Northern Ireland Assembly, 4 February 2014

311 contributions from 69 members. The official report.

Assembly Business

Jonathan Craig (DUP, Lagan Valley)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. This morning, the Minister of Justice made a pronouncement on the cost of policing parades and protests. The figure quoted is at variance with figures given to the Policing Board. Would it not be in order for the Minister to come to the House to give a breakdown of the figures?

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member will know that that is a matter for the Justice Minister, and it is a matter that he should take up directly with the Justice Minister. Once again, I say to Members that it is for Ministers to decide when they need to or should come to the House. We really should move on.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker, this is the second day in a row on which points of order have been made. It appears that some of the Members opposite do not know that there is Question Time in the House. Points of order seem to be a bit of a pattern now. I wonder whether you are worried about that.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

All Members from all sides of the House will find that, on occasion, there are points of order, or issues that are not points of order, raised in the House. I always question Members when they raise bogus points of order. In saying that, I have to add that, from time to time, there is a need for Members to get issues on the record. However, Members from all sides of the House should not abuse points of order.

Speaker's Business

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Before we begin today's business, I inform Members that I will be absent from the House next week.

Ministerial Statement

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will make a statement to inform Members that I am today launching a 12-week public consultation on the draft strategic planning policy statement (SPPS) for Northern Ireland.

We all know that this is an exciting and challenging time for planning. In just 15 months' time, 11 new councils will be responsible for drawing up their own local development plans, making the majority of planning decisions and shaping how their areas will grow and develop in a way that responds to the needs and aspirations of the communities that they serve. The benefits of that approach are wide-ranging, from improved service delivery to gaining community buy-in; from supporting the creation of a shared society to delivering sustainable development. This new approach to planning provides a real opportunity to transform the look and feel of local areas and create places that reflect local culture and the environment.

The return of planning powers to local councils on 1 April 2015 will mean that Northern Ireland will follow a two-tier approach to planning that will enhance local democratic accountability. Through the transfer of powers to councils, communities will have greater opportunity to engage with their elected representatives and have a say in how their area will change and develop. In this way, our planning system will be more responsive to the priorities and needs of our local people. It will be more open, more accountable and more inclusive. Through working together, the planning system can be used to bring about positive change, economic recovery and a more sustainable future for all.

It is my job to ensure that the transfer of planning to local councils happens as seamlessly as possible and to deliver a new system that is ready for providing these benefits. In October, I affirmed to the Assembly my commitment to driving forward planning and local government reform. Last week, I laid a written statement before the Assembly in which I announced five key actions that I will be implementing over coming months. These actions will lay the foundations for introducing an improved planning system. I am pleased to be able to bring forward the first of these actions today by launching for consultation the draft strategic planning policy statement.

My aim is to create a planning system that is fast, fair and fit for purpose; a system that is less complex, more effective, more efficient and more customer focused. This strategic planning policy statement will ensure we have a shorter, simpler strategic policy framework that provides clarity and certainty for all users of the reformed planning system. It consolidates some 20 separate pieces of planning policy into a single statement, reducing 800 pages of policy to fewer than 100.

The SPPS signals a new approach to the preparation of regional planning policy in the North. It outlines the reformed two-tier planning system and sets out a new purpose of planning and a new set of overarching planning principles. It explains the new local development plan and development management systems; consolidates existing planning policy statements (PPS); and includes new town centre and retail planning policy. Although the SPPS is largely a consolidation of existing planning policy provisions, there is an emphasis on improving them. I will outline some of the new elements it contains.

First, there will be eight new core planning principles, which will underpin delivery of the planning reforms set out in the Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011. In undertaking their planning functions, planning authorities have to balance and integrate a variety of complex economic, social, environmental and other matters of public interest. The core planning principles will assist with this process, and reflect my expectations for delivery of the reformed planning system. This includes furthering sustainable development; improving health and well-being; and supporting good design, positive place-making and urban and rural stewardship. Other core principles focus on creating shared space; delivering spatial planning; following a plan-led system; and enhancing stakeholder engagement and local accountability.

Secondly, the SPPS explains the new development plan and development management system. The Planning Act transfers responsibility for producing local development plans from the Department to councils and ensures that they are at the core of planning decisions. Councils must prepare a plan strategy to set out their strategic vision for the future development and use of land in the plan area. A local policies plan must also be prepared. This will set out the council’s local policies to support the plan strategy. The SPPS explains how the new local development plan system will promote greater efficiency, transparency, soundness, sustainability and accountability. Key elements of the new development management system are detailed in the SPPS. Those include a development hierarchy and schemes of delegation to streamline planning decisions; pre-application discussions to facilitate high-quality and timely applications; and pre-application consultations to allow applicants to inform and discuss proposals with communities.

A third feature introduced by the SPPS is a new strategic policy for town centres and retailing. The policy promotes a town-centre-first approach for the location of future retail and other town centre land uses and is consistent with the regional development strategy. It seeks to protect and enhance the vitality and viability of town centres and to foster a more sustainable approach to future retail provision.

Finally, the SPPS describes proposed transitional arrangements, which are considered necessary in the short- to medium-term to ensure continuity of planning decisions while councils finalise new plans for their areas. During the interim phase, councils will apply retained operational policies.

The draft SPPS has been subject to a number of impact assessments, including a strategic environmental assessment (SEA). That assessment, which considered the statement's impact on Northern Ireland’s environment, was carried out independently by specialist SEA consultants acting on the Department’s behalf. An environmental report that was published with the draft SPPS, makes a range of recommendations for mitigating and enhancing the SPPS to improve the overall environmental impact.

As part of the process of preparing the draft SPPS, my officials carried out a series of early stakeholder engagement events, independently facilitated by the Royal Town Planning Institute. Those events included meetings with key stakeholders, such as the business and local government sectors, and my officials sought comments from internal stakeholders.

To sum up, the SPPS supports my vision of creating a better environment and a stronger economy and of bringing forward a planning system that delivers for business, with timely decisions that encourage investment, facilitate employment and aid economic recovery. My new planning system will realise that the environment and the economy should not, and cannot, be at loggerheads. We need a system that protects the environment and fully recognises that a vibrant, sustainable environment can be a driver of prosperity and job creation. Similarly, a strong economy and a prosperous society can be good for the environment.

The SPPS will support and guide local plan making, the design and delivery of individual development proposals and the determination of planning applications and appeals. It will also influence how those functions are carried out.

This is the start of 12 weeks of consultation. I want everyone who is involved in the planning process, be they developers, planners, councils, communities, environmental groups or professional bodies, to work together to shape and influence this planning policy and the future planning system. I am keen for the final SPPS document to reflect all stakeholders’ views. Therefore, during the 12-week public consultation, my officials will conduct a further round of stakeholder engagement events that will provide an opportunity to find out more about the SPPS and to ask questions.

Meaningful engagement with stakeholders is a vital part of the policy development. In support of the need for continuous improvement in how the Department serves its citizens, I am pleased to inform Members that the SPPS is being published as an online interactive digital consultation document that aims to make it easier for stakeholders to respond and to provide a better customer experience. This will be the first time that the Department has undertaken a digital-first approach. I encourage everyone with an interest to give us their views by using the digital consultation document. It is only through working together that we can ensure that we achieve an efficient and fit-for-purpose planning system that delivers for all.

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

I am absolutely delighted to hear this announcement about the SPPS, and I certainly want to thank the Minister and his officials very much. They have been working very hard in the past few months to produce this hefty but succinct — hopefully — document. I also congratulate the Department for the extensive process for consultation, because I am sure that there will be a lot of public interest and a lot of responses received.

With your permission, Mr Speaker, may I ask a question as a member of the Environment Committee rather than as its Chair? As the Minister will probably recall, during the ill-fated Planning Bill, with the agreement, I think, of his predecessor, I was to put forward an amendment on shared spaces. I am so glad that, as part of the core planning principles in the SPPS, shared space is going to be included. Will the Minister perhaps elaborate a bit on how the SPPS will promote shared spaces?

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

OK. I thank Ms Lo for her warm welcome for my statement and, indeed, the opening of this consultation period on the strategic planning policy statement. She thanked my officials, and I would like to do the same. They have indeed, as Ms Lo pointed out, been working very hard over the past few months to compile this document, which is hefty. It is also concise. However, it is not yet complete and that is why this consultation process is so important.

On the role of peace-building and shared spaces, I am aware that the Member had tabled an amendment to the Planning Bill along these lines, an amendment to which my predecessor was well-disposed, shall we say. As you know, I decided for legal, procedural and evidential reasons not to move the Planning Bill to Further Consideration Stage. However, that does not diminish my commitment to proactively promoting shared, safer and welcoming places and spaces through the planning system on a number of fronts.

Creating and enhancing shared space will be a core principle of the SPPS. Post-transfer of powers, planning authorities should utilise development planning, regeneration and development management powers to contribute to the creation of an environment that is accessible to all communities, socially and religiously mixed, has a high standard of connectivity and supports shared use of the public realm. Council local development plans will be required to take account of any good relations policies set out within a local community plan by considering the criteria of equality of opportunity, reconciliation, mobility and connectivity in their formulation.

Also, as project partners in the Queen's University Belfast, Peace III project, Planning for Spatial Reconciliation, my Department is working closely with Queen's research staff to explore and exploit opportunities for connecting this research with the process of planning and local government reform. Further guidance will be included in 'Living Places: An Urban Stewardship and Design Guide for Northern Ireland', which I issued for consultation last August and am finalising.

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his statement. He made reference in his statement to bringing forward a planning system:

"with timely decisions that encourage investment, facilitate employment and aid economic recovery."

Given the commitment within the statement to the economy and economic development, I want to ask the Minister whether there is specific meat on the bones of that. Can the Minister point to any place within the statement that gives new or additional weight to planning decisions involving economic development or inward investment?

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

As regards meat on the bones, my written statement tabled before the Assembly last week outlined measures that I am taking to improve the planning system, all of which will go some way to creating more certainty in the system. From meeting developers, representatives of developer groups and the frequent objectors to developers and developer groups, I know that the one thing that everyone is crying out for is certainty. That is what will create certainty for investors and what will attract them. They want to know how long it will take for a decision to be reached, the likelihood of success and, therefore, whether to come here. It is my ambition and desire that investors will want to come here. It is important that we show that Northern Ireland is not only open for business but is good for business.

As regards the weighting of economic development as a consideration in planning applications, the new SPPS sets out the overarching core principles of the new planning system. It gives expression to important matters that are in the public interest, including furthering sustainable development and economic development. That core planning principle makes it clear that planning authorities should ensure that economic considerations are accorded appropriate weight in the making of planning decisions.

I am committed to ensuring that this new approach to planning policy plays its part in contributing to growing a dynamic, innovative and sustainable economy in the North. As things stand, consideration and weight are given to economic factors. However, it is not a determining weight, more a material one.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Cuirim fáilte roimh ráiteas an Aire. I welcome the Minister's statement but I am concerned about it. He is putting weight on economic recovery, but he also stated that this is about consolidation of the planning policy statements. Some of those statements are not fit for purpose, and I will give you two examples. In relation to the Hillsborough —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

I encourage the Member to come to a question.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I will certainly, Mr Speaker. The proposed Hillsborough Golf Course and Country Club development and the application by DMAC in Tyrone could create over 350 jobs. The criteria in the existing policies mean that there are difficulties with those applications. Will this planning policy statement address the concerns that people have with those applications when it comes to the creation of jobs and economic recovery? Go raibh míle maith agat.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Go raibh maith agat as an cheist suimiúil sin. I thank the Member for that interesting question. I fully intend for this statement to provide greater certainty and opportunities for economic development, as outlined in my previous answer.

I am reluctant to get drawn into the specifics of particular planning applications, although I am aware of both applications to which the Member referred. They are at different stages in the planning process. One has been refused and is awaiting a deferred office meeting, and I am not sure whether a decision has been made on the other one. Both have very differing sets of circumstances, which I would be happy to discuss with the Member following this morning's session. I accept his concerns. This is the launch of a public consultation period. This is a draft SPPS. He may think that it is very "drafty", in which case I invite him to do his best to plug the holes in it.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Before I call Colum Eastwood to speak, let us be careful that we do not pull the Minister into individual planning applications. Let us have questions on the statement.

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Thanks for that guidance: I will keep my question suitably broad. Will the Minister outline the changes he has made so far to improve the planning system?

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank Mr Eastwood for that broad question. I will give him a broad, in no way prepared, answer. [Laughter.] I recognise that the planning system can and should do much more to unlock development potential, support job creation and aid economic recovery. I want to create a better environment and a stronger economy. My aim, as I have stated — maybe ad nauseam — is to create a planning system that is fast, fair and fit for purpose, works to achieve that and delivers for business with timely decisions that bring investment and jobs but not at the expense of our environment, planet or people.

This is an exciting and challenging time for planning. In just 14 months' time, our 11 new councils will be responsible for drawing up their own development plans, making the majority of planning decisions and shaping how their areas will grow and develop in a way that responds to the needs of their local communities. It is my job to ensure that we transfer planning as seamlessly as possible and ensure that the new system is in the best possible shape for transfer.

Just last week, I made a written statement to the Assembly setting out five key actions that I want to focus on to bring the new system to life over the coming months. I want to shorten and simplify policy, which is why I am here today, by moving to the SPPS rather than the 20 separate policy publications. I want to initiate key reforms to the planning system. Although the Planning Bill, as originally intended, would have allowed us to do many of those on a legislative basis, we can set measures in place without legislation, such as new local development plan preparatory work; the new hierarchy of development arrangements; extending pre-application discussions; and encouraging more widespread pre-application community consultation. Better-informed applications will be processed more quickly.

I especially want to tackle consultees' response times. Members will be delighted to hear that I want to do so, particularly with the Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA) in my Department. I want to improve customer service and access to case officers — I know that that is another bone of contention for Members — so that queries can be addressed as quickly as possible. I want to ensure that all those with responsibility for delivering the new system have the capacity to do so.

These measures will benefit all users of the planning system, including communities that want to input in a genuine and meaningful way to development plans for their areas and to be consulted before applications are submitted. Developers will also benefit because, as I said, they will have more certainty through speedier decisions and outcomes. The environment will benefit from better-informed decisions, and the Department will benefit in the short term. Councils will reap benefits in the longer term through improved efficiencies and performance. These actions have received widespread support and were welcomed by a number of organisations, including the Confederation of British Industry, the Construction Employers Federation and the Institute of Directors.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for the statement. I welcome the new strategic planning policy statement. It is a wee bit difficult to ask about specifics because we have only the statement in front of us and not the actual document. Did the Minister have to make any changes to the strategic planning policy because of his actions in having to withdraw the Planning Bill?

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank Mr Elliott for his question. As outlined in my previous answer, a lot of the changes proposed in the Planning Bill, as intended, can and will be implemented, but not through legislation. I suppose that you are more interested in what is not in it than what is, so I will chat about the aspects of the Bill that have not been implemented through the SPPS and what will happen to the planned changes.

