Northern Ireland Assembly, 2 June 2014

323 contributions from 63 members. The official report.

Speaker's Business

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

I was sorry to learn of the passing of Sir John Gorman. The constant theme running through Sir John's life was one of public service and dedication to the community in a variety of significant roles, from military service through to being elected in 1998, like me, as a Member of this House. Sir John was an affable and thoughtful person, and, as Deputy Speaker, he attracted the same huge respect across the entire Chamber as he did in the wider community. I express my sincere condolences, on behalf of the whole Assembly, to his family and many friends and, of course, to the Ulster Unionist Party.

As we have done in the past on these occasions, I will call a representative of each of the parties to pay tribute to our late friend and colleague Sir John Gorman.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

Indeed, we gather to pay tribute not only to a former Member of this House but to a public servant of the highest calibre, a business leader of true stature and a soldier whose feats of derring-do were simply legendary. To say that Sir John lived a full life hardly cuts it. He was a war hero at 21 years of age, decorated with a Military Cross for his actions at Normandy as a tank commander with the Irish Guards. After the war, he was a district inspector in the RUC before going into the private sector and pursuing a career with the British Overseas Airways Corporation (BOAC). He then returned home to continue service, heading up the Northern Ireland Housing Executive and the Institute of Directors (IOD).

As if that was not enough, in 1996, he was elected to the Northern Ireland Forum and served as chairman. In 1998, he was elected to this Chamber as an MLA for North Down and went on to become a Deputy Speaker. He had a full and varied life of service, a life woven from threads throughout the island of Ireland.

John Gorman was born in Omagh on 1 February 1923, but his family roots were in Tipperary on his father's side and County Cork on his mother's. Both parents were unionists and Catholic, a faith to which he remained true all his days. His father served in the Irish Guards during the First World War. On his return, he joined the Royal Irish Constabulary (RIC). He was present for the handover of Phoenix Park barracks to no less a person than Michael Collins before he transferred to the Royal Ulster Constabulary.

John was a boarder at Portora Royal School in Enniskillen but soon found himself in the Irish Guards armoured division and in the thick of the action in Normandy, where he famously used his Sherman tank to ram a German Royal Tiger tank, an action for which he received the Military Cross and the French Croix de Guerre, as well as appearing on the cover of 'The Victor' boys' magazine. He went on to participate in the liberation of Belgium and Holland through Arnhem, northern Germany and on to Denmark.

In 1998, every Member of the first Assembly was invited to Brussels for a familiarisation trip on the European Union. Those on the coach from the airport will never forget the moment when the city came into view and Sir John uttered the simple, factual words:

"Last time I was here, I was liberating the city from Nazi Germany."

Over the weekend, I came across a photo of Sir John posing with another military hero Captain Doug Beattie — another holder of the Military Cross — at an event in Killyleagh to mark the ninetieth anniversary of the poppy appeal. Sir John was one of a number of speakers who recounted their war exploits. Of course, he stole the show.

After the war, in 1946, Sir John's next stop was Enniskillen and the RUC. While training, I believe that he and some colleagues managed to build a poteen still and indeed to present a bottle to Princess Elizabeth at their passing out parade. When asked about it and the aftermath, he used the famous phrase, "There was a frightful row."

After passing out, he served in north Antrim. It was during that period that he met his wife, Heather. In 1979, he became deputy chairman and chief executive of the Housing Executive. Indeed, he was so successful in that role that one politician — now the First Minister of this House — referred to him as the "acceptable face" of the Housing Executive.

In the mid-1980s, he became director of the Institute of Directors. I had the privilege of working with him and the IOD's then chairman, Sir George Quigley. Sir John and Sir George commanded the respect of the business community north and south of the border. Together, they promoted a focus on cross-border trade with the novel concept of an eastern economic corridor from Belfast to Dublin and beyond. After all that, he decided to enter politics.

The last time that I saw him was at a branch meeting of the Ulster Unionist Party in Killyleagh. He was 90 years of age and barely mobile. He said that he was there simply to support me. I was humbled by that gesture. In his death, I am more determined to deliver better politics in his memory. He was truly one of a kind.

John Gorman: Ulsterman, Irishman, soldier, businessman, politician, public servant and the public's friend, husband, father and grandfather. What a man. What a life.

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

It was with sadness that I learnt of the death last week of my friend and former colleague Sir John Gorman. I had the great honour and privilege of serving alongside Sir John, first in the Northern Ireland Forum and latterly in the first term of the Northern Ireland Assembly, to which Sir John was elected for the constituency of North Down. As the only representative from North Down who has been here since 1998, I welcome the valuable contribution that he made to the life of the constituency.

Sir John came late to politics. Mention has been made that he took his first elected office in the Northern Ireland Forum at the age of 73. In many ways, that was typical of the man. Mention has been made that he packed several lifetimes into one life.

Mention has been made of Sir John's service throughout the post-war period, in BOAC, the Institute of Directors and the Housing Executive before he entered politics. If there are two words that sum up John Gorman, they are "service" and "duty": he gave service to his country, and he did his duty for his fellow citizens throughout Northern Ireland. He did his best, without fear or favour, to represent them all.

Sir John Gorman was a decorated war hero. Mention has been made of the Military Cross and, later, the Croix de Guerre that he received for his actions in France and, later, Belgium. Indeed, the incident that led to the military honours that he received typified the man. Even when faced with a probably technically superior German tank, he had the courage to ram the tank and, indeed, do his duty for his country. Above all, the incident showed that, before he took any other action, he made sure that the men under him were safe. That was very much the spirit of the man.

When he came to the Northern Ireland Forum, he was, in many ways, pitched into the deep end with the Speaker's role, which was very difficult to perform, but he embraced it with aplomb. I do not think that anyone from any side of the House would say that he did not treat his roles, whether as Speaker at that stage or as Deputy Speaker later, with impartiality and good humour. Indeed, he was a friend to everyone.

Sir John Gorman was a man of great principle and strong convictions. As one who had a chequered relationship with the Ulster Unionist Party around that period, there were many occasions on which Sir John Gorman and I found ourselves on different sides of the coin in discussions or arguments. However, even when Sir John disagreed with you, he treated everyone with the utmost respect and courtesy. Above all, he was a gentlemen. He gave service and devotion to his country and to his people throughout his life. He will be sadly missed. From this side of the House, I add my condolences and my thoughts and prayers to his family. We have lost a great man in the past week, and we all mourn his passing.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

I want to add my condolences and regrets on the passing of John Gorman to his family, family circle and friends.

I got to know the man, in the first instance, at the Forum and, subsequently, in the first mandate of the Assembly. Previously, when I was an elected representative in Derry City Council, I exchanged correspondence with him, but I never had the opportunity or the pleasure of meeting the man because I normally worked through the local district office. However, in all our remote and personal exchanges, I found him to be someone who was prepared to listen and to engage.

I thought that John Gorman was the epitome of the type of person needed during the dramatically changing situation in the period from 1996 to 1998 and the establishment of the Assembly. There were tremendous challenges and difficulties, and, quite often, that resulted in considerable acrimony and perhaps more heat than light, not unlike today's circumstances. However, he always managed to keep his cool and to keep the lines of communication open. I think that he embraced, completely and absolutely, the changes that had to come. He recognised that that might be more difficult for some than it was for him, and he was prepared to give example and leadership. For that, I will always fondly remember him. I took a lot of sustenance from it. At times, it was very easy to get depressed and concerned about whether we could eventually bridge our differences, but John Gorman showed that it could be done. I think that that is the lasting testimony to his vision, commitment and strength of character.

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

With a sense of loss, I, too, pay tribute to Sir John Gorman and offer my condolences to his family and friends. I also pay tribute to the massive contribution that he made to society and to his total commitment to public service.

As others have said, he was larger than life — much, much larger. He had a glowing military career, and many of his exploits are still renowned. Indeed, the Brussels story is legendary, and I can vouch for it because I was on the bus when he made that statement. There are very few of us left — the founders of the House. He was there with us and very matter-of-factly made his statement and said, "The last time I was here, I came to lead the liberation." Some were very nonplussed at that, but the rest of us were all very plussed.

Subsequently, he was an exceptionally professional policeman and district inspector, and provided total commitment to public service in that role. When he went into business, he was involved with BOAC and the whole airline business. He then moved to the Housing Executive and, later, to the IOD.

John came late to politics. He came to the House when we were elected in 1998 and, for a time, was a distinguished Member. He acted as Deputy Speaker and was outstanding in that role. I consider it a privilege to have known him and to have shared his company on many occasions. Sir John reached a ripe age; I will not say "old age" because he was always young. He had a great life, and I think all of us are unlikely to see his like again. We thank him for the memories and pray to God in all his mercy to look kindly on Sir John's immortal soul. May God bless you, John. You will be missed.

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I rise as a successor to Sir John as an MLA for the North Down constituency. However, he was clearly much more than a Member for North Down. He was very much a servant to all of Northern Ireland, and it is clear from the comments that have been made today, and, indeed, more widely outside the Chamber, that he provided that service in a range of different ways throughout his life. His life was characterised by service, whether it was what he did during the Second World War, in the police, in business, in our public bodies and, ultimately, in politics.