Some reforms, which will not have a legislative footing until the 2011 Act is commenced, can be brought forward and tested administratively. Pre-application community consultation is already being tested with developers on a voluntary basis. The Windsor Park stadium redevelopment is a prime example. That application was granted planning permission only 11 weeks after it was received by the Department and had not attracted any objections from the public.

I know that the pre-application community consultation does not necessarily mean that there will not be any objections — our colleagues from West Belfast will be aware of that. I will continue to encourage this pre-application community consultation in other proposals.

We have also been working closely with statutory consultees through service level agreements to improve response times to planning application consultations. We will continue to do so in advance of a statutory time frame for responses, which I hope to introduce separately.

Inevitably, some elements will require legislative provision: for example, enhanced powers to determine applications, shorter time limits for submitting planning appeals and increasing penalties for a range of offences. These will commence in 2015, but, in the interim, a wide-ranging package of capacity building measures for the new arrangements will ensure that we are all ready for the transfer of the reformed system in 2015.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

The Minister said in his statement that he wanted:

"to create a planning system that is fast, fair and fit for purpose."

That is strong on alliteration, but people will want to know more. If his draft policy statement proceeds and becomes operative, will large-scale planning applications that have the potential to deliver thousands of jobs in Northern Ireland, such as the one outside Lisburn and one near Londonderry, be delivered, taking account of any objections, in good time so that the economy can be regenerated and people in those areas can benefit as a result?

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I just thought of another "f".

As I said, this is about creating speedier decisions and greater certainty on outcomes for developers and developments of all sizes and in all areas. I am not aware of any such current application for a development outside Lisburn. I do not want to get caught up in particular applications, but I am not sure that there is a live application for a development outside Lisburn that would meet that description. However, I assure the Member that all steps will be taken to ensure that quick and proper decisions are made on all applications. With the new hierarchy of development, resources will be allocated accordingly to such applications.

Barry McElduff (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Might the draft strategic planning policy statement contribute to the opening up of possibilities in rural communities that have been hamstrung by the out-of-date zoning of industrial land? In many cases, area plans are way out of date. In places such as Fintona, in County Tyrone, there is suitable land for industrial development, but, because of the out-of-date nature of the area plans, things cannot happen.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Is there a question somewhere?

Barry McElduff (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Might we see the opening up of possibilities under this strategic approach? I thank the Minister for his statement, of course.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Go raibh maith agat as an cheist sin. I thank the Member for his question. Yes, I am hopeful that it will open up possibilities. I have responded to questions from other Members by saying that this is a draft policy statement, and I look forward to input from all Members. The list of respondents on how the statement can be improved will go way beyond the membership of the House.

In last week's debate in the Chamber on PPS 21, I pointed to this consultation period as an opportunity to improve that policy. I am aware of other difficulties in rural areas, such as that which the Member has outlined. I view this as a tremendous opportunity for me as Minister and, indeed, for you as Members to shape planning policy for the years to come.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his statement. My question follows on from some of the questions from my colleagues on building and securing economic prosperity and moving forward on planning. I note the Minister's intention that we will have a planning process that is:

"fast, fair and fit for purpose."

Where is the synergy between the area plans, such the northern area plan in my constituency, which has been on the go since 2001 —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

I encourage the Member to come to his question.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

I ask the Minister where the synergy is between the area plans, the statement and the way in which he is intending to reform the Planning Service.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Work has commenced between departmental officials, local government officials and soon-to-be shadow council members on the formation of new area plans. It is a very important phase. Indeed, I said that it is an exciting time for planning. It is also a very challenging one, because, in the transition between the existing raft of planning policy statements and the implementation of the SPPS, there will be a period in which we look at existing, retained policy statements. That is what we will be using to draw up the new local area plans. Obviously, the role of local government in that cannot be understated. However, it is vital that the Department retain an oversight role to ensure, for example, that one council cluster is not, in its area plan, proposing something that will be hugely detrimental to a neighbouring council or councils. "Synergy" is the word that the Member used, and we will need to use a lot of energy to ensure that that synergy does exist. I look forward to his cooperation in doing that.

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

I welcome the Minister's statement, and I wish his objectives well. From talking to investors coming to Northern Ireland, one thing that strikes me is the need for policy certainty, and I hope that the statement can bring about a situation in which policy certainty can be created. There is a gap at present, and it relates to the Belfast metropolitan area plan (BMAP). Can the Minister provide some detail on why BMAP has not yet been adopted?

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank Mr Maginness for the question. I was asked a few questions on BMAP at my previous Question Time, and it has been the subject of much correspondence from other Members and, indeed, from developers and people outside of the House. My Department submitted BMAP to the Department for Regional Development for assessment against the regional development strategy 2035. I can confirm that the plan was awarded a certificate of general conformity on 21 October last year. I recognise the importance of the plan for the region's future development, as well as the need to ensure that it is adopted and published in its final form as soon as possible. I have sought agreement from my ministerial colleagues that my Department now adopt and publish the plan.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

The Minister is consulting on very significant changes to the planning system, condensing the many statements into a single strategic planning policy statement. Will he outline the schedule that he foresees for adopting the new SPPS and the subsequent necessary training of planning officers and councillors? Will he ensure that there will be a fair and robust planning system suitable for devolving to local councils in the future?

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank Mr Beggs for the question, and I reiterate that this is about more than condensing existing policy. I view it very much as an opportunity to improve planning policy here. However, the question about the timeline is a pertinent one.

Today, we see the start of a 12-week consultation period on the draft document. I would very much like to be able to bring the final document back before the House before the end of this year. I know one thing for sure, and that is that we need to do so in advance of transfer on 1 April 2015. I would like to do so well in advance of transfer so that the new system can be road-tested.

The question of capacity building is a very important one, and it is one that I am asked increasingly often at the moment, as I am doing a tour of statutory transition committees. I recall from my time on Derry City Council that often, during a planning committee meeting, councillors would rub their hands and say, "I can't wait to get planning" when they did not agree with a recommendation from planning officers. I am seeing an increasing reluctance to accept planning powers among councillors now as the sheer weight of responsibility that will come with that function dawns on them. For that reason, it is essential that we provide capacity training for councillors. It is vital that they have not just the competence to make sound planning decisions but the confidence to do so.

My predecessor secured £3 million from the Executive to allocate directly to capacity building. I think that it is safe enough to assume that the vast majority of that money will be spent on capacity training in planning, in particular. Some capacity-building events have already been held and have been well attended. However, we cannot really ramp that up until after the elections when we will know who is on the shadow councils and, therefore, who, on a personal basis, will be taking on those new powers.

Ian McCrea (DUP, Mid Ulster)

I welcome the Minister's statement. The Minister referred to the issue around the policy promoting a town-centre-first approach for the location of future retail and other town centre land uses. Can the Minister put a bit of detail on how he hopes that will be delivered, taking on board the concerns that many have in town centres about out-of-town development? Can the Minister comment on how he feels that those two things can come together, given the concerns that retailers have in that respect?

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Member for the question. Now that the document is out for consultation, I fully expect PPS 5, which deals with retailing and town centres, to be one of the most thumbed chapters of this document. It is one that I receive quite a lot of correspondence on, and I know that all Members in this House will also be lobbied strongly on it.

A consultant team led by GL Hearn carried out a comprehensive review of existing town centres in the North last year. A key aspect of the work was engagement with local stakeholders, including MLAs, on the future of city and town centres and retailing. The updated evidential context and the consultants' recommendations on possible future planning policy direction have been reflected in the SPPS. The new draft strategic town centres and retailing policy aims to support and sustain vibrant town centres across the North, consistent with the retail development strategy 2035.

The policy objectives are: to secure a town-centres-first approach for the location of future retailing and other main town centre uses; to adopt a sequential approach to the identification of retail and main town centre uses in local development plans and when taking decisions; to ensure local development plans and decisions are informed by robust and up-to-date evidence in relation to need and capacity; to protect and enhance diversity in the range of town centre uses appropriate to their role and function, such as leisure, cultural and community facilities, housing and business; to promote high-quality design to ensure that town centres provide sustainable, attractive, accessible and safe environments; and to maintain and improve accessibility to and within town centres.

Obviously, a lot of the work that has to be done, and that is ongoing, to protect and promote town centres falls outwith my Department's remit. However, I am keen and, indeed, happy to work with other Departments such as DSD, DRD and DFP to ensure that we do all that we can to protect and enhance the vitality of our town centres.

Jonathan Craig (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I will start by keeping myself right with you. I will refer to paragraph 4 of the statement, which states:

"The return of planning powers to local councils on 1 April 2015".

I hope that the Minister can confirm that that is not an April Fool's joke. More seriously, with the granting of powers to local councillors, they will become decision-makers, whereas, at present, they are lobbyists in the planning process. There is a massive conflict of interest between those two roles. Minister, can you give the House assurances that clear guidance will be given to new councillors on that conflict of interest that now lies in their new role?

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Thank you, Mr Craig. First of all, I assure the Member that it is not an April Fool. If it does not happen, I will be the one who looks the fool, so hopefully not. Mr Beggs asked about capacity building, and that hit exactly on what Mr Craig is asking. In my answer, I said that I understand that the councillors are now a bit more reticent about receiving the responsibility for making planning decisions than they were a few years ago. That is because of the realisation of the difficulties that it will cause them in their role as public representatives.

Of the £3 million that is for capacity building in local government reform, I fully expect that the majority of it will be spent on planning training. That will be a key aspect of it. It is a lot more difficult when you have the responsibility to make a decision than it is to call for something or to criticise someone for not making something happen. There is also the potential conflict of interest that could arise and that will be created for councillors who have always been poachers until now but who will be forced to take on a gamekeeper role.

That is why, as part of the Bill on the reform of local government, I expect quite a lot of focus to be on the establishment of planning committees in the new councils. As it stands, councils are set up differently. In Derry, for example, all members of council sit on the planning committee. I no longer expect that to be the case, but it is certainly something that we will keep a very close eye on.

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

I welcome the Minister's statement. Can he tell us about the vexed issue of fracking? Would a fracking prospecting licence application be considered by a local authority, a central planning directorate or a combination of both? Where are we with that?

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

That is a "boring" subject. [Laughter.] I thank the Member for the question. Given the controversy surrounding fracking, I would fully expect — if not insist — that that would be a matter of regional significance and would therefore be treated as an article 31 application. So, any decision on that would still be made centrally.

My position is reaffirmed in the draft SPPS that there should be a presumption against the exploitation of unconventional hydrocarbon extraction until the Department is satisfied that there is sufficient and robust evidence on all environmental impacts. There is ongoing work in DOE and by DOE and NIEA, in conjunction with the Environmental Protection Agency and our counterparts in the Republic, to enhance knowledge of the fracking process. That could ultimately, I suppose, suggest refinement of that position. In the meantime, it is proposed that the policy position as expressed in the draft should be retained. However, as I said, it is a draft, and we will use the consultation period to take on board the views of others.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I do not know whether the Minister said that his statement had been approved by the Executive. However, commonality might disappear with the devolving of planning powers to 11 different councils. For example, can we expect to see differing and contradictory approaches across councils to something like wind farm blight, where some councils might embrace the folly of the most expensive form of energy while others might protect consumers and the countryside from that blight? Is there going to be the opportunity for differing approaches on an issue like that?

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank Mr Allister for his question. He did not hear me say whether or not I have consulted the Executive on the draft. I have not. Obviously, however, before publication of the policy in final form, I will bring it to the Executive for consideration and approval.

The issue of consistency, or fear of a lack thereof, is a very real one, and one that I expressed to officials as recently as this morning. It must again be reinforced that the Department will retain an overarching and policy responsibility for planning matters and will be integral in the drawing up of local area plans with the new councils and new councillors. Obviously those will have to be drawn up bearing in mind planning policy. As expressed on a previous occasion in the House, it is my intention to bring forward a land use strategy for the whole of Northern Ireland, which, again, will help to determine applications such as those for wind farms, to which Mr Allister refers.

Steven Agnew (Green, North Down)

Like many others, I welcome the Minister's statement. He refers to after the devolution of powers to councils and states that our planning system will be more open, accountable and inclusive, which of course I welcome. The one word that is missing is "transparent". Does the Minister accept that, for as long as parties fail to publish who donates to the party, the planning system cannot be transparent and, indeed, will continue to be open to corruption?

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order. The Member is well outside the ministerial statement. It is very unfair to ask the Minister to comment on donations to political parties in Northern Ireland. I think that we should leave it there.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank Mrs Cameron for the question. The previous question I answered dealt with fear of inconsistency under the new system. However, this question deals with the impression that there may be inconsistency in our present system.

Obviously planning policy is there as a guide for planners. However, planners ultimately have to make decisions on applications. I have no doubt that, on occasion — in fact, on many occasions — planners differ in opinions. That is why the group system exists in divisional planning offices whereby planning officers will discuss and, I suppose, debate planning applications on their merits or otherwise before formulating an opinion, which will then come to council; where elected members will disagree with it as well in many cases.

It is important therefore that, where possible, policy is adhered to. However, I believe that policy should also allow the flexibility for planners to be more creative, particularly when the powers will be going to local government. It is important that they are responsive to the needs and desires of local communities. Mr Allister used the example of wind farms. His concern is about how an inconsistent approach might impact there. Given that the buck will stop with elected representatives, any fear that something will be imposed on a community against its wishes might well be unfounded.

Ian Milne (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Mo buíochas leis an Aire as an ráiteas ar maidin. I thank the Minister for his statement. He touched on PPS 21. Will he give us an assurance that the SPPS will explore further opportunities for single dwellings in the countryside to accommodate non-farming country dwellers?

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Ná habair é, agus go raibh maith agat as an cheist. In my earlier answer to the Member's colleague Mr McElduff and, I suppose, on the back of the debate that we had in the Chamber last week on PPS 21, I mentioned the opportunities that it affords to rural dwellers of non-farming and farming backgrounds alike. During that debate, statistics were aired that indeed showed the likelihood of success of applications for single dwellings in the countryside and that vast improvements have been made. Certainly, PPS 21, as it stands, is a huge improvement on the overly prohibitive PPS 14. Subsequent to my predecessor Alex Attwood's working review of the policy, further improvements along the lines that the Member would like to see have been made.

Last week, I said — and I will say it again this week — that this provides an opportunity to Members, planning experts and members of the public to have their input into planning policy and how we move forward with it. If the Member believes that improvements can be made, we will certainly look forward to considering them.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. The Minister will be aware of the anomalous situation whereby people in the countryside were awarded funding for small businesses from DARD through the rural development programme but had difficulty getting planning permission from his Department. Bearing in mind that the new rural development programme is under consideration, will the new draft planning policy take that into consideration?

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I am aware that this is another difficulty that faces, and is felt in, rural communities. In response to the previous question, we are talking about making it possible for people to live in rural communities. It is also important that we make it possible for people to work in rural communities. We have an open door and an open book. I am looking forward to taking into consideration any matters that Members or indeed anyone wishes to raise.