It is worth reflecting on some of the challenges that characterised the context in which he operated. It is noteworthy that he was serving in the Housing Executive at a time when we were moving from a situation where housing was seen as very politicised to one where the importance of integrity around housing was paramount. To have a man with such integrity heading up the Housing Executive clearly provided confidence right across the community.

He tried to make Northern Ireland an economic success at a time when there were major challenges on the security and violence front that were operating in a different direction. It was important that people tried their best to maintain Northern Ireland as a functioning economic area at those times of challenge. The actions of people such as Sir John allowed us the platform on which we can build today and, if it were not for his actions, we would be in a much worse place.

He was also, in some ways, a midwife to our political developments. As people have said, he entered politics at a late age but was sprung into some very important and sensitive roles as our peace process and political process were unfurling and we were beginning to see the way forward in the new structures. In particular, his chairing of the Forum for Political Dialogue was a critical intervention. Someone with integrity had to come forward to make that new start for us all.

In conclusion, it is also worth remarking on the fact that we are now losing more and more people from the wartime generation. The perspective that they brought to our politics and to wider society from their experiences of that war was of huge value. It points out to us the cost when things go wrong and the importance of standing up for our values and being prepared to go the full way with bravery and commitment to ensure that our values ultimately triumph over the forces of evil in this world. Ultimately, his actions when he was a very young man most characterise his legacy.

In closing, I think that it is appropriate that we pass on our condolences to his immediate family and his wider family circle.

Basil McCrea (NI21, Lagan Valley)

I rise to offer my condolences to the family and to pay my respects to Sir John Gorman. At this stage in the proceedings, a lot has already been said about the formal side of Sir John's life. People have recounted his heroism and the other contributions that he made. My reflections are of a rather more personal nature. Sir John was a district inspector in the RUC, as was my grandfather. They arrived at those posts by different means. When Sir John came out of the army, there was a fast-track process where people could be demobilised into the police, but my grandfather rose through the ranks from constable right the way up to become a district inspector. There was great debate, when those changes were going on, about what the new man was like. Those people were coming in from different places, so it caused quite a lot of discussion. When I last spoke to Sir John — I have had the privilege of talking to him on quite a number of occasions — he was quite taken about that because he had never really understood that there might be some consternation about how things would go, but he was very generous and very likeable, and we talked about a lot of things. My family was also in the services during the war, so we had a lot to talk about.

It is worth reflecting that when people pass away, the things that you are left with are the memories, and Sir John certainly left us with a lot of good memories and made a huge contribution to our society.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I did not have the opportunity to become acquainted with Sir John Gorman, but from everything that I have read about him and heard about him, it is quite clear that the glowing tributes paid in the House today are deserved in respect of the very full contribution that he made to public life, right through from his very notable military career and acknowledgement of his role in Normandy and the award of the Military Cross to his service for 17 years in the RUC through the border campaign of the IRA in the 1950s, and then his public service in a public role, followed by his political service. Few people, I suspect, will pack as much into their lives and leave as many glowing tributes as there have been today, so I am very happy to join in expressing my acknowledgement of him as a man and to convey to his family the respect and condolences of this House.

Steven Agnew (Green, North Down)

I offer my condolences and the condolences of the Green Party in Northern Ireland to the family of Sir John Gorman and the wide circle of friends and well-wishers who knew and respected the man. Personally, as an MLA, I did not know Sir John Gorman myself, but having read the achievements of his life and the many varied roles that he played, in all cases as a public servant to some degree or other, I cannot help but be humbled to occupy one of the positions that he occupied, which was that of MLA for North Down. He certainly set the bar high for the calibre of man who undertook that role. It is a standard that few of us will achieve but, certainly in representing North Down, all of us should aspire to.

As we reflect at the end of Sir John's life, I cannot help thinking that, at my stage of life, I am already somewhat behind where he would have been at a similar age, such were his achievements. Again, going forward, I hope I can pack in even a small proportion of the roles and service that he did. Having read about him and learned about him today and through the many tributes that have come, I can see what can be done with a life. We should not waste it; we are here but once. He certainly led the way in how we can serve our community and act as individuals as part of a greater effort to serve the wider society. I pay tribute to him and pass on my condolences to his family. Today, we can certainly celebrate a life well lived.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

That concludes the tributes to Sir John Gorman. Before we move to the ministerial statement, I wish to inform the House that I will be absent from the House tomorrow on official Assembly business.

Ministerial Statement

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I wish to make the following statement on the seventeenth North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC) meeting in the health and food safety sectoral format, which was held in the NSMC joint secretariat offices in Armagh on Wednesday, 30 April 2014. Minister Michelle O’Neill MLA and I represented the Northern Ireland Executive at the meeting. The Irish Government were represented by Dr James Reilly, Minister for Health. I chaired the meeting on this occasion. This statement has been agreed with Minister O’Neill, and I am making it on behalf of us both.

We had a discussion on various priorities and noted that they will be contained in a report to be considered at a future NSMC institutional meeting as part of the ongoing review into sectoral priorities. We received an update on a range of health promotion work that is ongoing across the island of Ireland. Ministers noted that the EU tobacco products directive will come into force in May 2014 and that the all-island tobacco conference, which was held in Belfast in November 2013, had allowed for the sharing of innovative ideas to benefit the health of people from both jurisdictions.

The ongoing collaborative work between the Food Standards Agency Northern Ireland and the Food Safety Authority of Ireland on the voluntary display of calorie information on menus in the catering business was discussed. It was noted that an online calorie calculator had been launched in Ireland on 9 April 2014 and that it will be made available in Northern Ireland.

Ministers also considered the issue of suicide and noted that all-island media guidelines for the reporting of suicide and self-harm have now been issued. We also noted that a joint conference, hosted by the Irish Association of Suicidology and Contact NI, had taken place in October 2013. It showcased global and local best practice in tackling suicide.

The Council welcomed the initiatives being taken forward in both jurisdictions to support mothers breastfeeding their children.

We also welcomed a presentation, "Reducing alcohol-related harm by addressing availability — Maximising the benefits from North South co-operation", by the Institute of Public Health in Ireland. Ministers noted the key findings and recommendations from a report into that issue and agreed that officials from both jurisdictions should consider the relevant findings and take them forward as appropriate in line with their respective alcohol strategies. Ministers requested that an update on progress be provided at a future meeting.

The Council received an update on the radiotherapy centre at Altnagelvin and noted that the business case process for the development of the unit continues to be progressed. Ministers were advised that officials from both jurisdictions are working to finalise a memorandum of understanding and service level agreement for the operation of the unit. That work is almost complete.

We welcomed the continued progress of the Ireland-Northern Ireland-National Cancer Institute Cancer Consortium and noted that the fifth of its series of international conferences will take place in Belfast during May 2015.

Ministers also noted the continued success of the US/Ireland R&D partnership and welcomed the approval of a further project, which aims to develop a novel test for prostate cancer.

Ministers noted that the child protection work programme, which was agreed at a previous meeting, continues to be progressed and that updates will be reported to future meetings. We welcomed the development of an app to allow access to the North/South child protection hub.

The Council noted a progress report provided by the chief executive of Safefood. Ministers were briefed on the continued development of the awareness campaign targeting childhood overweight issues and obesity and noted the success of the international food safety conference, which was held in Queen's University Belfast. We also noted a range of reports and surveys completed by Safefood in recent months.

Ministers took the opportunity to thank the outgoing chief executive of Safefood, Martin Higgins, for his work in the Food Safety Promotion Board over the years and wished him well for his retirement.

The Council was advised that Safefood had prepared a draft 2014-16 corporate plan and 2014 business plan. Those plans are progressing through the approval process, and they will be submitted to the NSMC for final approval in due course. The Council considered a report on nutrition surveillance on the island of Ireland prepared by the Safefood scientific advisory committee. Ministers noted the recommendations from the report on an all-island approach to nutritional surveillance. We noted the progress to date in recruiting a new chief executive for the Food Safety Promotion Board and approved the proposal to install an acting chief executive, if required. Ministers also approved the proposal to reduce the salary of the CEO, subject to the agreement of the Finance Ministers.

Finally, we agreed that the next NSMC health and food safety meeting will be held in autumn 2014.

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

I apologise on behalf of the Chair, who has been delayed. I am sure that, had she been here, she would have raised the issue of the radiotherapy centre in Altnagelvin in Londonderry. I welcome that the Minister has discussed it with Dr Reilly in the Irish Republic. Will he put a bit more flesh on the bones? It is an incredibly important project that will bring considerable benefits to cancer sufferers throughout the north-west of Northern Ireland and counties Donegal and Sligo. It would be very helpful if he would bring us up to date with the progress with the scheme. Can he give us a definite date of when it will be open and used by the people of the north-west?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for raising what is a very important issue. We recognised that it had to be dealt with at the outset. Therefore, we were delighted to give the go-ahead for the facility. It remains on target to become operational in 2016. Key things are happening on that front. Various pieces of work need to be carried out at the Altnagelvin site, including the removal and replacement of some existing buildings. That preparation work has to be done. The business case and memorandum of understanding are nearing completion, which will allow a lot of progress to be made. Obviously, a training programme will have to be put in place for radiotherapists to carry out that important work.