Executive Committee Business

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I beg to moveThat the Second Stage of the Reservoirs Bill [NIA 31/11-15] be agreed.

The purpose of the Reservoirs Bill is to introduce a legal and administrative framework for regulating reservoir safety in order to reduce the risk of flooding as a result of dam failure in the North of Ireland. When enacted, the legislation will provide assurance that people, the environment, cultural heritage and economic activity are better protected from the potential risks of flooding from reservoirs.

The Bill will regulate reservoirs that are structures or areas capable of holding 10,000 cubic metres or more of water above the natural level of any part of the surrounding land and that are created wholly or partially by artificial means. These will be known as controlled reservoirs. To assist you in visualising what 10,000 cubic metres looks like, it is the volume of four Olympic-sized swimming pools.

There are a number of exclusions from the legislation, including natural lakes, canals, quarry ponds, sewage lagoons and slurry pits. The legislation will make it clear that reservoir managers are responsible for reservoir safety and will require them to commission qualified engineers to supervise, undertake routine inspections and oversee any remedial works in reservoirs. Managers should not view those duties as an unnecessary regulatory burden but rather as an assurance that the safety of the reservoir is being managed and, therefore, their liability in the event of a dam failure may be limited.

In order to ensure that the legislation is proportionate, the level of regulation to the reservoirs will be determined by the degree of risk to people, the environment, the economy and cultural heritage. The management regime will, therefore, be related to the potential consequence of reservoir failure. The Reservoirs Bill is entirely focused on the management of reservoirs to prevent an uncontrolled release of water as a result of a dam failure. It does not deal with any other aspects of reservoirs, such as drowning, the security of public water supply or water quality, as those are outside the remit of my Department.

Before I set out the key features of the Bill, I will outline the background and the need for legislation. The EU floods directive requires that all significant flood risks are managed in an appropriate manner. To identify the potential sources of flooding on significant flood risk areas, my Department carried out a preliminary flood risk assessment in 2010. That assessment identified that 66,000 people live in the potential inundation area of the 156 impounding reservoirs that are capable of holding 10,000 cubic metres of water or more. I am sure that you will agree that that is a significant number of people, and we should be in a position to provide assurance to them that they are not at imminent risk due to dam failure.

It is worth saying at this time that there have been a number of incidents in the North of Ireland due to dam failure at reservoirs in the past: 1822 in Keady; 1876 in Carrickfergus; 1902 in Belfast; 1971 in Derry; and 1980 in Hillsborough. The most recent incident took place in 1998 when flooding in the Doagh area was attributed to the collapse of a spill weir and resulted in a number of houses being flooded. Fortunately, none of those incidents resulted in the loss of life. However, the same cannot be said for England, Scotland and Wales, where 352 lives have been lost as a result of dam failure between 1852 and 1930.

The year 1930 is important in reservoir safety terms as that was when the first regulation was introduced. Since then, there has been no loss of life across Britain as a result of a reservoir failure. However, that has not stopped the legislators and policymakers seeking to improve reservoir safety. The 1930s legislation was replaced by the Reservoirs Act 1975, and that was further amended in England and Wales by the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 and is being replaced in Scotland by the Reservoirs (Scotland) Act 2011.

Pat Ramsey (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Minister for giving way. There is a unique situation in the Foyle constituency, where we have a not-for-profit organisation managing two reservoirs in Creggan Country Park. That would put additional resource pressures on organisations. Will you look at that unique situation? It is grand for a Department to fit the costs that you are expecting of them — rightly so — but it is putting undue pressure on a not-for-profit and charitable organisation. Will the Minister comment on that?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The Member is quick off the mark. I will come to that point later. I have also been contacted by the group that you mention, and my colleagues have raised the issue with me. I will address that point as I go through my opening remarks.

There are a lot of similarities in the legislation that I have just referred to in England, Scotland and Wales and the Reservoirs Bill that we are debating today. They all seek to be proportionate in their management regime by adopting a risk-based approach to reservoirs with the capacity threshold of 10,000 cubic metres or more. The capacity threshold of 10,000 cubic metres is generally agreed by reservoir engineers as the volume that has the potential to result in loss of life and significant damage to property.

Most of the impounding reservoirs in the North of Ireland are over 100 years old, and comments made at stakeholder events held as part of the policy development for the legislation indicate that many have not been subject to routine inspection and, therefore, are in need of maintenance. It was also evident at those events that reservoir managers are totally unaware of their common law liability in the event of dam failure.

The legislation will, therefore, establish a framework for what is considered to be a reasonable management regime of a reservoir, which complies with industry best practice. It will also provide assurances that the safety of reservoirs, and hence the risk of flooding, is being appropriately and proportionately managed.

At this stage, I wish to thank all those who attended stakeholder and information events and responded to the public consultation exercise, and the members of the Institution of Civil Engineers' reservoir safety advisory group, who provided excellent technical advice. I also thank the Chairman and members of the Agriculture and Rural Development Committee for facilitating presentations from my officials, for their comments, which have helped to shape the policy and the Bill, and for taking time out of their busy work schedule to visit Kiltonga reservoir in Newtownards. I very much appreciate the input of all the stakeholders, individuals and organisations who contributed significantly to the Bill's development.

The Bill contains nine Parts, 121 clauses and four schedules.

Part 1 sets out the definition of a controlled reservoir and, importantly, what types of structures will not be regulated by the legislation. That is central to the legislation. It is, therefore, important to stress that it is structures or areas designed or used for the collection and storage of 10,000 cubic metres of water or more above the natural level of any part of the surrounding land that will be known as controlled reservoirs and subject to regulation. It will also include smaller reservoirs that, individually, do not meet the volume threshold but where, if water can flow between them, the combined capacity is 10,000 cubic metres or more.

The Bill also contains a power by regulation for my Department to provide that a smaller reservoir may be regulated if it is established that it poses significant risk or will have a widespread impact. That provision is only precautionary at this stage and is unlikely to be used by the Department.

Part 1 also defines the term "reservoir manager" as the person with responsibility for reservoir safety and, therefore, charged with ensuring that an adequate management regime is in place. The registration system that will apply to controlled reservoirs and the risk designation process to be undertaken by the Department are also detailed in that Part.

The risk designation will determine the management regime to be applied to a reservoir and is principally based on the potential consequence of reservoir failure on human life, economic activity, the environment and cultural heritage. The Bill provides for three classifications of risk: high, medium or low. That will determine the levels of supervision and inspection required by reservoir engineers. Basically, reservoirs designated as high risk will require more supervision and inspection than a medium-risk reservoir. Obviously, reservoirs designated as low risk will be required to be registered but will not be subject to the supervision and inspection requirements of high-risk and medium-risk reservoirs.

Part 2 sets out the supervision, inspection and record-keeping requirements for high- and medium-risk reservoirs. Such reservoirs that have been inspected prior to the commencement of the legislation may have their reports recognised, provided they meet certain requirements. That may reduce the initial regulatory and financial burden on some reservoir managers.

Part 3 sets out the requirements for the construction or alteration of a controlled reservoir and defines terms such as "abandonment" and "discontinuance". Abandonment is when a reservoir is made to be no longer capable of holding water above the natural level of any part of the surrounding land, generally by the removal of the dam structure. Discontinuance is when the reservoir is capable of holding some water but not 10,000 cubic metres of water above the natural level of any part of the surrounding land. In those cases, the requirement of the legislation would no longer apply to the reservoir.

Part 4 deals with other requirements such as incident reporting, flood plans and the display of emergency information.

Part 5 provides for a means of arbitration between reservoir managers and their engineers. So, for example, when a reservoir manager disagrees with the direction in a safety report, inspection report or recommendation as to the date of the next inspection, he or she can challenge that by referring it to a referee. That ability to challenge should provide reservoir managers with an assurance that reservoir engineers will act reasonably, with professional integrity and abide by their professional code of conduct.

Part 6 provides the Department with a range of powers such as the ability to enforce the commissioning of engineers, to take safety measures and to step in to undertake emergency works to prevent an uncontrolled release of water from a reservoir. The Department will also have the power by regulation to create a system of stop notices, enforcement undertakings and a suite of civil sanctions as an alternative to prosecution proceedings.

Part 7 enables the Department to establish one or more panels of reservoir engineers who will play an important role in the supervision, inspection and construction of controlled reservoirs. The legislation will allow for transitional arrangements whereby reservoir engineers appointed under the Reservoirs Act 1975 may be appointed to the panels. That should alleviate any initial concerns that there may not be enough qualified engineers in the North of Ireland when the legislation commences.

Parts 8 and 9 contain miscellaneous and general provisions, including consequential and minor amendments. I do, however, want to draw particular attention to the power for my Department to introduce a grant scheme by regulation. I will be willing to consider the need for such a grant scheme if, following the first inspection, safety works are required. As you will be aware, any such scheme will be subject to budget cover and Executive approval. Although the scope and conditions of the scheme will be considered at that time, it is very likely that any scheme will be limited to providing financial assistance for works required in the interest of reservoir safety. That takes on board the question asked by groups that have contacted us during the consultation about their responsibilities, given that they are community and voluntary organisations. General maintenance or other works due to neglect are therefore unlikely to be funded, but we can take a look at the wider grant scheme by regulation.

My Department will be responsible for administering and enforcing the legislation, and it is proposed that a dedicated unit, known as the reservoir authority, will be established to undertake that role.

Before Members debate the principles of the Bill, I emphasise that this is very much a risk-based approach to the management and regulation of reservoirs. It will ensure that each controlled reservoir will be subject to a proportionate supervision and inspection regime, depending on its risk classification. That will enable assurance that the potential risk from flooding as a result of dam failure is being appropriately managed. I am satisfied that the potential risk of flooding to people, the environment, cultural heritage and economic activity will be significantly reduced by the implementation of the Bill. I commend the Bill to the Assembly.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her address to the Bill. I rise as Chairperson of the Agriculture and Rural Development Committee to speak on the Reservoirs Bill. I speak in the expectation that, at the close of the debate, and assuming that the Bill passes this stage, it will be referred to the Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development for its Committee Stage.

A few weeks ago, the Minister introduced the Bill to the Assembly as a Bill to protect the public from the risk of flooding arising from reservoirs. The Bill's contents and policy aims have been outlined by the Minister. With nine Parts, 121 clauses and four schedules, it is a highly technical Bill, and not one that makes light or easy reading. It has come about because, if all 151 controlled reservoirs in Northern Ireland flooded or failed, 66,000 people would be at risk. Now, the likelihood of all 151 reservoirs breaching at the same time and without notice must be an extreme one, of course. Nevertheless, we now have to have a 75-page Bill to deal with it.

That leads me on to the first point, which various members of the Committee have mentioned about the Bill: is this in fact a sledgehammer to crack a nut? That is certainly an issue that the Committee will wish to explore with witnesses and experts as we undertake our detailed scrutiny of the legislation and its impact.

In my speech today, I will, on behalf of the Committee, outline the work that the Committee has done to date on the Bill. I will also outline some of the key issues raised by the Committee to date, and which we expect to fully explore during the Committee Stage. Finally, I will briefly outline who the Committee will take evidence from and why.

The Committee has been engaged for some time with the Rivers Agency, which, of course, is leading on the Bill. The total dam breach of a reservoir is recognised as a possible source of flooding that has the potential to cause catastrophic damage to those living and working in the reservoir's inundation area. Hence the need for legislation to prevent that happening in Northern Ireland.

The Committee has been told that the proposals for the Bill are designed to create a legal and administration framework to reduce and manage the risk from flooding from reservoirs. The intention is that the Bill will be based on industry best practice and that it will require operators and owners to carry out their duties in a manner that ensures, as far as is reasonable and practicable, the safety of their structures, without an unnecessary regulatory burden. It will be based on a risk-based approach for the management and regulation of reservoirs to protect the public.

The Committee has received oral briefings on the policy development and progress of the drafting of the Bill on a semi-regular basis during this mandate. During one of those briefings, the Committee asked that Rivers Agency assess the impact of the proposed reservoir legislation on those reservoirs that are regarded as community assets; assets that are used by local communities for social and recreational purposes. The Committee requested that information because it was concerned that some reservoir owners may wish to drain or empty their reservoir, or reduce the amount of water, in order not to fall under the legislation. In doing so, the reservoir owner may remove a community asset.

The result of the work that Rivers Agency undertook on that aspect was presented to the Committee in April 2013 and provided members with sufficient detail to begin to assess the impact that the legislation might have on the community, social and recreational uses of reservoirs. That information is also on the DARD website if any Member wishes to find out any more about reservoirs in his or her constituency.

The Committee also undertook a site visit, as the Minister mentioned, to Kiltonga reservoir just outside Newtownards. That reservoir was given as an example of a community asset that the public widely use for recreational purposes. Kiltonga reservoir is in public ownership. In that case, it is owned by DARD and seems to be very well maintained. Thus, the risk that is posed to a very large area of Newtownards is minimised. The reservoir and its surroundings are managed in partnership with the local council regarding paths and enabling public access. That outlines, in brief, the work that the Committee has done to date on the Bill.

I will now briefly outline the main issues that have arisen for the Committee and that we expect to explore in detail during Committee Stage, if we get there. Is the Bill proportionate to the risks that are involved? Has the Bill been gold-plated in any way? Is the proposal to define a controlled reservoir as one that is capable of holding 10,000 cubic metres or more of water appropriate? What about the costs to the private sector and third sector in complying with the Bill? What potential impact will it have on planning policy and household insurances? What about grant aid to ensure that reservoir owners can comply with the legislation? How will disputes and appeals be managed? What are the secondary legislation provisions in the Bill, and are they proportionate and appropriate? Members, that is not a definitive list, and we fully expect further issues to arise during Committee Stage.

Let me take a few minutes to explain some of those issues in a little detail. As I mentioned, the legislation will place new operational requirements on the owners and managers of 151 structures that are capable of holding 10,000 cubic metres or more of water above the natural level of the surrounding land. The legislation will place a regulatory requirement around reservoirs to try to prevent failure of the structure and thus flooding. We do not disagree that this is required, but we want to make sure that the regulatory requirements are appropriate and proportionate to the risk and impact of a reservoir flooding. The Agriculture and Rural Development Committee, with its experience of the agriculture and agrifood sector, has seen how primary legislation, secondary legislation and EU legislation in particular can sometimes be gold-plated to the detriment of business.

That point is linked closely to the next key issue, which is the definition of 10,000 cubic metres. The Committee has heard that the rest of the UK currently has legislation that uses a 25,000 cubic metre definition. The Scottish Parliament has passed the Reservoirs (Scotland) Act 2011. Under that Act, the defining level will come down to 10,000 cubic metres, but that has not been enacted or commenced as yet. So, we will want to explore what the defining level should be for Northern Ireland, and we will want to explore what the consequences of different levels will be on issues such as numbers of controlled reservoirs, costs and the burden to the owners.

The anticipated costs that reservoir owners will have to bear to comply with the legislation is an area that the Committee is likely to have some concerns with. We are aware that ownership of reservoirs is roughly at 76 in the public sector, 59 in the private sector, nine in the third sector and seven with ownership unknown. We know that the single largest owner is Northern Ireland Water (NIW). It and, we assume, most other public body owners are already operating to the spirit of the proposed legislation. Subsequently, we do not expect that the operating requirements for that group will be either too onerous or will have new financial implications. That may not be the case for the private sector, most of which comprises private individuals, and the third sector, which involves bodies such as fishing clubs, social enterprises and charities. I do not want to suggest that those groups have been operating their reservoirs in an unsafe manner, but they most likely have not been operating to the spirit of the proposed legislation. They are maybe not even aware of the legislation in GB.

Yet very soon, as soon as this Bill is passed and commenced, they will have to pay for inspecting engineers, supervisory engineers and a rigorous repair and maintenance programme, if that is considered necessary. The cost of that may come as a shock to some of those people and owners. The initial consultation, undertaken by Rivers Agency, provided an outline of estimated costs, ranging from £2,000 to £4,000 for an inspection by an approved engineer, and that could happen twice a year for a high-risk reservoir. Remedial work could range from concrete repairs costing £15,000 to some extensive work that could cost anything between £75,000 and £150,000. Rivers Agency is very clear that those are only rough costs and the need for such works on a regular basis will vary considerably, depending on the structure and its condition. Nevertheless, there is some evidence to suggest that private owners and charity owners of high- or medium-risk reservoirs could be facing additional charges of between £6,000 and £7,000 or more a year. To the private individual owner or small local charity, such costs are substantial and could make them go out of business. So, please be assured that the Committee will explore such costs in great detail with the relevant witnesses.

Rivers Agency has recognised that this legislation may well have a detrimental financial impact on private owners and charities. Within the Bill, it has proposed a grant scheme to be enacted if necessary. I suspect that it will be a critical issue. However, a legal basis for a grant scheme is no good if the funds to back it up are not in place. So, we will be exploring how much Rivers Agency might consider it will need on an annual basis for such a grant scheme and where it thinks the funding might come from. I will take a little bit of licence here and go so far as to say that the Committee will need definitive assurances that any potential grant scheme will be funded before it can be truly content with the Bill as it stands.

Linked to that issue is that of operating requirements or the extent of the administrative and financial burden. The requirements for inspection and maintenance are linked to the risk assessment. There are three levels of risk: high, medium and low. The requirements under each level vary according to the risk. The Committee will want to assure itself that the requirements at high- and medium-risk level are appropriate and not unnecessarily burdensome financially. There also appears to be very little difference in the operating requirements at high and medium risk, and that will need to be explored at Committee Stage.

Another major issue that taxes some of the Committee members is the impact on community assets and community use of reservoirs. We have heard that from Members' contributions, even at this early stage. Reservoirs and their environments are often very pleasant landscapes and used for a variety of activities, from walking and family outings to boating and fishing. Access is often free of charge. The Committee is concerned that the legislation may cause reservoir owners and managers to consider discontinuing the reservoir by reducing its capacity or taking it under the 10,000 cubic metre threshold or abandoning the reservoir so that it no longer holds water above the natural level of the surrounding land. If that happened, it could mean the loss of significant amenities to the local community. That is one of the reasons why the Committee asked Rivers Agency to carry out the community assets survey.

Some of the other issues that have been mentioned in the Committee meetings but have not yet been explored in great detail include the potential impacts on household insurances, once the reservoir flood inundation maps are made public and, indeed, what account Planning Service will take of such.

The cost to Rivers Agency to develop, implement and eventually police this legislation has also been discussed at the Committee, and we will obviously wish to explore the dispute and appeals mechanism in some detail to assure ourselves that it is fair, cost-effective and capable of acting in a timely manner.

I will now briefly outline the work programme that the Committee has proposed to undertake. We will speak to as many owners or managers of reservoirs as we can. The ownership of the 151 reservoirs that are likely to come under this legislation has already been mentioned as follows: 76 or some 50% are owned by the public sector; 59 or some 39% by the private sector; nine or some 6% by the third sector, that is the National Trust, angling clubs, social enterprises, charities etc; and seven or some 5% are orphaned or the ownership is unknown. The single largest owner is Northern Ireland Water, with 48 reservoirs. The Committee, therefore, will take evidence from that organisation. We will explore all the issues I mentioned earlier with Northern Ireland Water. We will also want to explore the implications for reservoir safety of the proposed sale by Northern Ireland Water of up to 18 reservoirs. The production and testing of a plan to cope with a reservoir breaching and flooding will also be of interest to the Committee.

Although there are reservoirs in practically all council areas, only 10 councils are likely to become reservoir managers as defined by the scope of the Bill, with those councils owning or being responsible for the reservoir. The councils are Ards, Banbridge, Belfast, Craigavon, Carrickfergus, Dungannon, Fermanagh, Lisburn, Newry and Mourne and Newtownabbey. The Committee decided, therefore, that it needs to hear from local government about what the legislation means for it. The Committee will request written evidence from all councils that own reservoirs, and it will take oral evidence from NILGA and from Belfast, Craigavon and Newry and Mourne councils. This is particularly important as council-owned reservoirs are also likely to be community assets. We will also wish to hear about the potential cost to the ratepayer for an increase in the operating regimes of councils regarding reservoirs and the plans they have in place to cope with any reservoirs that breach or cause flooding. That leaves nearly 50% of reservoirs that are owned by the private sector and third sector, by which I mean a combination of individuals, private sector companies, angling clubs, social enterprises and charities. The Committee will hear from two angling clubs that own reservoirs, and it has invited two other charitable and social enterprise owners of reservoirs as well.

The inspection and supervisory regime, as well as the recommendations for the maintenance required, will be undertaken by a panel of engineers drawn from the Institution of Civil Engineers. They also have a role to play in the dispute and appeals mechanism. As the majority of costs relating to inspection and supervision will arise from the panel of engineers, I imagine that the Committee will be interested in exploring cost issues in some detail. We also hope to take evidence from local government and private sector owners in Scotland and/or England by videoconference about what it is like, and how much it costs, to live under similar legislation in those jurisdictions.

Reservoirs are important parts of our environment. Many are in areas of outstanding natural beauty or of special scientific interest. We will explore that aspect and the decommissioning aspects with the NIEA. We have already identified one private owner, and we hope to identify more in the coming weeks, from which to receive oral and written evidence. I am sure that, as the weeks go on, further issues might come to the surface that we will wish to explore in further detail.

That completes what I wish to say on behalf of the Committee. I will now take the opportunity to say a few words as an MLA for North Antrim. I will be brief. Most of us — North Antrim is not alone in this — have reservoirs, sometimes many, in our constituencies. There will be different levels of risk and different sizes of population around reservoirs, which will, of course, increase or decrease the risk, depending on the size of the population. It is important that safety comes first. It is important that we protect life and property. Like many MLAs, I have witnessed at first hand how flooding can devastate a family. It takes a house to be flooded only once to have dire consequences for a family. Every time it rains, they are on tenterhooks. Every time a river increases in size, those families are nervous. There should be no difference in the potential threat that a reservoir holds for the flooding of those properties. Sometimes, properties, households and communities do not even know the risk that is being placed on them by a reservoir. Sometimes, communities might not even be aware of a reservoir and the potential flooding of their area.

It will all depend on the contour of the land, the size of reservoir and the size of the population. We understand that, but the most important thing is that the legislation and the need for it are balanced by the proportion of risk. It is very important that we get this right and have in place legislation that will meet that risk.

We all live with risk every day. As soon as we walk out of the house, we are involved in risk. It is about managing risk, and that is what we have to get right. We have to ensure that the balance is there: the risk must be managed, but doing so must not increase the burden on the owners, ratepayers or the public. There is a balancing act here, and I stress to the Department and the Minister that we need to make sure that the legislation is not gold-plated and that it is not burdensome to the point where we lose some of our best community assets. We have to manage risk, and we have to do so in a way that is best suited to Northern Ireland, not other areas, be that GB, the Republic of Ireland or anywhere in Europe. It must be suited to Northern Ireland and Northern Ireland alone.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I welcome the Bill. We are very lucky here in the North that dam failures are a rarity. As many as 66,000 people live in potential inundation areas, so the message is that prevention is better than cure. We welcome the steps being taken to improve reservoir safety and reduce the possible loss of life and damage to property.

It is also important to point out, and I am glad to note, that a risk-based, proportionate approach is being taken in looking at the potential consequences of the unlikely event of a dam failure. I understand that many of the dams or reservoirs are very old — indeed, some are over 100 years old — and have not been subject to regular inspection.

I share some of the concerns raised previously, particularly about voluntary organisations using reservoirs for social activities. In my community, the reservoir, which is not subject to this legislation because it is a lake, is a centrepiece of community development activities. I appreciate personally the importance of that natural asset to communities throughout the country.

I am glad to note the Minister referred to a grant scheme by regulation should, after inspection, safety measures have to be implemented. I will track that with great interest as the Bill proceeds through its various stages.

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

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Bill. Considering that there has been no legislation on reservoirs in Northern Ireland prior to this, the Reservoirs Bill is important. For many reasons, it is timely that this is addressed fully, both in the Agriculture Committee and the Assembly.

As was stated earlier, the EU requires that there be such legislation. England and Wales have had legislation in place since 1930, and Scotland's legislation, which has been in place since 2011, is being implemented through the Scottish Environment Protection Agency. There is no legislation on reservoirs in the Republic of Ireland.

Reservoirs throw up a difficulty in dealing with them because of their variety of owners. One third are owned by Northern Ireland Water, one third are loosely in public ownership and the other third are loosely in private ownership. So it is important to have a regulatory system that fits all types of ownership. All 151 impounding reservoirs in Northern Ireland are 10,000-plus cubic metres, the variety to which the legislation will apply.

As the continuity of supply of water to the public is vital, it will be important to have a grant aid system to help owners who are not in the financial position to upgrade structures to acceptable standards. The Bill needs to provide the powers to do that. Nearly all the reservoirs in Northern Ireland are over 100 years old. New capital investment will be required in the future as engineer inspections become mandatory.

Although the main purpose of reservoirs is to provide the public with water, many are also considered to be community assets and not only provide recreational and leisure facilities but have tourism benefits and offer vital amenities. Others are used for economic and social activities. As has been said, examples are the Ligoniel reservoir in Belfast, the Creggan Country Park in Derry and, indeed, in my area, the Loughmacrory lake in Omagh district that was mentioned by Mr McAleer. Many also have environmental or built heritage protections. Thus, it is important to consider the direct and indirect impact that any legislation would have on the reservoirs.

It is important that the Bill protects the users of the reservoir without putting too much unnecessary burden on owners. It is important that any legislation ensures that reservoirs are safe for users without putting unnecessary burden on the owners of the facilities. Dam bursting and consequent flooding are the nightmare scenarios that must be taken into consideration and provided for.

It is important that the Bill reflects the aspirations not only of DARD but of other agencies, such as Northern Ireland Water and the Planning Service. Again, it is important that the level of administration is kept to a minimum, as many of the private owners may be active farmers or landowners, who are already subject to many rules and regulations and much administration. It is also necessary that those farmers or landowners are not put under more strain to upgrade reservoirs to DARD-required standards without grant aid. Some of the reservoirs are in isolated locations, and virtually nobody accesses them other than the farmers and those who check them.

There are a number of reservoirs in my constituency of West Tyrone — Lough Bradan, Loughmacrory lake, and Glencordial. Both Loughmacrory lake and Lough Bradan are used for leisure activities, and all are in areas of great beauty. I know how much people enjoy using those facilities. It is therefore important that any legislation accommodates the various uses of these reservoirs and their surrounding areas.

Safety is important so that the reservoirs are safe for their various uses. However, it is important that this is in proportion: one system will not suit all. It is also important that the costs associated with monitoring the reservoirs are kept to a minimum. Also, who will take responsibility for these costs, because the Bill provides for a panel of reservoir engineers?

In Northern Ireland, we have an integrated water capture, water processing and water distribution system that provide a quality water supply to almost 100% of homes. Unfortunately, some homes in upland areas are still not provided with a public water supply. Our integrated water system has been brought together over the past 40 years. We have a unique water capture system of five water capture zones across the North, through the infrastructural system of natural lakes and reservoirs. Northern Ireland Water is a very good water management organisation that is in public ownership. The Rivers Agency and DARD now have to deal with the EU requirement in relation to the risk of flooding from reservoirs.

The proposed legislation needs to be sensitive to the owners, the community and the users of those facilities. I welcome the Bill today.

Jo-Anne Dobson (UUP, Upper Bann)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Bill. It has been a long time coming, and has moved along very slowly in the background since I first joined the Agriculture Committee. Nevertheless, it was right not to rush the Bill through the Assembly, as the Department encountered issues during the consultation stage. By taking an open approach, it had the opportunity to hone and refine the contents of the Bill. I will refer more to that shortly.

The policy intent of the Bill has been discussed, so I will not go through it again. What I will say is that, of course, I agree with the broad objective of ensuring that Northern Ireland's reservoirs are properly maintained and pose no significant risk to human health or life. I think that we can all agree on that.

People need reassurance that these large bodies of water, which are often sitting above their homes and built to store huge volumes of water, are stable. Thankfully, none of Northern Ireland's reservoirs would be considered dangerous at this moment in time. Nevertheless, it is right to put in place the proper safeguards to ensure that the situation remains like that.

Many of our reservoirs were constructed a long time ago, especially during the industrial revolution. They were built in a different age, when the focus for some would have been on the generation of power rather than the safe storage of water for decades to come. Tragedies across the water spurred authorities there into action, even if it took a while. However, for some reason Northern Ireland was left behind.

Although there have been no significant breaches here, it would be remiss of me not to mention that reservoirs can still be dangerous, especially with people using them as leisure facilities. Unfortunately, over recent years we have seen their deadly power. Tragedies in these waters, including that at Annalong last year, may not be the focus of the Bill, but it is important that we recognise that other safeguards may also be necessary for our waterways.

I pay tribute to the Polland family in particular, who, through their grief, wrote to me urging action on safety measures at reservoirs and quarries. Minister, I wrote to you on this issue, as well as to the Environment Minister. Although this is not directly linked to the Bill, perhaps you would agree to take their views on board.

Although our reservoirs may be unregulated in the sense that those in England, Scotland and Wales are regulated, we have a number of pieces of legislation that mention them. Those include the Water and Sewerage Services (Northern Ireland) Order 2006 and the Drainage (Northern Ireland) Order 1973. Importantly, though, neither requires reservoirs to be maintained to a particular standard. Thankfully, over the years a common sense approach has been taken to the maintenance of many of our reservoirs, and we have avoided the tragedies on the scale that has been experienced in other places across the UK.