The satellite facility that will be available at Altnagelvin hospital, which will cover Donegal as well, will be of significant benefit to people not just in the north-west of the Province but right across Northern Ireland. Anybody who knows people who visit the radiotherapy centre at the City Hospital will recognise that that service is very heavily used. Consequently, had we not taken the decision to open the facility in Altnagelvin, it would have led to a circumstance in which we would not have had the capacity in Belfast to deal with cancer. There was only one logical conclusion to the recommendation, and that was approval. I am glad to say that things are working apace.

Mickey Brady (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his statement. Minister, you said that Ministers considered the issue of suicide and noted that all-island media guidelines for the reporting of suicide and self-harm have been issued. As you are aware, suicide is one of the major issues in our society, North and South. Are there plans to continue to provide an effective suicide awareness and prevention strategy on an all-island basis?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Suicide is clearly something that causes major problems in both jurisdictions and right across the British Isles. However, we have different elements of suicide in that regard: in England, for example, suicide tends to be among the older population, whereas, here in Northern Ireland, it tends to be among the younger population. It is important that we identify what is specific to our area for the purposes of targeting.

As for the all-island action plan on suicide prevention, there continues to be a rolling programme of cost-effective and mutually beneficial actions to tackle suicide. Those will be public awareness campaigns; the production of guidelines for media reporting of suicide; the evaluation of assist training; the publication of the report on the all-Ireland Young Men and Suicide Project to identify a range of possible means to promote positive mental health among young men; the extension of the deliberate self-harm registry to all trust areas in Northern Ireland; and the establishment of formal arrangements for monitoring media reporting of suicide and self-harm.

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

I welcome the news that the NCI Cancer Consortium conference will take place in Belfast next year. I also welcome the fact that the memorandum of understanding that underpins its work has been extended twice since it was first signed in 1999. Let us hope that it can be extended again.

Dominating the conference will be the nature of the consortium's work, which is around scientific collaboration, policy analysis, treatment and diagnosis. Would the Minister care to contrast that with the lack of information available here around progressive drugs and the fact that 39 cancer drugs that are available in the UK, which have been developed as a result of some of those discussions, are not available here?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

We in Northern Ireland desire to have the widest range of drugs available to cover a range of clinical conditions. We have made considerable progress on that, and there are many drugs available in Northern Ireland that are not available in England. If we wish to make the provision of cancer drugs a priority, I am happy to give consideration to that. I have indicated that we may have to look at other means of raising funding for doing that, because if that were to be done purely through a cut in services, I am not aware of the Member having suggested which service he believes should be cut. Those are the difficult decisions that we have to make. If we are not to cut services elsewhere, we must look at how we can bring in funding to do that.

On a positive note, considerable research work is being carried out on cancer through the collaboration that we have at the City Hospital with Queen's University Belfast. Over 1,000 people are availing themselves of drugs that would not otherwise be available because of the close collaboration that exists through that research. Northern Ireland people are at an advantage in many circumstances when it comes to cancer treatments because of the collaboration that is taking place on cancer research between Queen's University Belfast and the Belfast Trust.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his statement, in which he mentioned the ongoing collaborative work between the Food Standards Agency in Northern Ireland and the Food Safety Authority of Ireland. Can the Minister provide us with any additional detail of discussions that may have occurred regarding illegal milk movements across the border or illegal meat movements, perhaps linked to the illegal slaughterhouse in south Armagh, both of which can endanger the public and are a threat to our high-quality food processing industry?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Safefood has a scientific advisory committee, which has convened a working group of members and co-opted experts to review nutrition and surveillance activities. It has been looking at carrying out a gap analysis in that area. My Department remains in contact with the Department of Health in the Republic of Ireland to see how we can ensure that food is and continues to be safe.

The transportation of milk is a fairly significant issue because milk needs to be kept in chilled conditions. If it is being transported in vehicles that are not suited to that, it causes a risk to human health. Considerable work is being done to ensure that these illegal activities are not allowed to continue. I think that the issue around the transportation of milk will disappear very soon with the removal of quotas, but that does not mean that we should take our eye off the ball in general. When it comes to food, it is important that high standards are maintained.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

I thank the Minister for his statement. Ministers noted the recommendations of the report on nutritional surveillance on the island of Ireland, but we do not know what those recommendations are. Could the Minister tell us whether any means have been identified to deal with those recommendations that are not being adhered to?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

We have been looking at any gaps that there might be to ensure that all the recommendations are applied. We have a vision for the future of nutrition surveillance. My Department will continue to work with the Department in the Republic of Ireland to implement the recommendations of the Safefood report.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

There is obviously quite a bit going on. Obesity remains a major problem, and it is a problem that very often starts when people are young. Therefore, cooperation with education is particularly important. In March 2012, we launched the framework for preventing and addressing obesity and overweight in Northern Ireland. That recognises the complex nature of obesity and addresses these issues through a coordinated, integrated, cross-departmental and cross-sectoral approach that contains a range of outcomes that are designed to create an environment that will support and promote a physically active lifestyle and healthy diet and that will benefit longer-term health. One of the key challenges in overweight and obesity prevention is bringing about a behaviour change in individuals throughout all life courses, stages and settings. This framework aims to empower the population to adopt a healthier lifestyle. So, that is a course of work that continues.

As regards prevalence, 25% of children aged between 2 and 10 were classified as either overweight or obese, one fifth were classified as overweight, and 6% were classified as obese. There is no significant difference between boys and girls, by the way. So, it is very important that we get the message out to young people in particular, because, very often, young people who are overweight carry that throughout their lives. It is very important to get the messages out there, to engage in communities where obesity is a problem to ensure that there is better nutrition and diet, and to ensure that, in education circles, the right health promotion messages are going out to young people to encourage them to look after themselves.

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as an ráiteas agus a chuid freagraí. Thank you very much, Mr Speaker, and I thank the Minister for his statement and his answers. In the statement and his answer to Mr Wells, he referred to the north-west radiotherapy centre and the fact that it is now on course for delivery in 2016. He mentioned the training programme in his answer to Mr Wells. Is the Minister confident that the training places will all be filled with appropriate staff in 2016?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

That is certainly our aim, and a course of work will be carried out to ensure that that is the case. We are doing more and more on radiotherapy in Northern Ireland, and the standards are rising all the time. I remember being questioned about stereotactic radiotherapy, for example. Those sorts of things used to have to go to England, but a lot of them are coming back to Northern Ireland. So, the quality of radiotherapy that we are able to provide continues to improve. Therefore, it is important that we have the appropriate training in place. I believe that it is a very attractive career option for individuals. It is certainly a career option that will provide great rewards, because, in later years, they will meet many people who have had some role in saving their lives.

Gordon Dunne (DUP, North Down)

I also thank the Minister for his statement. What potential is there for a cross-border air ambulance between Northern Ireland and the Republic? I think that we all recognise and have no doubt that such a service would have potential, especially in the aftermath of accidents or major incidents.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Yes, and speaking of air ambulances and major incidents, I think that it would be good to remember the loss of many people from this country on the Mull of Kintyre 20 years ago today. Some 25 people lost their life in that incident. They were people who served their country faithfully and well, and they were an immense loss to it.

Both Minister Reilly and I have a major desire to progress this and get to the point at which an air ambulance is available. The conditions have changed considerably since I first took office. In the first instance, running an air ambulance that crosses into the Republic of Ireland would help to reduce the cost burden to us. Also, the fact that Altnagelvin hospital will have a 24/7 cath lab available later this year is critical. It is important for people in, for example, west Fermanagh, to be able to travel to that unit and have the work carried out as quickly as possible. An air ambulance would be greatly beneficial in that respect.

The air ambulance would be available right across Ireland, but the fact that we will have the 24/7 cath labs in place increases the quality of the business case for bringing one to Northern Ireland. It is a matter of ongoing discussions, and we are working closely with officials on the matter, but it is believed that there would be significant benefits in having an air ambulance available to the population here in Northern Ireland.

Pat Ramsey (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I welcome the statement to the House. I want to follow on from a question by Mickey Brady. The relationship between self-harm/suicide, and alcohol/ substance abuse is relevant across all of our constituencies, as are the emotions raised, particularly among families who have lost loved ones. I am reminded that the North/South Parliamentary Forum had a plenary meeting recently, and those two matters were subject to debate by politicians on both sides of the border. Will the Minister outline to the House what action plan there will be to look at best practice on the alcohol and substance abuse related to self-harm and suicide in order to try to address the issue?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Alcohol abuse continues to be a major issue for us. We continue to have considerable numbers of people drinking excessively. It is not a case of being killjoys and wanting to stop moderate drinkers from carrying out their activities, but there seems to be a prevalence across these islands of people who drink until they are incapable of standing up and think that that is something that should be aspired to. We need to continue to work on this on the basis of educating and giving people qualitative advice about the sensible use of alcohol.