We were told during introductory briefings by DARD officials that Northern Ireland Water, for instance, already follows similar standards to those in the 1975 GB legislation. It is a fact, however, that even those reservoirs that are in public hands have few accompanying duties placed on their owners. However, any responsible owner of these structures, which hold huge volumes of water, must accept that they should have some responsibility to ensure that they are safe. Having said that, however, I do not believe that full responsibility can be placed entirely at their feet. Many of these reservoirs will have passed through private hands, sometimes down through families, in addition to the many that public authorities own but are now surplus to requirements. Indeed, we are now seeing Northern Ireland Water in the process of selling a number of its reservoirs.

A reservoir, although potentially dangerous, can be a great asset to an area or organisation. A number have been converted into some of our very best fisheries, for instance, and we have excellent examples of successful and beautiful fisheries dotted in reservoirs across Northern Ireland. On that point, Northern Ireland Water should consider the future benefit to communities when selling its reservoirs. I know that alongside the Richmount Rural Community Association, we have worked so hard in Upper Bann with Northern Ireland Water to convert a disused sewage works into a community nursery. That is an example of Northern Ireland Water working responsibly with the community for the good of all.

The definition in the Bill of a controlled reservoir will not discriminate between owners, whether they are farmers, Northern Ireland Water, councils or any other body. If they meet the volume limit, the Bill will carry requirements, so I trust that Northern Ireland Water, alongside DARD, will be keeping potential new owners of reservoirs fully up to date on what will be expected of them. As a direct consequence of the Bill, some owners, whether new or long-standing, face having to pay for visits from engineers to inspect reservoirs. Some may even decide to drain their reservoirs to below 10,000 cubic metres so that they will fall outside the scope of the Bill. The Minister's views on that would be appreciated.

The Bill should not be resented, and I do not think that it will. However, although the Assembly has the job of deliberating on the Bill, it will be the owners or managers of the 151 reservoirs concerned who will have to live with the day-to-day decisions that are made in it. A one-size-fits-all approach would be entirely wrong for the Bill, and I believe that the Department fully recognises that. For instance, its initial proposal for either high impact or low impact reservoirs was far too broad-ranging and would have meant too many reservoirs being subject to excessive requirements out of precaution because no middle option was being made available. It was crucial that those concerns were listened to by the Department during the consultation exercise, and it now proposes high-, medium- and low-risk categories.

Unsurprisingly, many of the reservoirs that are determined as being high risk are in urban areas, so it is only right that they are properly maintained and have an appropriate level of supervision. Equally, those determined as being low risk will simply have to register and display signage that states who owns it and who to contact in the event of failure. Importantly, they do not face the prospect of paying for regular engineer inspections. However, I hope that owners of those structures will still use their judgement to determine if and when repairs are necessary.

There are a number of issues in the Bill that, I hope, will be thrashed out in more detail over the coming stages. One such issue is the power that the Department is proposing that will enable it to call in smaller reservoirs if it deems it necessary. I am not opposed to that as it is important that the flexibility exists to allow intervention on smaller structures that may still pose a risk.

However, I urge the Department to ensure that the Bill's drafting and, more importantly, its subsequent regulations stand up against the threat of legal challenge. The Minister may say that she does not envisage that power being used, but it is best to get issues like that right the first time around.

The issue that I want to conclude on is the power in the Bill that will enable the Department to bring forward a grant support scheme. I welcome that, because, as I have said, many of the owners of our reservoirs will have no idea about where to look for professional engineering opinions or about how to go about making any necessary repairs. How much support would be available or where it would come from will not be decided until after the Bill comes into operation. However, I hope that the Department is already looking into options available to it. I would be grateful if the Minister could provide some idea of what she anticipates being included in the grant scheme.

The Bill was clearly heavily prompted by the EU floods directive, but the Department will now be judged on how it liaises with the people most affected by it. So far, the lines of communication appear to have been adequate, with the exception of our local councils. At a time of significant reform in local government, the Department will have the difficult task of ensuring that its voice is heard on the Bill. There is time for the Department to persevere. I hope that the lines of communication with the owners in the past remain open, even more so as the Bill enters its Committee and Consideration Stages.

I welcome the overall intent of the Bill. However, it is entirely in the hands of the Minister and her Department to ensure that its provisions can be adopted and implemented with the broad support of the 150-plus owners and managers of our larger reservoirs.

In closing, I come back to my point about safety measures, as raised with me by the Polland family. I would welcome the Minister's assurance that she will continue to work with her Executive colleagues in that area.

Judith Cochrane (Alliance, Belfast East)

I too speak in general support of the Bill as presented. The need for the Bill is clear, since there is no formal legislation that covers reservoirs in Northern Ireland, unlike in GB where reservoir safety has had its own legislation since 1930.

The European floods directive requires member states to identify, assess and manage potential flood risks. Therefore, the policy objective of the Bill is to ensure that we can comply with that directive by introducing a risk-based approach to management and regulation of reservoirs to protect the public from flooding.

The Bill proposes a number of things. First, the establishment, under DARD, of a reservoir authority. Panels of civil engineers would be appointed to supervise, inspect and construct controlled reservoirs under the Bill's provisions. DARD would then establish and maintain a register of controlled reservoirs that would be available for public inspection.

Other proposals in the Bill are that high-to-medium risk reservoirs will be required to have a supervising engineer at all times, and there is a requirement to maintain records of water levels, leaks, repairs etc. DARD could also make flood plans for reservoirs. These controlled reservoirs would have to have emergency response information displayed.

As others said, 151 reservoirs will come under the scope of the Bill. Many of them are currently under public or Northern Ireland Water ownership. Northern Ireland Water should have the funding available to cover necessary maintenance. Indeed, it already maintains reservoirs under voluntary regulation matching the UK legislation requirements.

An area of concern, however, relates to the reservoirs that are not under statutory ownership. Angling clubs, not-for-profit organisations, individuals etc who own reservoirs may find the regulatory regime arising from this Bill onerous and may perhaps seek to dewater, reduce levels or drain completely and abandon reservoirs with the resulting environmental impact. It is important that we look carefully at the potential impact of the Bill on these private and third sector owners and explore options for DARD to bring forward a grant scheme to help them meet the requirements of the Bill if passed.

It will also be important to ensure that there is a joined-up approach involving the Northern Ireland Environment Agency, Planning NI, the Rivers Agency and other bodies to safeguard the environment and ensure the safety of reservoirs. As we look at the Bill in more detail, we must ensure that it sets out clearly how abandoned reservoirs will be managed. We must also consider what issues may arise once the legislation is in place should Northern Ireland Water, for instance, start selling disused reservoirs as their duty of care to stop flooding will pass to new owners as a result of the legislative safeguards.

Overall, the Bill seems reasonable. It is necessary to meet the EU floods directive and to bring Northern Ireland into line with the rest of the UK. I support the principles of the Bill and look forward to looking at the issues that I and others have highlighted in further detail at Committee Stage.

Jimmy Spratt (DUP, Belfast South)

I thank the Minister for her opening remarks in introducing the Bill. I will keep my remarks brief and to the areas that affect the Committee for Regional Development.

Members will be aware that Northern Ireland Water, an arm's-length body of the Department for Regional Development, owns quite a few reservoirs throughout Northern Ireland. It is my understanding that officials from NIW will brief my Committee and the Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development should the Bill pass to Committee Stage. My Committee may also wish to make a further contribution to the development of the Bill at that point.

I am aware that the Department for Regional Development expressed its support for the principles of the Bill in correspondence to the Agriculture Committee in January 2012. The Department and NIW contributed fully to the consultation process on the Bill and queried a number of issues, including seeking consideration to be given to NIW, as the operator of the majority of service reservoirs in Northern Ireland, having a construction service reservoir engineer in its employ. I would appreciate it if the Minister could indicate whether those queries have been amicably resolved to date.

Northern Ireland Water has 71 structures under its ownership that will fall within the Northern Ireland Reservoirs Bill, making it the largest single owner of structures that will be affected. There are a significant number of reservoirs in private ownership. They will be subject to the requirements of the new Bill. I will be interested to hear how the Minister intends enforcing the requirements of the Bill, particularly in the event that a private owner attempts to drain a reservoir to a level below the 10,000 cubic metres stipulated in the Bill. Deliberate circumvention of the regulations to avoid the safety works proposed in the Bill needs to be prevented. The requirements of the Bill need to be enforced.

As I indicated , I am aware that Northern Ireland Water warmly welcomes the Reservoirs Bill, which is being introduced 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."

Northern Ireland Water is, like its predecessor, DRD's Water Service, committed to ensuring the safety of the public of Northern Ireland. It has, since 1975, been managing its impounding of dams in line with the Reservoirs Act 1975 in England and Wales.

All of NIW's physical assets are already compliant with the regulations that fall within the new Bill. I am confident that any further work necessary to ensure their ongoing compliance will be undertaken within the specified timescale. This further work will require that NIW develops and implements new documentation on how each site is being managed.

The principal objective of the Bill is to introduce a risk-based approach to the management and regulation of reservoirs in order to protect against the risk of flooding. I note that, thankfully, no fatalities have been reported in Northern Ireland because of dam failure. It is important, however, that we do not rest on our laurels. We witnessed the recent severe floods in England and Wales and, indeed, those that impacted on our constituents. The Bill, through regulation, seeks to improve the safety of our dams and remove risk to the public. I support these efforts and the principles of the Bill. I look forward to further engagement with the Committee for Regional Development at Committee Stage.

The Committee for Regional Development supports the principles of the Bill.

William Irwin (DUP, Newry and Armagh)

This is an important issue that requires a specific focus from the Department and the Executive. Over the past number of years, there have been no fixed regulations for the maintenance of reservoirs to a recognised standard. The Bill aims to provide these as part of a response to the EU floods directive, which requires DARD to assess all potential flood risks — hence the focus on reservoirs and the obvious flooding potential associated with breaches of dam defences.

These are important issues, especially given the history of wall failures over the past 100 years across the UK. Notably, however, that has not been the case in more recent times, which shows that public and private owners are more alert to the dangers and risks when large volumes of water are held. That said, it is important that reservoirs are legislated for. That is where the Bill enters the agenda and seeks to plug the gap, if Members will pardon the pun, in the regulation and maintenance of such infrastructure.

I spoke on this matter in the early stages of the discussion in the Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development. I have some concerns that private owners of reservoirs in areas with a particularly low risk of damage to the public or the environment will be subject to an overly onerous set of regulations, which, in many cases, would become financially impossible to meet. With a low to non-existent risk, it is questionable what any maintenance over and above that which the owner already undertakes would achieve.

Certainly, where the larger reservoirs are concerned, in light of the lack of legislation and where significant risk has been established, it is proper that some controls are available to ensure that those facilities are of a standard that addresses any risk to the public and the environment. The Bill must strike that balance. It must ensure that European directives are complied with but in such a way that they are not overbearing, financially or from a management perspective, on the lower-risk installations.

I look forward to further opportunities to contribute to the debate in the Committee.

The debate stood suspended.

The sitting was suspended at 12.29 pm.

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

Oral Answers to Questions

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

1. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure to outline the current links between National Museums NI and the Northern Ireland Tourism Board. (AQO 5454/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Museums play a central role in helping to deliver on the objectives of the Tourist Board’s strategy to 2020. The Tourist Board recognises the important role that museums play in our tourism offering here and the benefits of partnership working. NITB has provided significant levels of financial support towards a number of museums-based projects. These financial links include providing £482,000 of capital funding for the Ulster Folk and Transport Museum and the Ulster American Folk Park over the past five years. Of this amount, £257,000 was for the discovery farm at the Ulster Folk and Transport Museum, and £225,000 funded the Rogan and McCallister houses at the folk park in Omagh. In addition, NITB provided £40,000 of funding for the successful bluegrass festival at the Ulster American Folk Park over the past three years.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

I am grateful to the Minister for her response. The Minister will agree that museums are an integral part of the tourist industry, as indeed is Exploris in Portaferry in my constituency. Now that a strategic business plan has been produced for the future of that wonderful facility, what part will the Minister and her Department play to assist in the continued existence of a new and revamped Exploris?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his question. I am waiting for the revised business plan to come before the Department. I am glad to see that significant progress has been made since the Member last asked this question. It is still up to each of the Departments that currently do not have a role in Exploris — as the Member is aware, I am not responsible for marines — to see what role they have and to see how that money will come forward, if at all.

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

Can the Minister advise whether National Museums Northern Ireland has sufficient moneys in its budget to take advantage of any links with the Northern Ireland Tourist Board?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The Member may be aware that some of the zero-based budgeting exercises with the ALBs are currently under way. Museums has just been completed, but we still have to come back on things. I am conscious of the fact that Museums has, in line with a target set out for it, raised some of its own capital, but, from what I have seen thus far, the plans are reliant on Departments — not just DCAL, but others. Indeed, Museums is trying to strengthen links with other Departments to ensure that funding not only continues but increases over the years.

Christopher Hazzard (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Can the Minister explain why DCAL supports W5, which is a regional educational museum, but not Exploris, which, in my opinion and that of the people of south Down, is a similar place?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his supplementary question. I recognise that Exploris has an important tourism aspect, and it has educational and environmental implications to its product. As I said to Mr McCarthy, while my Department has no remit for marines per se, by comparison, W5 is a science centre that is an integral part of the wider Odyssey Trust Company project, which the Department of Education and, latterly, DCAL were instrumental in developing. The Member may not be aware, but Museums, which is, obviously, one of DCAL's funded bodies, set up W5 activities, and its funding is covered by legislation under museums. In April 2012, we transferred ownership of W5 to the Odyssey Trust, so the W5 aspect was firmly wedged within the DCAL family product. As I said, I am waiting for a revised business plan for the future of Exploris to come in front of not only my Department but those of other Executive colleagues to see what way we will take it forward, if at all.

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

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle, agus gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as na freagraí cuimsitheacha in leith sin. Thank you, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, and I thank the Minister for her comprehensive answers on this.

It might be worth putting it on record that the ETI Committee, of which I am Chair, was the only Committee that took the time and trouble to go down and find out for itself and lobby on behalf of Exploris. I hope that others can learn from that and maybe commit to doing that too.

In the context of the question, can the Minister please advise whether any collaborative work has been done by Museums NI and the Tourist Board on the Tourist Board doing that bit more to highlight upcoming attractions and events that are being held in the museums, rather than just advertising museum opening times?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his supplementary question. In my answer to Kieran McCarthy, I said that the Tourist Board had provided funding for events and activities. That needs to continue, particularly when it looks at tourism and the DCAL opportunities, especially in rural areas outside the cities of Belfast and Derry. The bluegrass festival in Omagh is very successful. That is an example of collaboration and helping others in the decade of centenaries, and that will continue. I hope to see those links strengthened to the end of this mandate. It should be put in a better place for future funding, because it is important that we provide a better wrap-around approach to investment, particularly in tourism and culture, arts and leisure.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Question 14 has been withdrawn.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

2. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure what funding is currently available to upgrade facilities at Irish League football grounds. (AQO 5455/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his question. The Executive previously endorsed the development of subregional stadia as a priority area of spend in the next comprehensive spending review (CSR), which is in 2015-16. So, funding for the development of a subregional association football stadium has yet to be finalised, and no decision on or timescale for funding has yet been made on that basis. However, in the meantime, I have commenced preparations, and the early planning phase on the delivery of the subregional programme, which will allow the necessary programmes to develop from one stage to another, will take place in advance of future funding being made available from 2015-16 and beyond.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for that update. Can she confirm whether she or her Department has made any promises of funding to any clubs in Northern Ireland?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I confirm that I have not made any decisions yet on any of the potential subregional facilities. I am waiting for a facilities management plan to come forward, and, on the basis of that and of the recommendations for the plans, I will test them to see how robust they are to make sure that they meet the needs. On that basis, I will make the decision, but none has been made by me thus far.

George Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

Can I ask the Minister whether any delay in the stadium development at Windsor Park will impact on the second tranche of money going to grass-roots football?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I could not quite hear the first part of the question. I think it was, "Was any of the money from Windsor Park going to have an impact" —

George Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

I asked you whether any delay in the stadium development at Windsor Park will impact on the second tranche of money going to grass-roots football.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

There is no delay in Windsor Park, and there will not be any delay in Windsor Park. There will also be no delay in Ravenhill or Casement Park. In advance of securing the funding for the subregional stadia, which I anticipate I will do, I will not sit and wait for that funding to drop into my Department; I am getting on with the plans. I do not anticipate any delays at all.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. How will the decisions be made on what football grounds will benefit from subregional funding?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I am sure that the Member heard the response that I gave to Tom Elliott. The decisions on any of the subregional facilities will be made by me. Where the process or any distribution of funding under the subregional stadia programme are concerned, as the Member will be aware, we are waiting for strategic outline business cases. At the outset, that should reflect the needs for the facilities strategy. It then goes into the whole technical processes of outline business cases and so on and so forth. At the end of the day, the decision around the subregional programme will be made by me, and it will, as I said to Tom Elliott, be based on identified need and robust business cases. It has to make sure that it will have a long-lasting legacy, not just in soccer but in the communities where those facilities will be built and developed.

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

Has the Minister any plans to introduce funding for the Irish League football clubs that wish to purchase defibrillators and, if they do, for training in the use of those?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

As the Member will be aware, as part of the legacy of the World Police and Fire Games, defibrillators were certainly transferred to schools and, I understand, some sports clubs, although I am not in possession of a breakdown of exactly where they all went. The popularity of defibrillators, training and awareness raising around health and safety, unfortunately for many schools and those involved in sport and physical activity, has meant that people are now looking for those. Sport NI, as the Member will be aware, is bringing forward a new series of grants, and that is something that they could have a look at. I have been in discussions with many clubs and some schools around how we can ensure that those facilities are available at first hand, particularly when there are lots of children involved.

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

Go raibh míle maith agat. Ceist uimhir a ceathair.

David McNarry (UKIP, Strangford)

What question is that?

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

Question three.

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

3. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure, following the announcement of the new funding model by Foras na Gaeilge, which establishes six lead Dublin-based Irish language organisations, how she plans to ensure that local Irish language organisations are included in the funding and work of the six lead organisations. (AQO 5456/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Ná bí buartha, Dominic; tá a fhios agam sin. My response is to Dominic's question, which was question 3, is that, following an extensive review of the current core funding arrangements, which began in 2008 with discussions and consultations and included a public consultation, Foras na Gaeilge has announced the names of the six lead organisations that will now lead services in the six thematic areas across the island. The purpose of the review was to ensure the effective delivery of services to language communities consistent with Foras na Gaeilge’s statutory obligations and to make best use of available resources.

To ensure that there is Northern-based representation in the delivery organisations, Foras na Gaeilge, in accordance with the approved business case, will agree criteria with the lead organisations to ensure that up to 25% of staff will be based in the North. They will also have to demonstrate that their boards include members from the North.

Although the core funding will cease under its present format at the end of June, there will be opportunities for organisations in the North to apply for funding from Foras na Gaeilge for individual projects and programmes that meet identified needs outside those provided for by the six thematic areas. The language development forum will also include representatives from the North and South. Foras na Gaeilge has appointed a project change management adviser who will provide assistance to the six lead organisations. The adviser will also provide advice and guidance to the non-lead organisations about their future funding options.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

I remind Members about the use of telephones. We are getting an awful lot of feedback at the Table.

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

Go raibh míle maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a freagra. Is dócha go bhfuil a fhios ag an Aire cheana féin go bhfuil eagraíochtaí Gaeilge anseo sa Tuaisceart, ar nós Forbairt Feirste, Pobal, Altram agus Ultach, go bhfuil siad gan dóchas a bheith acu as an phróiseas nua seo. An dtig liom a fhiafraí den Aire cad is féidir léi a dhéanamh le misneach a thabhairt do na grúpaí sin go mbeidh siad istigh sa líon maoinithe?

I hope that my Irish is up to the standard required by my learned friend here to the left.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

It is better than the Minister's, anyway.

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

I will offer a translation. I am sure that the Minister is aware that there is a high degree of dissatisfaction among some of the language groups here in the North like Forbairt Feirste, Pobal, Altram and Ultach. They are not hopeful about the new process. What can the Minister do to ensure that those groups have enough confidence that they will be included in the funding net?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Go raibh maith agat. Mar pointe eolais, tá Gaeilge mhilis agat. You have very good Irish. I am not going to answer the remarks made from the Bench, because I think they are offensive to you, let alone to me.

I thank the Member for his question. It gives me an opportunity to repeat again that there is still an opportunity for the four groups — three of which are eager, I understand — to try to fit into the new arrangements and be reflected. One group decided, for whatever reason, not to apply and has not indicated to me that it has any intention of applying to any of the lead organisations in a partnership. I am willing to make sure that those who are eager to protect the value of their work, which needs to be protected across the island, enter into partnership with other groups. The change manager, provided by Foras na Gaeilge, needs to be integral in that transition. I will continue to work with Forbairt Feirste, particularly on the work it is doing around the development of an Ceathrú Gaeltachta.

Rosaleen McCorley (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a freagra. I thank the Minister for her answer.

An dtig liom iarraidh ar an Aire cé hiad na phríomh-ghrúpaí nua? An bhfuil teacht le chéile déanta ag aon duine de na grúpaí bun-mhaoinithe anseo, nó an dóiche go dtiocfaidh siad le chéile?. Who are the new lead organisations? Have any of the core-funded groups here merged, or are they likely to merge?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Of the lead organisations, Gaelscoileanna will have responsibility for Irish-medium and Irish emerging education. Conradh na Gaeilge will have responsibility for awareness raising, language protection and representation. Gael Linn will have responsibility for education and the English language sector for adults. Oireachtas na Gaeilge will have responsibility for supporting the use of Irish and the establishment of networks. Glór na nGael will have responsibility for community and economic development. Cumann na bhFiann will have responsibility for the development of opportunities for the use of Irish in networks for young people. So far, Comhluadar has amalgamated with Glór na nGael, and Comhaltas Uladh, which is already affiliated to Conradh na Gaeilge, has reached an agreement with Conradh on language awareness raising, protection and representation. Foras na Gaeilge has asked both lead organisations and those not chosen thus far to begin talks to ensure that the skills and knowledge are retained. As I said in response to Dominic Bradley's main question, the opportunities for other groups who have yet to amalgamate are still there. I encourage them to explore ways in which they can not only secure the work that they do but future-proof and protect the language.

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

Minister, have you any intention to review the current funding structures for the Ulster-Scots bodies that exist? As an aside, do you recognise Ulster Scots as an official language?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I am surprised at the Member asking that question, given that, at one stage, he sat on the CAL Committee. He should have a working knowledge that Ulster Scots is protected in legislation. Ná bí silly. Do not be silly. At some stage, we will review the working arrangements between the Ulster-Scots Agency and the ministerial advisory group on Ulster Scots to make sure that the work it does still provides value to the community, not only value for money on the investment we have made but by taking on board the ideas, projects and themes that are emerging through its work. It would be best served if you, coming from your community, gave them a bit more support, rather than making cheap, silly remarks.

Maurice (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

On the announcement of the new funding model, will the Minister tell us, in some detail, the amount of money that she is making available? Is she funding the Dublin groups directly?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I did not catch the last part of your question: what about the Dublin groups?

Maurice (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Directly.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The Member should be aware — he is a former Minister — that those arrangements are done through North/South body arrangements.

Maurice (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I never served on them.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

You should have. If you had, you would have known the answer to that question. There is another example of people putting public money and faith into elected representatives. Either way, I will write to the Member with the exact figure for the core funding arrangements, and I will write to him about the exact amount of money for Ulster Scots so that he will have the correct figure to hand if he needs to use it.

Judith Cochrane (Alliance, Belfast East)

4. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure what proportion of her departmental budget is allocated to the arts in the remainder of the budgetary period. (AQO 5457/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for her question. I take the Member's reference to "the arts" to mean budget allocations to the Arts Council — I thank her for that clarification — and to NI Screen, the creative industries, the City of Culture and a number of smaller areas in the Department. This is how the Department records and reports on its arts allocation.

The allocation to the arts in 2014-15, the final year of the current Budget settlement, for resource is £15·4 million or 16% of the total resource budget. In the current and preceding year, that proportion climbed to around 22%, with major contributions being made towards the City of Culture and its legacy. The allocation for capital spend in 2014-15 is very modest in comparison at £249,000. I should emphasise, however, that the capital investment trends cannot follow the regular pattern that was there previously. Capital spend on the arts throughout the current CSR period from 2011-12 to 2014-15 will amount to £7·12 million. As the Member will be aware, significant capital investment was made to ensure that the Crescent Arts Centre, the MAC and the Lyric Theatre were all completed.

Judith Cochrane (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the Minister for her answer. Does she agree that supporting Northern Ireland's artists boosts both our culture and the economy and that we should seek to increase funding to exploit that in coming years? What impact will the zero-based budgeting exercise that she referred to in a previous answer have on the arts sector?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I suspect that the Arts Council would probably look forward to the answer to that question. With the zero-based budgeting exercise, we need to ensure that all the ALBs attached to DCAL provide value for money, first of all, and that the money that they are provided with is used to deliver services against the DCAL plan. If the Arts Council, for example, wants to do other projects, it needs to ensure that it meets the policy and direction of the Department, which, thus far, it has.

The Arts Council certainly wants to champion and take forward support for artists. I will look at how it does that and at how that investment and support will increase year in and year out. Certainly, spend in the arts has a direct impact on economic development. The Member will remember from last year the World Police and Fire Games in Belfast and the City of Culture and the Fleadh Cheoil in Derry. Those are the best examples that we have that investment in the arts can help the economy.

Jimmy Spratt (DUP, Belfast South)

I thank the Minister for her answers so far. Substantial amounts of money obviously go into the arts in the south Belfast area. Will the Minister indicate, however, what projects or money might be poured into less well-off areas — if you want to put it like that — such as Sandy Row and, indeed, Taughmonagh?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his question. I was waiting for clarification of which parts of south Belfast he was talking about. I am also keen to ensure that the zero-based budgeting exercise puts investment into the areas that the Member has just outlined, including communities that probably have not received what, they feel, is their fair share of investment in the arts thus far. I am happy to write to the Member. I will write to the Arts Council to find out exactly what money has been spent in his constituency and will forward that information to him. Whatever is there, I hope that it will change in the future. I hope that investment, particularly in working-class areas, increases and that people feel that they can access and participate in the arts.

Sandra Overend (UUP, Mid Ulster)

The funding of the arts in urban and rural areas is important. Will the Minister inform the House how much funding has come to my constituency of Mid Ulster?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I am happy to write to the Member with details about the funding that has gone to her constituency. I appreciate the principle of the question that she asked about ensuring that there is a spread of investment in the arts and other members of the DCAL family. As I said, I will write to the Member and give her those details.

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

In light of the current discussion and debate on the need for a permanent gallery at Ebrington, is the Minister supportive, and what work will she do with OFMDFM to ensure that we have an internationally recognised art gallery at some place on the Ebrington site?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

When I was in the Member's constituency last week, Ebrington was one of the places suggested as a permanent art gallery, and the retention of Buildings 80-81 has certainly received some prominence. As the Member is aware, they are not within my gift; they are within the gift of OFMDFM. However, rather than waiting to see the outcome of that, I am looking at the potential for other sites around the city of Derry, not only for art galleries but for exhibition space that can be part of the permanent legacy of the City of Culture.

Cathal Ó hOisín (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

5. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure to outline the recommendations made by Sport NI on the recognition and funding available to sports with differing or no governing bodies. (AQO 5458/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Along with Sport NI, the sports councils in England, Scotland, and Wales have a governing body recognition policy that aims to recognise a lead organisation for the governance of a defined sporting activity. For applications to be recognised, they can be made only by an organisation that claims to have a governing body. It is, therefore, not possible for a sport without such an organisation to apply. Any governing body can apply. However, under the current policy, the sports councils will recognise only one body per sport as the lead organisation.

Sport NI may be in a position to provide funding that will support the delivery of an activity for which there is not a governing body. That will depend on issues such as the purpose for which the funding programme has been developed; the criteria for the funding; the level of risk and regulation required for the activity; and the ability of the applicant to deliver on the objectives of the funding programme.

Cathal Ó hOisín (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as an fhreagra sin. Will the Minister advise which sporting bodies are currently going through the recognition process?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The only sporting organisation going through the recognition process is kick-boxing. At present, none of the sports councils in England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland or here recognises kick-boxing as a sporting activity. Therefore, there is currently no governing body. However, I am led to believe that the recognition process is well under way.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

The Minister may be aware that urban sports are among the fastest growing sports in Europe, and we have a fantastic urban sports facility in T13 at Titanic Quarter in Belfast. However, it is self-sustaining and has no funding body. Is the Minister willing to visit T13 with a view to helping to advise on the development of urban sports in the region?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I have visited T13, and I have visited the Odyssey to see the Giants and other aspects of the complex on many occasions. I am happy to facilitate a meeting with the Member and representatives from urban sports, T13 or anybody else involved. In areas of work that are self-sustaining, it is particularly important that we do not take them for granted or ignore the potential for further participation. It is important that that is not forgotten, particularly for children who cannot afford access to urban sports.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

We are still getting feedback from mobile telephones in the Chamber. I remind Members of the rules.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Today's 'News Letter' reports extensively on the support of a very prominent figure in the world amateur boxing fraternity — Mr Ray Rodgers of Golden Gloves — for the Sandy Row club and, in particular, for the establishment of a Northern Ireland association of amateur boxers. Would the Minister care to join in giving her support for such an enabling organisation in order to enfranchise and open up opportunities for all young boxers in Northern Ireland?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Unlike the Member, I have not had time to read the 'News Letter' or any other paper for that matter. I am too busy getting on with my work to peruse gossip. The Member will also be aware of an independent report on boxing that did not recommend a separate authority for boxing in the North.

The Member keeps bringing this up at every Question Time — fair play to him; he is consistent — and he is given the same answer. He needs to stop messing about with politics and sport. It is unbecoming of any elected Member. [Interruption.]