On a North/South basis, we share many problems, and it therefore makes sense to us to explore benefits from working in partnership. A conference was held in Armagh on 26 January 2012, and the Institute of Public Health in Ireland has now established a North/South alcohol policy advisory group, which has been looking at a number of issues and presented a paper on alcohol availability to the meeting on 30 April this year. The paper will be disseminated widely, and I will ensure that the Assembly and the Committee are given copies for their consideration.

We are also looking at minimum unit pricing for alcohol. Sometimes, alcohol is sold at a cheaper price than bottled water, for example, or soft drinks. I believe that minimum unit pricing may be a means of targeting the stronger alcohol products in particular and ensuring that they are sold at a sensible price.

On a UK basis, I recently met the Ministers in Scotland and Wales, and they, too, are very keen to proceed with minimum unit pricing and to do more to tackle the scourge of alcohol abuse. So there is certainly a focus right across Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland and, indeed, Great Britain. We cannot afford to ignore it; we need to do more. We know that alcohol is a depressant, and many people who take their own lives are found to have a high level of alcohol in the blood when pathology testing is carried out.

David McIlveen (DUP, North Antrim)

I, too, welcome the Minister's statement. He will be aware that some concerns have been raised recently over the provision of foster care services in Northern Ireland. When the Minister was speaking to his counterpart in another European jurisdiction, such as the Republic of Ireland, were there any lessons to be learned for this part of the United Kingdom?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Certainly, child protection and foster care services go hand in hand. We want to promote more kinship care placements in Northern Ireland. The numbers on the child protection register have been rising. I consider that to be a sign of success rather than failure, because it is better to identify a problem than pretend it does not exist. You cannot deal with problems if you do not know that they exist. Therefore, better identification of children who are at risk is very important.

In terms of placing those children in places of safety where they can have a good-quality home life, residential care homes are not the ideal solution; we much prefer people to go into family settings but there will always be a role for residential care for children, particularly in very difficult cases. In May 2012, my Department published minimum kinship care standards, which recognise the importance of the unique role played by family and friends who are carers in the lives of children separated from their parents. We have recently completed a public consultation on fostering agency regulations and it is hoped that these new regulations will commence in the late autumn.

Other initiatives in foster care include the Fostering Achievement scheme, which was established under the children and young people's funding package in 2006 and is delivered by the Health and Social Care Board. We continue to support the Going the Extra Mile scheme, which seeks to promote continuity of living arrangements in post-care life for young people aged 18 to 21. For young people who are currently residing with foster carers or kinship carers, the scheme ensures that appropriate and agreed levels of financial support are available to assist carers to continue to meet the care, accommodation and support needs of those young people.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

The Minister mentioned the continuing progress in the Ireland-Northern Ireland-National Cancer Institute Cancer Consortium. In a previous answer, he mentioned the conference forthcoming this time next year. Can he give a brief outline of progress to date?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The consortium is a collaborative framework that has been in place for almost 15 years with the aim of reducing the burden of cancer. Current work focuses on five work streams which were identified in the most recent memorandum of understanding. They are: capacity building for clinical research; public health and well-being/prevention/health promotion, including population health research; nursing; palliative and end-of-life care; and survivorship. The conference we are organising in Belfast will highlight progress through research relevant to all of those work streams and their benefits for patients and the public, for policy and for healthcare service providers.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I will take the Minister back to the radiotherapy centre for Londonderry. He told us in his statement that work is ongoing on the memorandum of understanding and the service level agreement, which, presumably, will touch on how the Republic of Ireland will pay for the services. That work seems to have been ongoing now for a very long time. On the Northern Ireland side, is the decision on that only for his Department or is it an Executive decision, requiring the Executive's approval? If so, is it in danger of being caught by the logjam in the malfunctioning Executive?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The decision will remain with my Department unless it is called into the Executive. Therefore, I do not expect or anticipate that there will be a logjam. I am not particularly interested in establishing straw men when we are dealing with cancer issues. I do not think that there will be a problem or an issue in taking forward this very important initiative, which will ensure that everyone in Northern Ireland will receive quality cancer care and will be of assistance to people who live on the border with Northern Ireland.

Committee Business

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

As is normal with debates on legislation, there will be no time limit for this debate. As a valid petition of concern was presented on Friday 30 May in relation to the motion, the vote will be on a cross-community basis.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

I beg to move

That the Social Security (Habitual Residence) (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2014 (S. R. 2014/133) be annulled.

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. The Committee for Social Development first considered the Department's proposal to make the Social Security (Habitual Residence) (Amendment) Regulations at its meeting on 6 March. At that stage, the Committee was not content for the regulations to proceed and deferred consideration until the Department was able to brief it and provide further clarification.

Departmental officials briefed the Committee at its meeting on 20 March, but, if anything, certainly in the minds of a number of members, that briefing raised more questions than answers. The Committee was advised that most applicants will have to satisfy a habitual residency test for income-related benefits. That test has two strands: proving that applicants have a right to reside — a legal right to live here and claim certain benefits; and proving that they intend to settle here for the time being and secure habitual residence.

Members noted that a three-month residency rule was introduced on 1 January 2014, which applies to European Economic Area (EEA) jobseekers and nationals returning from abroad. That requires evidence of how long applicants have been living in the UK or common travel area and will require them to have lived here for at least three months before they can make a jobseeker's allowance (JSA) claim. The Committee was particularly concerned about the impact of the regulations on returning nationals and the need for them to satisfy habitual residence requirements.

At its meeting of 20 March, the Committee divided and indicated that it was not content for the regulations to be made at that time. Subsequently, at its meeting of 15 May, the Committee received the statutory rule relating to the regulations. Some members were still not convinced by the Department's explanation of the restrictions that could apply to returning nationals and the lack of clarity on the habitual residency test. For example, some members were of the opinion that the new regulations would mean that people who, for instance, had been doing Church or missionary work overseas, had been involved in voluntary service overseas or had emigrated as a result of the economic conditions of the past few years will no longer be treated as satisfying the habitual residency requirements immediately, or very soon after, their return to the North. Indeed, it is the view of the Law Centre that the three-month rule is much more likely to affect returning UK or Irish nationals than EEA nationals, given that EEA nationals rarely make successful claims for JSA within the first three months of arriving here.

Departmental officials have advised the Committee that the regulations are intended to make changes to a number of income-related benefit regulations and to provide clarity and consistency in the way that an EEA national's right of residency is determined for benefit purposes. In short, we are told, the aim is to prevent so-called benefit tourism, although no evidence has been produced to substantiate the extent of that or, indeed, to show whether it exists at all. Indeed, in an extensive report by a consultancy on behalf of the European Commission, it was clear that employment is the key driver for intra-EU migration and that the budgetary impact of benefit claims on national welfare budgets is indeed very low. The greater effect of the regulations, therefore, will be felt by returning nationals.

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

I do not believe that any members of the Committee want anything but a fair benefits system. That has been quite clear throughout all the discussions over the past couple of years. They want a fair benefits system that is transparent and that has clear criteria for applicants to meet. I do not believe for one second that anybody wants a system that is open to abuse. However, in creating a fair system, our approach should not be reactive to the almost hysterical projections of the number of immigrants who we are told are intending to come here to settle on the back of what is described as a generous welfare system, or the idea that immigrants are somehow treated better by the welfare system than our local nationals and that, therefore, we need a more stringent regime to prevent this. This is a false notion, and it is wrong. We need to be reflective, not reactive, when it comes to this complex area.

In conclusion, in attempting to address the unsubstantiated claims about EEA nationals and their impact on the welfare system, the regulations are, paradoxically, far more likely to impact on returning nationals.

Departing from my comments as the Chairperson of the Committee to speak as a party representative, I think that Members should reflect on this prayer of annulment. I ask Members to reflect on how they would like to try to explain to their constituents why they were prepared to support regulations that are more likely to impact on their returning relatives than any notional EEA immigrants. I think that I would have a hard time explaining that one. I therefore ask the House to support the Committee motion to annul this regulation.

Paula Bradley (DUP, Belfast North)

I rise to speak against this prayer of annulment. As the Chair of the Committee stated, when the proposed statutory rule was brought before the Committee on 6 March 2014, all members, including me and my party colleagues, were in agreement that this should be brought back to the Committee for a full explanation in order to satisfy members before the rule would be made. On 20 March, we received a briefing from the Department, and what appeared to be the main concern highlighted by the majority of members was that of persons from the United Kingdom returning home to Northern Ireland after working or living abroad, and how this statutory rule would affect them. The DSD officials explained that all persons entering Northern Ireland would be subject to the same tests in relation to income-related benefits, albeit that it might be easier for someone originally from the United Kingdom to satisfy the habitual residency test.

However, the statutory rule is in no way to be aligned to issues concerning immigration but is quite simply to determine whether someone is habitually resident in order to receive income-related benefits. As part of the Government's economic plan from Westminster, we want to ensure that those with the right to be in Northern Ireland and who plan to contribute to the economy can make a claim on this benefits system.