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Order. That ends the period for questions for oral answer. We now move on to topical questions.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

1. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure to confirm that project funding for the Irish language will be available to groups that are not recipients of core funding. (AQT 661/11-15)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. An féidir leis an Aire a chinntiú go mbeidh maoiniú togra don Ghaeilge ar fail do na grúpaí siúd nach mbeidh bunmhaoiniú acu.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The short answer is yes. Project funding will continue to be available. It has been available year on year and will remain available until 2014. It is very important that groups that are not recipients of core funding have certainty about the opportunities to apply.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as an fhreagra sin. I thank the Minister for her response. I am sure that she will join me in reiterating that the Irish language, contrary to some misreporting in the media, is for everyone, regardless of which community or, indeed, country in the world they come from. Will she assure us that support, particularly for smaller groups, will continue to provide added value to their work?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Bhuel, aontaím leat go hiomlán. I totally agree with you about the need to make sure that the Irish language belongs to everyone. Given some of the speculation and media coverage on funding for the Irish language, I want to reassure some of the smaller groups out there that programme funding and funding for smaller groups doing specific work is still available. I want to make sure that that support and opportunity continues not just in 2014 but beyond.

Daithí McKay (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

2. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure what role her Department has played and will play in the planning for the Giro d’Italia, one of the most popular international sporting events, watched by millions around the world, which will, in three months’ time, pass through the constituency of North Antrim, where we will all be donning pink shirts for an event that is particularly great for the local area, given the growth in cycling clubs over the past couple of years. (AQT 662/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his question. Perish the thought that everybody in North Antrim will be wearing pink shirts, especially pink Lycra, but we will not go there. [Laughter.] The Giro is hugely important, and it is a huge opportunity for us all. DCAL, through Sport NI, has been working closely with not just some of the local government bodies, which I visited last week, but other small groups and bodies, which are looking forward to the Giro coming to their area. I support the Member's sentiments: it is a huge opportunity to have an international sporting event come to these shores.

Daithí McKay (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for her answer. I will not take any offence at her comments about Lycra.

It is crucial that we have a cycling legacy at the other end of the Giro and that we aim to target other events such as the Tour de France to hold opening stages here in order to build further on cycling as a sport in the North and across the island. Further to that, how will the Minister keep Members informed about the progress plans for the Giro?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

As the Member will be aware, that is primarily in the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment's remit. However, the legacy for cycling is firmly in my Department's remit. My Department has met Cycling Ulster, some of whose representatives are from North Antrim, but they are from all over. I have had discussions with my colleague Leo Varadkar and his officials on the potential new business cases for a velodrome and on what we can do across the island. As the Minister with responsibility for this jurisdiction, what I can do is provide better facilities for cycling in the North. I wish everybody all the best with their preparations for the Giro.

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

3. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure what plans she has to correct the imbalance in arts capital funding for Newry city. (AQT 663/11-15)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Agus seo í mo cheist don Aire. Ba mhaith liom a fhiafraí di cad iad na pleanannaí atá aici leis an mhíchothromaíochtatá ann i gceantar an Iúir ó thaobh maoinithe caiptlíochta do na healaíona a cheartú.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The Member may be aware that I have visited Newry on several occasions. I have certainly met some of the arts organisations. Indeed, as a result of those discussions, we were able to support Sticky Fingers Arts, which is happening this week. The lack of capital investment has certainly been raised. I anticipate those discussions increasing this year. If DCAL or any other Department need to look at capital investment, particularly around arts provision, even in partnership or conjunction with other Departments, that is something that we will be happy to do. The Member will also be aware that this is a long process. I am waiting on, and will have meetings with, the Sticky Fingers project around future capital needs and potential needs, but one thing is clear: organisations need to come together and act in partnership and concert to make sure that Newry gets what it deserves.

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

Go raibh míle maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a fhreagra. An féidir liom a fhiafraí den Aire an bhfuil socrú ar bith déanta aige le déanamh cinnte de go bhfuil an Ghaelscolaíocht san áireamh nuair a chuirfeas a Roinn polasaí nua chun tosaigh, mar atá molta san athbhreithniú ar an Ghaelscolaíocht? Will the Minister's Department or, indeed, an arm's-length body of her Department, be willing to be a partner with other partners in Newry city to deliver a major capital arts project?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Again, I thank the Member for his question. Just to repeat myself on capital provision for arts and leisure, it is unthinkable that DCAL or a member of the DCAL arm's-length family would not be part of that, but we need to make sure that when we are having discussions, we are having them with all the partners in the city and that we make sure that the city acts in concert. To be honest, I do not think we are there yet. I think that we will get there. After a round of discussions, we need to start working out what people want, how they go about getting it and what we can do to help them.

Phil Flanagan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

4. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure what discussions she has had with Inland Fisheries Ireland to ensure that there is an adequate and functioning fish ladder at the dam in Ballyshannon. (AQT 664/11-15)

I was down for question 9 in questions for oral answer, but we never got that far, so I have asked the Minister that one now.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I am not too sure. I do not have the response here; I have it in my folder. The fish ladder is there to try to make sure that the fish kill, particularly in those rivers and in relation to the ESB substation, is reduced. That will continue around discussions with inland fisheries and my Department. We have tried to have discussions with the ESB about reducing the fish kill in that area. Certainly, it is important that we take measures for that reduction to make sure that salmon and other species have an opportunity to go upstream.

Phil Flanagan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for her response. A Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle, this is a topical issue. Cathal Ó hOisín and I met the chairperson of the Enniskillen fishing group today. The Minister will be aware that there are widely held concerns about the impact of the dam and the ESB operations in the area on the travel of salmon in the Erne. Will the Minister advise the House on whether she is willing to engage in discussions at a ministerial level with her counterparts in the Oireachtas with regard to trying to resolve those issues, given that the ESB is a semi-state company?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I can give the Member that assurance. Certainly, I hope to have a meeting at the end of spring to have that concluded. For the Member's information, I did try to have discussions and meetings with the ESB around this, and they did not provide any outcome. I do not find that acceptable. Certainly, I am keen to pursue this because I have responsibilities under European obligations to make sure that salmon are conserved, and the ESB has responsibility not only to people but to species, flora and fauna in their neighbourhood. We all have responsibility to make sure that we do what we possibly can and not to have a detrimental impact. I am not convinced, thus far, that the position and conservation measures around salmon are being taken seriously or even that ESB is aware of how serious this is.

Maeve McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

5. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure to outline any discussions that she has had regarding the potential for Derry to submit an Irish City of Culture bid for 2016, given that she has indicated that she is broadly supportive of the Irish City of Culture. (AQT 665/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

First of all, I have not had any formal discussions with either Derry City Council or anyone else about their approaches or my support — it is, at this stage, support — for the Irish City of Culture for 2016. By 20 December, anybody I had met in the city had made known their view that I should support the bid for Irish City of Culture for 2016 or 2018, or whenever it is.

Maeve McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Go raibh maith agat. I thank the Minister for her support for the City of Culture and for the bid. Can she give us assurances that the process will involve a wide range of stakeholders, particularly from the community and voluntary sector, as we move forward?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I can give that assurance about my Department. I am sure that the Members and other residents in the city of Derry can stand over the fact that, when DCAL made its investments and continued its support, we engaged in a genuine and real way in an inclusive partnership with people from the community and voluntary sector. We will ensure that that continues in anything that I or, indeed, our arm's-length bodies are involved in in the city or surrounding areas.

Sammy Douglas (DUP, Belfast East)

6. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure whether any discussions have taken place with the East Belfast Arts Festival, given that, last year, she encouraged the festival to engage with her Department much earlier this year. (AQT 666/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The Member brought representatives from the East Belfast Arts Festival to meet me last year, and, from that, we have made a small investment, albeit at a late stage. I am keen for that investment to continue, and I am also keen to make sure that the partnerships between east Belfast and west, north and south Belfast continue. To that end, I will fairly soon meet a collective of people who are involved in arts and festivals — east Belfast is part of that — and I am happy to keep the Member updated on any developments that come from that.

Sammy Douglas (DUP, Belfast East)

I thank the Minister for her support so far. Could she ensure, at those discussions, that the arts festival looks at a longer-term strategy of maybe three to five years?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Certainly. We have had discussions with the West Belfast Festival, and I know that it has a good working relationship and strong partnership with the East Belfast Arts Festival. I expect that that is at the top of the agenda for sustainability, particularly, but not exclusively, for arts in working-class and inner-city areas. I would be surprised if it is not looking for at least five to 10 years' support. The discussion will focus on how we do that and, I am sure, on other things that it will raise. However, as I said in a previous response, I am happy to meet the Member again, and I will certainly keep him updated in between.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

7. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure for an update on the Cultúrlann Cairde Teo project in Armagh city. (AQT 667/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The Member will be aware that we have had ongoing and continuing discussions with Cultúrlann Cairde Teo in Armagh city. He may also be aware that DCAL funding was offered for the development of the Cultúrlann. I know that that funding was dependent on match funding from other sources. I am not too sure about developments on that, but my investment was, I think, in the region of £150,000. So, I look forward to seeing the Cultúrlann in Armagh city developed.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for her response. Will she assure the House that opportunities for cultural hubs are developed in communities outside Belfast and Derry?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I am keen to make sure that not just cultural hubs but, indeed, facilities, services and investment in the provision of public services are developed outside Belfast and Derry, particularly in smaller towns and villages and in newer cities. The cultural hubs, particularly in the Member's constituency, are vital not just because of what they provide but in the context of a shared future, reconciliation, creative industries, inclusion and working with children and young people, older people and people who have been excluded. From what I have seen across the city in Belfast and, indeed, outside it, those hubs provide excellent opportunities for people to do very good activities, to put down roots and to give them access where they did have not have it before.

Michael Copeland (UUP, Belfast East)

1. asked the Minister of Education what options are being considered for the future use of the Orangefield High School site. (AQO 5469/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

As indicated in my announcement of 14 January 2014 on east Belfast development proposals and area planning, Orangefield High School will close on 31 August 2014. The Belfast Education and Library Board is considering a range of options for the future use of that site. Following consideration of those options and engagement with relevant stakeholders, clarification on the future use of the site will be provided by the board. In the event that a viable alternative use is not identified, the site will be declared surplus and disposed of in accordance with guidance issued by Land and Property Services.

Michael Copeland (UUP, Belfast East)

I ask the Minister for his assessment of any changes that he would have made to the original plan, in the area planning process and the development proposal process, in order to better reflect the needs of the local community.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

At the end of the day, it is up to the managing authorities. In this case, the Belfast Board and the South Eastern Education and Library Board were involved in the development proposals. I have to say that they should have been brought forward much earlier. Orangefield has been left in limbo for a very considerable period without any firm decisions being made about its future. I had to make the unfortunate decision to close it. Had interventions been made earlier by the managing authority, a different outcome may well have taken place.

In relation to the entirety of the planning process, I have reflected that it would have been much more useful had all the schools in the area been involved in the discussions on the planning process, regardless of sector. That might have been of huge benefit to the planning proposals. However, I believe that the decisions that I reached in the 14 January announcement are the correct ones and give a stable environment for education to be planned and the way forward in that community.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the Minister for his update. He may be aware of significant parental anxiety that has followed his announcement to amalgamate Newtownbreda and Knockbreda High Schools in south and east Belfast. How will the Minister reassure those parents of the plans that he has in place in relation to that particular proposal? Is he willing to meet with a delegation to listen to concerns in more detail?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Had we continued with Knockbreda and Newtownbreda as two separate schools, both would have suffered as a result. The proposal to amalgamate is the right way forward. I pick up a certain commentary on my proposal to close Newtownbreda. However, the more people say that out loud, the more they miss the exact point. They send out into the community a misconception that the school is closing. The school is reopening in a new guise. The school is going to continue to provide high-quality education to that community and beyond. People should look at the positives in the proposal on the way forward and should not bring it forward as a negative story. Educational provision has been secured in the area at post-primary level for generations to come. That is the benefit. I am more than happy to meet a representative group of parents, or representatives from the community, to discuss the proposals. I will not be overturning my decision, but I will be happy to outline how it will be implemented.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Before I call any other supplementary questions, I remind Members that the original question is very site specific.

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

As has already been articulated, the Minister is aware of the enormous anxiety that has been caused to Newtownbreda and Knockbreda in relation to this proposal. Our offices have been inundated with people reflecting those concerns. This might be helpful. Will the Minister now take the opportunity to dispel any notion that the Orangefield site will be used as a new site for Newtownbreda or Knockbreda schools?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I respectfully suggest that, had your offices expressed the views and commentary of the people before I made a decision and, indeed, expressed concerns about the failure to plan properly for education in that community, it may have been more beneficial than expressing it afterwards. I am not the decision-maker in the matter of where or whether the school will be relocated. I asked the two boards to discuss future provision in the area in much greater detail and to decide, based on all the evidence before them, whether the school needs to be relocated and where it should be relocated to. I am not interested in postcodes. I am not interested in the postal address of any school. I want to ensure that schools are in the right place to provide education to the young people of the community they are there to serve.

Maeve McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Go raibh maith agat. I will keep my question all-site-specific. What work has the Minister's Department done in and around the overarching framework for community asset transfer?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The Department for Social Development is leading on the Programme for Government commitment to support social enterprise growth in the broader community sector. A key element of that is to develop and implement a policy framework for community asset transfer. The Minister for Social Development brought a paper before the Executive on 30 January in that regard. My Department continues to work with my Executive colleagues and other Departments to ensure that community asset transfer is brought forward, that it is to the benefit of communities and that, where appropriate, assets are transferred to the community for the betterment of it.

William Irwin (DUP, Newry and Armagh)

2. asked the Minister of Education for his assessment of the recent inspection report on Markethill High School. (AQO 5470/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I am always eager to read the reports produced by the Education and Training Inspectorate. I am particularly pleased when, as in the case of Markethill High School, the inspectors recognise and celebrate very good quality education provision, which is led effectively and results in very good outcomes for the young people in the Markethill and surrounding rural areas.

William Irwin (DUP, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Minister for his reply. There is ongoing discussion about a possible new school build for Markethill High School. Will the Minister give an indication of the possibility of a new school build for Markethill?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I asked the education and library boards and the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools (CCMS) to bring forward proposals for possible future builds. I am not in a position to announce the outcome of the discussions or any of the proposals that the boards or CCMS brought forward. I hope to be in a position at a latter stage of the spring to bring that announcement to the Assembly. I am not in a position to make any specific comment about Markethill High School or any other school, for that matter.

Jimmy Spratt (DUP, Belfast South)

3. asked the Minister of Education to outline any plans he has to increase funding to the extended schools programme. (AQO 5471/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

During the 2013-14 year, £12·4 million was made available for the extended schools programme. Work is ongoing to finalise budget allocations for 2014-15, but I fully intend to maintain extended schools funding at a similar level to 2013-14.