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

I rise on behalf of the SDLP to support the prayer of annulment. As a member of the Social Development Committee, I was immediately concerned about the adverse impact that this would have on people returning to Northern Ireland, whether they were young people who had left these shores to seek work elsewhere or people who had worked in churches or, indeed, gap year students. I believe that the British Government, without great consideration, rushed these regulations through in Westminster in advance of the deluge of people who were anticipated to be coming to these shores from Bulgaria and Romania. As we all know, that never materialised.

These regulations are supposed to target any people who would want to abuse the system and who would be called benefit tourists. There are no examples or rationale. The evidence has not stacked up in relation to that. I think that we should all be very mindful, in particular, of the young people who have left these shores and who will be adversely impacted by these regulations, should they remain on our statute books. I support the prayer of annulment and oppose the introduction of these regulations.

Michael Copeland (UUP, Belfast East)

I welcome the opportunity to make a few brief comments on this prayer. First, however, I want to wish the Minister well after his recent fall on the campaign trail. To paraphrase, I suppose that he did experience the rough and tumble of politics. I wish him a speedy and successful recovery.

On today's statutory rule, let me say that, on the whole, I and my party understand why it would be preferable if the IRB regulations were to refer to the immigration EEA regulations rather than the directive, as at present. I voted against this rule on 20 March and will vote for the prayer of annulment today because, in my opinion, there are still too many questions remaining unanswered on the wider issue of how the habitual residency test will look in the future.

Everyone in the Chamber will understand, I hope, why such a test is necessary: whether it is to cut down on so-called benefit tourism or ensure that only people genuinely in the country receive support. The test, I think, must be fit for purpose. Whilst the changes to the test will apply to all EEA nationals, people from Northern Ireland, who may have worked or lived abroad up to a certain point, will, or may be, impacted by these changes. We need to understand that people sometimes leave the country for a whole range of reasons: they may have been offered short-term employment; they may take a few months out to do voluntary work — and the latter, in particular, can occur quite often across the church sector; and, sadly, people can leave and return hastily following the breakdown of family or business relationships. Essentially, there is a whole range of circumstances to be considered. The changes to the residency test have removed the flexibility to treat claimants within a reasonable time of returning to Northern Ireland.

I will cite the example of an individual in my constituency who went on holiday to Tenerife and stayed on for just over six months. When he returned, he found that he was excluded from any support from the system to which he had financially contributed for almost all of his working life, despite the fact that he maintained his home, which he is purchasing in Northern Ireland, and had returned twice during the six-month period. We need more clarity from the Department, and that, in my opinion, was not totally forthcoming from the meetings on 6 and 20 March.

On a wider issue, I must express concern at the repeated use of the petition of concern mechanism in matters of this type. My party and I will be supporting the Committee motion.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

I also support the prayer of annulment, and I do so because of the real concerns that have emerged, particularly, as others have remarked, on the effect on UK and Irish citizens returning to Northern Ireland from working, studying or volunteering abroad.

The regulations may seem quite innocuous, but they have the potential to have a detrimental effect on many citizens. I believe very strongly in parity between Northern Ireland and the United Kingdom, but we should not just parrot regulations, and we have the opportunity ourselves to scope out the reality of regulations. Therefore, that is why I believe that it is not appropriate to introduce the regulations at this stage. They are being put forward to combat what has been termed as benefit tourism, yet, when you examine the issue, there is very little evidence to suggest that this is a problem in Northern Ireland, let alone throughout the rest of the United Kingdom. Indeed, last year, an EU Commission report found that mobile EU citizens are less likely to receive disability and unemployment benefits in most countries studied, including the United Kingdom. The regulations, therefore, are designed to tackle a problem that is not a problem, but they will have a significant impact, as others have said, on UK and Irish citizens.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

Sure.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

I take the point that the Member makes that this may not be a huge issue in Northern Ireland at present. However, it is an issue for other parts of the United Kingdom. Does he accept that if the regulation here is different to other parts of the United Kingdom, the problem could shift from other parts of the United Kingdom to Northern Ireland, hence the reason for uniformity?

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

Mr Speaker, on many issues, I would not disagree with the comments from Mr Wilson with regard to the matter. However, as I have just said, the reality is that not only is it not a problem, with respect to benefit tourism, in Northern Ireland, the statistics show that it is not a problem in the rest of the United Kingdom. While there may be circumstances where it is important to take the comments into account, the reality, with respect to this particular regulation, does not fit with the comment that has been made.

We have heard reference to how those working abroad for short periods could be affected. For example, many people from Northern Ireland go and work in marine security or the oil industry, which puts them in a similar situation when they return to Northern Ireland or any other part of the United Kingdom.

Many people who have attempted to find work in the United Kingdom go abroad to find alternative employment in other countries. As an example, I can quote a teacher who went to South Korea to teach English. They continued to pay their income tax in the United Kingdom but would be denied benefits on their return. We have already heard of the difficult and distressing circumstances of family breakdown, and in those circumstances a speedy return to the United Kingdom is required for the family member. To add additional pressures in relation to benefits is unfair and unreasonable.

As I have said, this prayer of annulment would break parity; but, under devolution, it sometimes feels appropriate to do so in these matters. In this limited context, I believe that that is the right course of action. It is important to note that we could implement similar measures at any time, were it deemed necessary, to take up Mr Wilson's point. Given the serious concerns raised, we should pass this prayer of annulment and make sure that we give the appropriate scrutiny and consideration that is deserved.

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I have listened with interest to all the Members who spoke in the debate, and I thank them all for their input.

As Minister with responsibility for social security matters, I will take a few minutes to provide a brief background and to outline the purpose of the regulations we are discussing here today. Perhaps, when I have finished speaking, it will be evident to everyone why voting to annul the regulations would not be the right thing to do.

Firstly, I will explain what is meant by habitual residence. Most people who apply for welfare benefits have to satisfy what is known as the habitual residence test in order to claim income-related benefits. The requirements for satisfying this test are set out in each of the income-related benefit regulations. To meet the conditions of the test, persons must prove, firstly, that they have a right to reside in the United Kingdom in accordance with immigration legislation and, secondly, that they intend to settle in the United Kingdom, Isle of Man, Channel Islands or Irish Republic, and make it home for the time being. That is known as habitual residence.

A person has the right to reside if, for example, they are looking for work, are self-employed, a jobseeker or a student or have sufficient resources for them and their family members not to become a burden on the social-assistance system. The right to reside element of the test ensures that economically inactive migrants have no entitlement to income-related, social assistance-type benefits.

A British citizen who has recently returned to the United Kingdom after a period living outside of the common travel area may also have to show that they satisfy the habitual residence test in order to claim certain benefits. They would be subject to the test if they had broken their links to the United Kingdom by, for example, having been on a very extended holiday or a gap year or, indeed, if they had spent many years away and no longer have property or any close family in the United Kingdom.

Prior to the introduction of the Social Security (Habitual Residence) (Amendment) Regulations, the EEA legal right of residence — ie the right of citizens of the European Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the member states — was defined, for income-related benefit legislation, with reference to European directive 2004/38/EC. However, the Home Office transposed this directive into the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations and subsequently amended the regulations to create a new statutory presumption that, from 1 January 2014, an EEA national's right to reside as a jobseeker or retained worker in the United Kingdom will cease after six months, unless they can prove that they are actively seeking work and can demonstrate that they have a genuine prospect of getting a job.

It is intended that only those with a legal right to be in the United Kingdom and who plan to contribute to the economy, as demonstrated by their intention to secure employment, can make a claim for benefit. Therefore, the purpose of the regulations that we are debating here today is to ensure consistency in defining the EEA national's legal right of residence for benefit purposes.

It is crucial that our legislation makes reference to the UK's Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations rather than the directive because, as you will know, the Home Office is ultimately responsible for immigration issues.

While the regulations are consequential in nature, I hope you will now understand the importance of ensuring that our income-related benefit legislation reflects the immigration law as it stands. I recognise that some who spoke during the debate have real concerns regarding the overall immigration issue and the impact it could have on our benefit system. I would caution, however, that concerns around immigration policy are not relevant in this debate.

While social security is a transferred matter, Assembly colleagues will be only too well aware that immigration and issues regarding UK residency are in themselves considered excepted matters and remain the exclusive competence of the Westminster Parliament. Therefore, irrespective of whether we vote to annul these regulations today, the wider policy regarding the rules that are applied to EEA nationals' entitlement to reside will remain and be applied on a UK-wide basis and within the same time frames.

I, therefore, hope that Members will be persuaded that these regulations merely ensure consistency in defining an EEA national's legal right of residence for benefit purposes in our income-related legislation. I advise Members also to take account of the point that was well made by Sammy Wilson about the dangers and possible implications of getting in some way out of step with the rest of the United Kingdom. Therefore, I urge Members to reject this prayer of annulment.

Mickey Brady (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I support the prayer of annulment. I will put into context the issue of habitual residence. The habitual residence test was introduced in 1995 by Tory Minister Peter Lilley. A lot of people at that time regarded it as a form of xenophobia. I am convinced that there was an element of that in it.

When it was introduced, there was flexibility in the test. We have been talking about people from here returning after working or living abroad, and there was a lot of flexibility in the sense that, because of commissioners' decisions at that time, there was no set time for how long a person had to be here. Commissioners' decisions at that time stated that, the longer you were here, the more habitually resident you became, so a person could be here for a week, a fortnight or month and be considered as being habitually resident and benefit could be paid.