Looking forward, the education budget will not be known until the outcome of the 2015-16 Budget process, which has to be agreed by the Executive and the Assembly. Any decisions about the level of future extended schools funding will be taken in the context of the 2015-16 Budget outcome for education.

Jimmy Spratt (DUP, Belfast South)

Will the Minister join me in recognising the great potential there is to make greater use of school buildings for community purposes, and, indeed, that it can be done through the extended schools programme?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I will. I have no hesitation in promoting the greater community use of school buildings. Recently, I launched a guidance document; along with the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure who also launched a document on sports clubs and greater linkages between sports clubs and our schools estate. The extended schools programme is an excellent way of integrating schools more into the community and drawing parents and others into schools to encourage them to use school facilities and become more involved in their children's education. The community use of schools is a programme that I very much support.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his responses so far. Minister, how concerned are you that school principals are being overburdened as a side effect of this worthy policy?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

We have set out best practice in the guidance. The guidance is there to assist school principals and boards of governors to open up their schools more to the community. There is a great demand for greater access to facilities, particularly to schools after hours, and particularly in communities where there are inadequate community facilities.

The guidance sets out simply how schools can and could open up their facilities. It refers to insurance issues, rental policies etc, and I believe that the guidance has taken some of the burden off boards of governors and principals.

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

I thank the Minister for his answers thus far. The development of parenting skills and encouraging parents to get involved in their child's learning were an integral and valuable part of the extended schools programme. Does the Minister have any plans to extend that aspect to all primary schools?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The option exists for all primary schools, although I accept that extended schools is directed at schools in areas of highest deprivation to assist them in tackling the challenges that deprivation brings to education. However, many schools outside the extended schools programme run programmes on relationships with parents and communities, expansion etc. The current budget restricts me to a certain degree on how much funding I can make available to the extended schools budget. I have no plans at this stage to expand the eligibility criteria.

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

4. asked the Minister of Education for an update on the implementation of the Irish-medium education review. (AQO 5472/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The aim of the review is to ensure that Irish-medium education is fully and appropriately supported as an integral part of the education system and contributes to the building of a shared future for all our citizens, based on equality. I am pleased to say that the vast majority of the recommendations in the review have been fully or very substantially implemented.

The current position is that, of the 24 recommendations, 15 have been implemented, with a further seven showing substantial progress. Only two recommendations have not made significant progress, but these relate to developing Irish-medium primary provision through a federation model. As time has progressed, educators have been able to develop and share best practice across Irish-medium primary provision through less formal structures and ways than a federation model, as originally envisaged in the review.

These approaches are proving successful in the stated review aim of creating and maintaining sustainable Irish-medium primary education. The ongoing implementation of the recommendations continues to contribute greatly to the vibrancy and success of the Irish-medium sector at preschool, primary and post-primary school stages. Although significant progress has been made, I am keen to identify where more needs to be done to develop this important area further and to ensure that education in the sector is of the highest quality.

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

Go raibh míle maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a fhreagra. An féidir liom a fhiafraí den Aire an bhfuil socrú ar bith déanta aige le déanamh cinnte de go bhfuil an Ghaelscolaíocht san áireamh nuair a chuirfeas a Roinn polasaí nua chun tosaigh, mar atá molta san athbhreithniú ar an Ghaelscolaíocht?

I thank the Minister for his answer. Is there a process in place in his Department to ensure that any new policy emanating from it is Irish-medium proofed, as recommended in the review of Irish-medium education?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Chomhalta as a cheist. Yes, all policies in my Department are proofed across the sectors, particularly for Irish-medium education. It is ensured that they are adaptable to and appropriate for the promotion and facilitation of Irish-medium education. I think that that is one of the reasons why we have seen such a dramatic rise in the number of young people attending Irish-medium provision. The numbers have risen from 2,695 in 2002-03 to 4,627 in 2012-13. We have supported that development through direct financial resources and through resources for teaching the curriculum and provision around the curriculum. We engage with the Irish-medium sector, as with all sectors, regularly and continue discussions as to how we can further support and facilitate that sector.

Rosaleen McCorley (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a fhreagraí go dtí seo. I thank the Minister for his answers up to now. An dtig leis an Aire sonraí a thabhairt ar fhás an Ghaeloideachais le blianta beaga anuas? Will he detail the growth of Irish-medium education over recent years?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Chomhalta as an cheist. There has been a dramatic rise in Irish-medium education over recent years. As I outlined to Mr Bradley, there has been an increase from 2,695 pupils in 2002-03 to 4,627 pupils in 2012-13. There are now 29 stand-alone Irish-medium schools — 28 primary schools and one post-primary school — and 10 Irish-medium units attached to Catholic maintained schools — seven in primary schools and three in post-primary schools.

Since 2009, DE has made capital investments totalling just over £7·6 million in the Irish-medium sector. In addition, on 25 June 2012, I announced new school projects in the Irish-medium sector: an £11·9 million investment in Coláiste Feirste; and a £2·5 million investment in Bunscoil Bheann Mhadagáin. Two further Irish-medium projects revealed in my 22 January 2013 announcement are at an early stage of progression.

The Department continues to react to the growth of the Irish-medium sector. We will continue to carry out our statutory duties in the sector and to engage with it on our statutory duty to facilitate and promote Irish-medium education.

Trevor Lunn (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

Given that the Irish-medium and integrated sectors were both referenced in the Good Friday Agreement and that his Department has the same statutory obligation to encourage and facilitate both movements, will he consider a review of the integrated system similar to the one that has been spoken about today?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

In previous responses, correspondence and, indeed, statements to the Assembly, I have set out my obligations and work on facilitating and promoting integrated education. I have not been asked to carry out a review of integrated education to see whether that will facilitate its advancement. However, I am happy to consider that and have further discussions with the Member and supporters of the integrated sector.

Barry McElduff (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

5. asked the Minister of Education for his assessment of the recent Council of Europe report on the implementation of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages and its implications for his Department. (AQO 5473/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I noted the recent Council of Europe report on the implementation of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. My Department is considering the references to education here in the North of Ireland and looking at what action we can take to ensure that we meet our obligations under the charter.

My Department has already made a great deal of progress in the area: the Irish-medium education review that I have just mentioned aims to ensure that Irish-medium education is fully and appropriately supported as an integral part of the education system; schools can teach the Irish and Ulster-Scots languages, literature, culture and history at primary and post-primary level; my Department has provided funding for the production of teaching resources for Irish and Ulster-Scots languages; the development of special educational needs provision for Irish-medium education; the establishment of an advisory group on the strategic development of Irish-medium post-primary education; the creation of an Irish-medium education early years specialist post in Altram; the introduction of the community relations, equality and diversity in education policy; and the introduction of a Department of Education languages policy for Irish, which sets out the administrative services that my Department offers in Irish and informs those who wish to use Irish how they may communicate with the Department through the Irish language.

Barry McElduff (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Will the Minister outline what additional duties or obligations the charter places on him as a Minister? Essentially, will he develop his point about how the charter specifically impacts on education?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I thank the Member for his question. As he will know, and as I said in response to a previous question, there is an obligation on us under the 1998 Act. Part II of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages sets out high-level objectives and principles that are to be pursued in support of regional and minority languages. That applies here to Irish and Ulster Scots.

Part III of the charter lists more specific measures that must be taken to promote the use of regional or minority languages in public life. Here, that applies only to Irish. Under Part III, DE has either a specific or a collective responsibility with other Departments under article 8, which deals with education, or article 10, which deals with administrative authorities and public services. So obligations to promote minority and regional languages are placed on us by the charter. That is taken very seriously by my Department.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

The Minister will be aware of his Department's funding and resource responsibilities for the Ulster-Scots Agency. Given what he has just said, what extra resources will he put into the education system and sectors across Northern Ireland to promote Ulster-Scots education? Indeed, given the ongoing disparity in funding between Irish and Ulster Scots, what more can he make available to help to address that?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

My Department funds on the basis of need. The Member will be aware, and I have said this in answer to previous questions, that we have a thriving Irish-medium sector. We have over 4,000 children being taught through the medium of Irish, and that number continues to grow. We have over 20 specific Irish-medium units or schools. Unfortunately, we do not have any for Ulster Scots.

I make funding available for the promotion of Ulster-Scots material and have engaged with the Ulster-Scots Agency. I asked it to come back to me with further details for support. I await that response, but I am happy to engage with anyone who is promoting Ulster Scots to see whether we can work closer together to promote the Ulster-Scots language or culture. I have a phobia of neither.

Jo-Anne Dobson (UUP, Upper Bann)

Given his party president's statement in 2003 that:

"the language is still central to our political project",

how is the Minister, as Education Minister for all children, depoliticising the Irish language?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The Member spends more time studying my party leader's speeches than I do, so I do not know in what context or where the party leader said that, but keep studying his speeches anyhow.

The Irish language has been politicised not by those who advocate it, wish to speak it, wish to learn it or wish to respect it but by those who wish to prevent it from being spoken, prevent it from being learnt, prevent it from being used or prevent its identity from ever being acknowledged.

I am currently learning Irish because I believe that it is part of what and who I am. Many other people learn it because they believe that it is part of what and who they are. However, it does not belong to me, my party or my political beliefs. It belongs to everyone on the island of Ireland, regardless of their political or religious affiliations or none, and the best way, to use your term, to depoliticise it is for people to respect it for what it is — a language — and for everyone to take ownership of it. Then no one can claim ownership of it.

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

Ní thiocfadh liom ach aontú leis an Aire ins an mhéid a dúirt sé ansin. Is le gach aon duine an teanga agus agus ba choir rud a dhéanamh í a leathnú amach i measc an phobail i gcoitinne.

I thank the Minister for, and support him fully in, what he is just after saying about the Irish language. It is there for everyone. It belongs to no one, or to no section of the community in particular. It is there for us to gain understanding of our history, background and environment.

Le theacht ar ais chuig an cheist maidir le tuairisc Chomhairle na hEorpa, ba mhaith liom a fháil amach ón Aire i dtaobh cibé taighde atá déanta lasmuigh den Roinn maidir leis an tuairisc: an féidir leis an Aire an t-eolas sin a roinnt linne go poiblí.

What analysis has the Department done of the recent Council of Europe report, and can it make that analysis publicly available so that the rest of us can have a look at it?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Chomhalta as an cheist. I have asked my officials to study the report and to report back to me on its findings. I have been concerned by certain media reports highlighting alleged failings by my Department in its promotion and facilitation of Irish-medium education, and I certainly want to clear those matters up. Where there are failings, we need to deal with them, correct them, move on and ensure that they do not happen again, but, once my Department has completed its review of the report, I will be more than happy to publish that and share it with Members.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

6. asked the Minister of Education how his Department improves literacy and numeracy in deprived communities. (AQO 5474/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Through the implementation of 'Count, Read: Succeed', the literacy and numeracy strategy, the aim is to raise standards and close achievement gaps. The strategy sets out the central role of teachers, supported by parents and school leaders, in their work to raise standards. Improvements have been made at Key Stage 2, GCSE and A level. However, we still have too many young people who are underachieving.

Funding has been allocated to specific programmes to further improve outcomes in literacy and numeracy in socially disadvantaged areas. Those include the Delivering Social Change programme to employ additional teachers, a community education initiatives programme, a literacy and numeracy continuing professional development (CPD) Key Stage 2 and Key Stage 3 project and the special educational needs CPD literacy project for primary schools. I have also provided additional funding for area learning communities to increase the capability in post-primary schools to improve literacy and numeracy levels amongst disadvantaged pupils.

The Education and Training Inspectorate (ETI) is engaging with a number of post-primary schools in a programme to raise standards in English and mathematics. There is also an important role for parents and local communities in addressing educational achievement. The Education Works advertising campaign is aimed at informing and reminding parents of the importance and value of becoming more involved in the education of their children.

Both the community education initiatives programme and the extended schools programme have a focus on positive educational outcomes.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his answer. Given that literacy and numeracy issues in communities of high deprivation are often intergenerational, what is the Minister doing with other ministerial colleagues to address those issues, where children, unfortunately, are not supported sufficiently by their parents?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

In my original answer, I referred to the Delivering Social Change programme, which is a subcommittee of the Executive. I have secured funding through that, in coordination and collaboration with OFMDFM, for the appointment of numeracy and literacy teachers to schools. Around 273 recently qualified teachers have been appointed to post-primary and primary schools. That is proving to be very successful.

I also have sponsored a programme, along with the Social Development Minister, in relation to nurture units in primary schools, and there are a number of other initiatives that I am looking at in conjunction with my ministerial colleagues. As I have reported to the Assembly, I have worked quite closely with the Health Minister on a number of the programmes that he has developed on working with young mothers and their families to create an educational environment in the home.

So, there is a lot of work going on. Of course, if we had greater budgets across the Executive, we would like to do much more work, but I am satisfied with the level of cooperation thus far.

George Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

Given the work of learning communities, such as the one that you will see on your next visit to Limavady later this week, how important is that work in improving literacy and numeracy?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I was wondering how you were going to get your constituency into this one: fair play to you.

Area learning communities have proven to be very valuable in sharing skills bases and knowledge between schools on how to tackle the issue of numeracy and literacy and sharing the best practice and the advantages that it brings. I have provided funding specifically to the area learning communities to develop projects on numeracy and literacy, and they have proven very successful. I would like to see the area learning communities developing their work further and developing their collaboration further. When we come to finalising the budgets for the next comprehensive spending review in 2015-16, I will be keen to ensure that area learning communities continue to be funded in such a manner.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his answers so far. Given the large amount of initiatives on illiteracy and innumeracy, if we were to go for absolutely no one — zero — to be illiterate or innumerate, would the Department have a process for annually counting how many people are illiterate or innumerate?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

We have regular assessments within our schools system, and we are trying to improve on that through the levels of progression to see how our young people are progressing through the school system and to ensure that their needs are being met. The nature of this issue is that problems should, and can, be identified in nursery school and in primary school, and they should be dealt with in those phases of education. It is regrettable if any young person reaches post-primary school without having their numeracy and literacy deficit recognised or aided, or with no scheme put in place to assist them.

I believe that the systems that we have put in place are continuing to ensure that more and more young people's lives are not blighted by an absence of numeracy and literacy. However, I also believe that we have to improve how that is measured. As you say, at any given time of the year can we express how many children are below the levels that we are concerned about? I believe that, if we could make progress on levels of progression, we would be able to achieve that goal.

Christopher Hazzard (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Will the Minister detail the level of additional funding that has been targeted at numeracy and literacy projects in recent years?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Delivering Social Change and improving literacy and numeracy has had £15·56 million added to it. The community education initiatives will have £2 million over the next two years. The literacy and numeracy CPD key stage 2/3 project will have £2 million over two academic years, and the post-primary sector will get an additional half a million pounds per annum over the three years to further support area learning communities. So, substantial additional amounts of money are being placed to tackle numeracy and literacy. However, the core function of educational funding is to improve numeracy and literacy. So, surely everything that we fund has to be about improving a child's numeracy and literacy skills.