This legislation has now put in a three-month rule, so it does not matter whether you are habitually resident or not — you will not get benefit for three months. It is a fairly extreme measure. Michael Copeland mentioned the petition of concern. Sammy Wilson is saying that we should be led by the nose all the time and fall into line with what is happening in the rest of Britain, even if people from here who are coming back are affected by this test.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Member for giving way. The point I was making, and I would like to hear his response to it, was that, if we have a different arrangement here from what pertains in the rest of the United Kingdom, in other words, there is no uniformity, those who wish to escape the habitually resident definition in the rest of the United Kingdom will naturally gravitate towards Northern Ireland, so we become the repository of those who want to avoid the security regulations here in Northern Ireland, with all the other problems that that causes: demand for housing, schools, jobs etc.

Mickey Brady (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I —

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

I thank the Member for giving way. I am sure the Member will agree that, given the latest increase in racist abuse and attacks, it would be more likely that people from other EU states will want to leave these shores rather than return to pick up a few benefits that will keep them on or below the poverty line.

Mickey Brady (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I thank both Members for their interventions. In response to Mr Wilson, I will say that he need not be that worried that we will be flooded with "benefits tourists", because, as was pointed out, that is not necessarily a problem. When the Pensions Act was coming through, the Department told us that we would be in danger of being flooded by people from Wales coming to live here because they might get better pensions terms. It is a ridiculous proposition, and I think that it needs to be put in its intended context. Obviously, we will not be flooded, either now or in the near future. Given recent events, I imagine that people will think long and hard about coming to live here, particularly those from abroad.

Paula Bradley acknowledged —

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Will the Member give way?

Mickey Brady (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Yes.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Following on from the suggestion from one Member that departing in any way from parity would result in a flood of people coming here, why did that Member consider supporting the notion that we would seek split payments under universal credit and other deviations from what is supposed to be happening in Britain? If the Member can support split payments and not see that as something that would open the floodgates, why can he not see the logic of rejecting this particular SR? There is no evidence that doing so will lead to an opening of the floodgates. I am just following his logic.

Mickey Brady (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Member for his intervention. He is quite right.

Going back to what Paula Bradley said, and I will get there eventually, because I am sure that she just cannot wait to hear what I am going to say. Paula Bradley acknowledged that all Members were not originally content with the regulations. She said that these are not directly related to more general immigration issues; rather, they are based on habitual residency.

We talked about habitual residency, and it is the rigid application of the three-month rule that is the issue. My view is that it is purely a technical way for the Department to make it easier to do claims. It would be a much fairer system to take each claim as it came in, as used to happen. For instance, if somebody was coming back from America, they had to show their passport, a one-way ticket, they had to be registered with the Housing Executive for a house and they had to show that their children were registered with schools. So, each case was taken on its merits, which, to me, seemed a much fairer way of doing it. Paula Bradley was opposed to the prayer of annulment.

Dolores Kelly is concerned about the impact on those who have gone to work overseas or who are on a gap year etc. She stated that there is no benefit tourism and supported the prayer of annulment.

Michael Copeland raised a number of issues and said that there were outstanding matters that needed to be clarified. He referred to the habitual residency test and its applicability in particular to residents from here who are coming back from abroad. He said that flexibility has been removed from the test and that there are significant issues to be resolved. He was concerned about the petition of concern.

Stewart Dickson said that, although this legislation may be seen as innocuous, it could have a negative effect on citizens from here who are returning. He said that there was little evidence of benefit tourism and that the test was designed to tackle a problem that does not currently exist. He said that citizens from here who were working abroad could be affected when they return home, and he said that there could be an impact when there is a family breakdown. He supports the prayer of annulment.

The Minister explained the habitual residency test and the concept of the right to reside. He also explained that returning residents, including UK and Irish citizens, would be subject to habitual residency tests. He described the importance of the regulations in the context of immigration law to some Members but cautioned that they were not relevant to the debate.

We covered habitual residence, and I think that it is accepted that benefit tourism is a phrase that has been coined to reinforce the imposition of this kind of draconian legislation. I support the prayer of annulment. Go raibh míle maith agat.

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

I remind Members that the vote on the motion will be on a cross-community basis.

Question put.

The Assembly divided: Ayes 56; Noes 37.

Private Members' Business

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

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

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

I beg to move

That this Assembly expresses serious concern regarding the ongoing area planning process in the education sector; notes the critical comments made in the Justice Treacy judgement on area planning and integrated education; further notes that the current process places no formal recognition or promotion of greater sharing between schools and sectors; believes that decisions made now will determine the shape of the education system for many years to come; and calls on the Minister of Education, in the absence of either an Education and Skills Authority or the reconstitution of education and library boards, to suspend the current area planning process until there is clarity on the future strategic management of schools, and a long-term vision for education in Northern Ireland is agreed.

I welcome this timely opportunity to debate the effects that Judge Treacy's decision on Drumragh Integrated College will have on the Minister's area planning policy. As the motion states, we call for the suspension of the current area planning process until there is clarity on the future of the strategic management of schools and an agreed long-term vision for education in Northern Ireland.

It seems that we have a mess in the education system, whether it is the Education and Skills Authority (ESA), assessment, common funding, and even the lack of improvement in examination results as announced last week, as well as many other fields. Most of that failure comes down to the Minister's continual failure to understand the idea of consensus or, indeed, the whole basis of the Belfast Agreement, which relies so forthrightly on consensus and agreement between all parties.

Only last week, we saw the new ESA being publicised before it has even reached the Executive. There does not seem to be any sign of hope that consensus or agreement is the way forward. However, I hope that all that has changed and that the Minister changes that in the future. The Ulster Unionist Party will keep trying to do what it is right for Northern Ireland.

Today, we highlight the need for clarity on what Justice Treacy's judgement means for the present area planning policy. As usual, it is hard to interpret exactly what the judgement means. When considering the article 64 duty, he seems to clarify that the type of integrated education that is to be supported is integration between Protestant and Roman Catholic pupils, as opposed to integration in school of any set of pupils:

"the provision plainly envisages education together at the same school ... and not education that is delivered by a partisan Board ... Using an analytical tool to plan for an area is of course acceptable and necessary, however the inflexibility of the projections used will have the effect of making it difficult to accommodate the Article 64 duty in future day to day decisions. The Department needs to be alive to the Article 64 duty at all levels, including the strategic level."

That court ruling seems to blow the Minister's plans out of the water, and we need to go back to square one.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Member for giving way. I totally agree with a lot of what he said, but does he not see there being one danger, in that the longer we delay proper area planning, the greater the danger that Justice Treacy's ruling will be used to expand one particular sector at the expense of all other sectors and, indeed, make area planning even more difficult?

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

Thank you. I partially agree with what has been said: it will certainly make it more difficult, and we must avoid trying to prefer one sector over the other. At the same time, I think that it is important to make it absolutely clear that these decisions will affect the long term. When we talk about the long term, we are talking of 30, 40 or 50 years, so we have to get it right. It is better to go through the battles now to get it right, and then we will take it from there.

To go back to the judgement, any decision that ignores the wish for increasing the number of pupils integrating, or any decision that takes an action that makes it more difficult for schools to integrate their pupils, is contrary to Judge Treacy's interpretation of article 64. The Committee awaits the legal advice.

It seems clear to me that, if you accept the Programme for Government's aim to promote shared education, any challenge to Judge Treacy's judgement is contrary to that Programme for Government aim.

We have already debated shared education on numerous occasions and learnt that it seems that neither of the two main parties wants anything more than just a handful of shared campuses. In a statement from earlier this year, the Minister quoted, I think, 18 examples of sharing. We have 1,200 schools and just 18 examples of sharing. That is a miniscule proportion. Of course, there are many great examples of ongoing sharing, many of which are unquantified. These stretch from sharing occasional sporting or cultural events to much more full-blown collaboration between teachers, principals and governors. Of course, there is the excellent work of all the area learning communities, which we seem to be ignoring more and more.

Indeed, in so many cases, our schools do share, but we must not be conned by those who tell us that we already have shared education. Schools under the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools (CCMS) remit have but a few Protestant pupils, and most controlled schools are mixed. However, no one can argue against there being a desperate need for a much deeper basis of sharing and integrated education. That is why the UUP's long-term policy is for a single shared education system.

We also must not forget that the survey of the integrated education sector showed that over 80% of parents wanted more integration, and if you overlay that example of parental choice for integrating education on Judge Treacy's judgement, all area planning decisions should favour only closures, mergers and amalgamations that lead to the maximum integration possible for that area. If that is so, nearly all the decisions to date that do not do that are flawed and open to challenge. With no known overall area plan for Northern Ireland, little interrelation or intersectoral area planning between boards and, in most cases, very little intersectoral planning within board areas, I once again say that the whole policy is flawed.

However the judgement is interpreted, it opens up the possibility of legal challenge to area planning throughout the whole education system, and I believe it means that all area planning must be suspended. There are some examples. In the borough of Larne, CCMS closed St Comgall's College and was allowed to amalgamate post-primary provision in a joint grammar/non-grammar campus at Garron Tower in Carnlough. That means spending £166,000 a year moving pupils 20 miles in seven buses every day when they could have built upon the excellent area learning community and involved all the post-primary schools in Larne, such as St MacNissi's, St Comgall's, Larne High, Larne Grammar and Roddensvale. That would have been sharing and integrating. That could have been a shared campus and, despite the North Eastern Education and Library Board being against it, CCMS was allowed to go ahead.

There are other examples, such as the two CCMS schools pulling out of the proposed Armagh shared campus, Immaculate Conception College in Londonderry being refused a chance to go integrated, and closures of numerous other small schools, especially CCMS schools, without integration being considered.

In Crumlin, if rumours are true, we are about to see a complete travesty, with the closure of an integrated school when over 1,000 parents in a petition said that they wanted a shared school to remain in Crumlin. When the Minister has indicated that he is for shared schools, when CCMS and the transferors have indicated that they are happy with a shared school and, indeed, when previous studies of all stakeholders two years ago showed the same, it seems extraordinary that we are about to close a school for the reason that it has lost half a million pounds due to lack of numbers, yet some 1,100 are leaving Crumlin daily to go to other schools, costing three quarters of a million pounds to the taxpayer. If we close the school, that will add another 200 pupils to the daily exodus and cost even more. In fact, we could have built the new school in the next 15 years on the same money.

There seems to be a lack of will to ensure that the school remains in Crumlin. Even if you take voluntary grammar pupils out of the equation, surely it is cheaper to keep a school in Crumlin and build on it and expand for future success rather than for ever and a day have no post-primary education in Crumlin. Hopefully the Treacy judgement, if you take into account the petition of 1,000 parents and the need for a proper survey before any decision is made, will mean that we will still have a school in Crumlin.

Many other debates have shown how the area planning policy is flawed. The terms of reference for area planning included the following two objectives:

"identify realistic, innovative and creative solutions to address need, including opportunities for shared schooling on a cross sectoral basis;

maximise the use and sharing of the existing schools estate".

We do not even seem to be following those guidelines.

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

The Member's time is almost up.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

Today, the Ulster Unionists call for area planning to be suspended, and we oppose the amendment.

Christopher Hazzard (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I beg to move the following amendment:

Leave out all after "Assembly" and insert:

"recognises the need to rationalise the schools estate in a planned and managed way in the promotion of educational equality for all and that the ideal vehicle to manage area planning is the establishment of the Education and Skills Authority; further recognises that area planning can, and must, be progressed in the absence of the Education and Skills Authority for the educational well-being of children; notes that the current process allows for the promotion of sharing between sectors; and calls on all sectors to redouble their efforts to bring forward proposals for greater sharing."

I call upon all those who seek a world-class and equitable schools estate here to support our amendment this afternoon. The need to rationalise and structure our schools estate in a manner fit for the 21st century has been debated countless times inside and outside the Chamber. However, some voices remain incorrigible to the direction of travel that we have embarked upon. I doubt that it is the virtue of the arguments that is lost on them but rather that they belligerently refuse to acknowledge the need for change. Indeed, in a similar debate in the House not so long ago, the Ulster Unionist Danny Kinahan called on the DUP to block everything that the Education Minister brings forward. I have yet to see any rationale for that call other than brute-force belligerence, which will do nothing other than to harm the educational opportunities afforded to our children and our schools. Sinn Féin representatives have repeatedly called on those opposite to bring forward proposals on a number of different educational issues if they are so opposed to the direction of travel. Today is another opportunity for alternative ideas and propositions to be outlined for all to digest. However, what we are served up is nothing but rhetoric of the finest unionist vintage. Every policy is portrayed as a Trojan Horse and every announcement greeted with sneers that should have been resigned to the history text books long ago. It should go without saying that such posturing will achieve nothing for our system. I call on those opposite to embrace the need for change and help shape a fit-for-purpose system in the interests of our young people, not the narrow political agendas of a few.

For the best part of a generation, the need to strategically manage our system and schools estate has been viewed by many as mission impossible. In an area where multiplicity rules the roost, planning a cohesive and strategic schools estate has proved a difficult task. Nonetheless, it is a challenge that successive Ministers have taken head-on in the interests of our young people.

It is also worth bearing in mind that the area planning process is continuing throughout the most difficult Budget period ever faced by this Assembly. Never before has the need to invest been balanced so finely with the need to protect the public purse. In no way is that to suggest that area planning or, indeed, the establishment of a single education authority is about making savings for savings sake; rather, this is a process of change, enabling us to maximise the value of public money and make best use of the limited resources available for the funding of our schools, so that we are able to fund a world-class system for generations to come.

Area planning allows for unprecedented investment in the schools estate, while simultaneously ensuring that we are sustaining and investing our resources in the best possible way and in the right places. The various boards, CCMS and the Minister have very difficult decisions to make, which will not always prove popular, but if we are serious about raising standards and opening up educational opportunities for our children, we must accept that we are on a journey of change.

The Minister has repeated to the House on several occasions that the central consideration in any and all proposals will be the educational benefit to the pupil of today and tomorrow. In light of that, I welcome recent assurances from the Minister that area plans will be reviewed regularly to ensure that they remain fit for purpose and reflect local circumstances for years to come.

We all accept the need to raise standards and tackle underachievement and inequality in our system. We all consider the gaps in achievement as unacceptable, but some still appear unwilling to address the issues at hand. Few could argue with the fact that, at the heart of addressing such issues, we must focus on the provision of our education services and schools estate. We simply must address the fact that we have too many schools that do not have the capacity to give our children the broad and rich educational experience they so rightly deserve. Without a determination to deliver change, we set those schools an impossible task in the delivery of our curriculum. Faced with a highly competitive and globalised workplace, our young students deserve the best possible opportunity to succeed. It is simply no longer acceptable or affordable to do nothing. An education system that stands still only serves to limit the opportunities for our young people and to dissipate our scarce resources.

The absence of ESA should not be a barrier to area planning. Undoubtedly, the task of strategically planning the school estate would be a hell of a lot easier under the stewardship of a single education authority such as ESA, but we cannot delay as those opposite might suggest. How could we possibly continue to drive up standards and tackle underachievement without an effectively planned and sustainable pattern of schools?

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Christopher Hazzard (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Yes.

Christopher Hazzard (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I thank the Member for his intervention. I am sure that it is a specific point that the Minister —

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Will the Member take a point?

Christopher Hazzard (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Yes.

Christopher Hazzard (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I thank the Minister for that moment of clarity.

The Ulster Unionists tell us today that we should postpone the process of change until there is widespread agreement on how to move forward, yet we have been furnished with no alternative vision. We have heard no different ideas on how to keep driving up standards in our schools. It is the same "no, nay, never" attitude that does nothing for our schools or for our young people.

The hype about an agreed way forward has been a misnomer from the start, because, after years of negotiating and horse-trading, we had, in recent months, widespread support among educationalists for the ESA structures, yet the Ulster Unionists and the DUP still objected to the revised proposals. So, let us not pretend that this is anything to do with seeking an agreed vision. It is purely political obstructionism, and it is hurting our young people each and every day that it persists.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Member for giving way. Does he not see the point that the concerns relate to the lack of consistency that there is from the Minister? On one hand, a controlled school can be closed at a stroke; on the other hand, the maintained sector can go forward with plans, regardless of what the impact will be on the local area; and, on the other hand, because there are now three hands on this, the integrated sector is allowed to expand, even at the expense of some viable controlled sector schools. It is that inconsistency that has caused the concern about the whole planning process.

Christopher Hazzard (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I thank the Member for his intervention, but, again, we have the exact same thing: it is all rhetoric. You have absolutely no examples of where you are talking about; this is all political rhetoric.

It is time that we engaged in constructive educational engagements inside and outside of the Assembly. We must move beyond the politics of obstruction and belligerence. If we are to send a clear signal to our schools and our community that the Assembly can deliver a world-class system, we must work together in the interests of those we claim to serve. Suspending a process of change is not an option. We must continue to build a system that we can all be proud of — a system that delivers for each and every one of our young people.

I call on Members to support the amended motion.

The debate stood suspended.

(Mr Speaker in the Chair)

Oral Answers to Questions

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

1. asked the Minister of Education what steps is he taking to ensure that a temporary variation in the number of nursery places at the All Saints' Nursery Unit, Annaclone is achieved to allow for a local parish solution. (AQO 6216/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The purpose of the temporary flexibility is to address a shortage of preschool places in an area and, therefore, to help to meet the Programme for Government commitment. It is not intended to be used to meet parental preferences for a particular setting. The education and library board preschool education advisory groups are responsible for managing requests for temporary flexibility. Based on their knowledge of demand and alternative provision in each area, they can make a recommendation to DE on whether temporary flexibility would provide increased capacity to help to address a shortage of preschool places in an area.

At the conclusion of stage 2 of the preschool admissions process, the Southern Board preschool education advisory group considered the need for temporary flexibility in All Saints' Nursery Unit and recommended the approval of two additional places. The Department has approved those, and the school has been informed.

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

I thank the Minister for his answer. The parents will be very glad to hear that. In future, Minister, can that process be expedited so that we do not have such stressful situations?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

We have continually reviewed our operation of preschool placements over the past number of years. Indeed, just after I came into office, my Department carried out a review of preschool education. Where there are areas in which we can improve that, I am all for it. I accept that it can be a very stressful time for parents. We are placing somewhere in the region of 23,500 children at this stage, so quite a considerable piece of work and administration is being carried out in a very tight time frame. We are certainly continually trying to improve the administration of the preschool programme.

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

2. asked the Minister of Education to outline the reasons for the draft policy on elective home education giving greater power to education and library boards than is currently the case under section 13 of the Education and Libraries (Northern Ireland) Order 1986. (AQO 6217/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Legislation places specific responsibilities in the education of children other than at school on parents and the five education and library boards. That includes those who are educated at home. The boards have directly prepared guidance that reflects the existing legislative requirements, and they are consulting on it.

I consider that the consultation process provides an important opportunity for views and ideas to be provided to the boards on how they best strike the balance between ensuring that the rights and needs of the children concerned are appropriately protected and facilitating parental preference for home education. As Minister of Education, my focus is on ensuring that the needs of children and young people are met. Therefore, I have indicated that I expect the boards to ensure engagement with as wide a range of stakeholders as possible, including young people and their families, as part of that consultation and to ensure that the feedback that they receive is considered very carefully in reviewing the draft guidance. I have also made it clear that I will wish to review their guidance once it has been subject to consultation and reviewed and refined in response to that engagement once it has taken place.

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

I thank the Minister for his answer. He stressed that there was a legal requirement to do what he is proposing. Will you confirm that it is your view that, under the 1986 Order, there is a legal requirement, and will you explain why your predecessor said in answer to a question that there was no legal requirement for home educators to register with the library boards? In any case, do the requirements that you are laying down not go too far by having to register children, inspect homes and approve the curriculum etc? That goes far beyond what happens in England and other jurisdictions.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

With respect to the Member, it is clear that he did not listen to my response. I am not proposing anything. The education and library boards are currently in a consultation process on issuing best practice for homeschool education. There are balances of rights in that. There are the balances of the parent and the parental home, and there are the balances of the right of the child to receive a good education. There is also the legal requirement on the education and library boards and my Department to ensure that children have access to education. All those things are being consulted on.

I am not consulting on anything. My Department is not consulting on any matter in that regard. However, I have made it clear to the library boards that I want the consultation process to be open and transparent for everyone to be able to make their views known. I expect the new guidance to be presented to me before it is finally signed off.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

If the Minister did not initiate the process, who did, given that I understand that his Department sits on a regional strategy unit with the education and library boards? Following Mr Attwood's comments, we would like clarity on where this came from. Will the Minister give an assurance that this is not an attempt by some to require registration and make it more difficult for parents, particularly those from an evangelical Christian perspective, who take a personal view of ensuring that their children are educated at home in an environment that is conducive to their learning, to do what they have always done in a way that is honourable and within the law?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I understand that the process came about as a result of legal advice given to the North Eastern Education and Library Board, which then proposed consultation on guidance. The other boards, which now seek to work in greater cooperation with one other, also believed that it was the right time to consult on the matter.

As I said in response to Mr Attwood, there is a balance of individual legal rights in this debate, but I urge Members not simply to follow those who shout the loudest. At the very heart and centre of the consultation process is the children's right to education, whether in the home or in school. I assure the Member opposite that I am not aware of any agenda to stymie the rights of anyone, including evangelical Christians, to educate their children at home, if that is their wish.

My understanding of the process is that it is to ensure that the rights and entitlements of children to education and the rights of all others involved are being upheld. I will ensure that that is the case before signing off or approving any guidance at the end of the consultation. Mr Attwood suggested that the boards overstepped the mark in relation to the Education Order 1986. I will satisfy myself whether that is the case before any final guidance is issued.

Jo-Anne Dobson (UUP, Upper Bann)

Minister, you will be aware that I raised this issue with you recently. You know that this has caused anger among parents who choose to educate their children at home, especially the idea of people entering their home. When will the Assembly and the Committee be given the opportunity to debate and shape the future of elective home education?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

It is for the Assembly's Business Committee to decide which topics are debated in the Assembly, and it is for the Education Committee to decide what is discussed there. I have no say in either.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

The Minister is anxious to point out that the guidance is not his. Does he accept that the guidance issued for consultation gold-plates what section 13 of the Order requires? Surely even he can see that.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

No, I do not accept that; nor do I deny it. There would not be much point in the education and library boards having a consultation process if I, as Minister, were to stand here in the middle of it and say, "This is how things are". The consultation process is ongoing. Members of the House, political parties and individuals are perfectly entitled to respond. When the outcome of that arrives on my desk, I will satisfy myself that all the questions raised here today and others that I am aware of have been answered. I will also seek legal advice on whether the boards have gold-plated section 13 of the Order or whether, as Mr Attwood suggests, they have overstepped it. All those things will be satisfied before any final decisions are made.

Ian Milne (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

3. asked the Minister of Education for his assessment of the impact of the recent court ruling regarding the development proposal by Drumragh Integrated College. (AQO 6218/11-15)

Maurice (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

10. asked the Minister of Education what impact Mr Justice Treacy's recent ruling in relation to Drumragh Integrated College, Omagh, will have on his Department's approach to long-term planning. (AQO 6225/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will answer questions 3 and 10 together.

I have noted the court’s judgement. Some of the recent press coverage is, in my opinion, ill-informed. I will decide what action, if any, is required after I receive the detailed assessment by senior counsel of the judge’s decision and its implications for the work of my Department. I will give careful consideration to that assessment when I receive it.

Ian Milne (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Mo bhuíochas leis an Aire go dtí seo. I thank the Minister for his answer. Can the Minister give us an update on the shared education campus programme, le do thoil?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Chomhalta as an cheist. We have received 15 or 16 expressions of interest in relation to shared education campuses, which are part of the Together: Building a United Community (T:BUC) scheme that was launched by the Executive late last year. My Department is working through those expressions of interest and matching them against the terms of reference. I hope to be in a position before the summer recess to make an announcement on those projects that are successful in moving forward.

Maurice (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

The Minister, in answer to Mr Attwood, talked about "balances of rights".

Yet, in his statement of 19 February 2013, he said:

"until I ensure that those schools that wish to move onto the Lisanelly site are completed, I do not envisage moving forward with any other capital project in Omagh." — [Official Report, Bound Volume 82, p204, col 1].

Judge Treacy then said:

"This would mean that any development proposal requiring capital investment by any school not allied to the Lisanelly project would be refused without proper consideration."

Does the Minister accept that, if he were to proceed down that road, there will be a big degree of discrimination?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

With respect to all assembled, the judgement has been made, but there are still legal papers from the judgement to be issued by the court, there is still a full analysis of the judgement to be carried out by my own senior counsel, and I have no doubt that the party to the case is also having its senior counsel look at it. I know that there are barristers and legal professionals in the Chamber, but let us not all set ourselves up as legal professionals with regard to these matters. Let us not all pull lines out of the judgement that suit our argument. I could pull lines out of the judgement that suit my argument as well. That is not the way forward for this case.

I believe that my decisions on area planning in Omagh were correct, and I believe that the Lisanelly project, which is a Programme for Government commitment, is the correct way forward. However, Judge Treacy has asked several questions that require an answer, and I will answer them in due course.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

I guess that we will hear more of an answer in the debate later. Does the Minister agree that there needs to be a fundamental rethink on the area planning process, especially in light of the court judgement? When you look at the agreed overall vision for shared education, you see that, to paraphrase George Orwell, all sectors are equal but some are more equal than others. Does he agree that that is the case?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I will have a chance to respond to the debate following Question Time. In your opening remarks in that debate, you said yourself that the judge's judgement was not clear. I hope that the Hansard report will be available before I respond, but you are on record as saying that it is not clear. I think that it is wise that we wait on senior counsel's advice on that matter.

You throw out the line that some are treated more equally than others. Which sector is being treated more equally than others? Name the sector or the school where I have acted inappropriately. Name where I have been involved in discrimination against a school; name them. Those broad-stroke statements do not stack up. I can tell you of one case where I have acted differently and contrary to the advice, statistics and figures that were given to me.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

One?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Yes, one. In relation to schooling in east Belfast, I could have closed — the name slips my mind at the moment. Dundonald; apologies. I could have closed Dundonald and defended that decision in any court in the land. I made a different decision on Dundonald. If I am accused of treating one sector differently, I have treated the controlled sector differently, in a positive way. I believe that that intervention was correct. If any Member wishes to present, either in the Chamber or outside, where I have treated another school in a discriminatory manner, I ask them to name it.

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

I thank the Minister for his answers. Does he accept that the judgement has caused some anxiety to parents of all secondary-school pupils in the Omagh area? What reassurance can the Minister give to the parents of children at Drumragh College, as well as parents of pupils at other schools who want to see the area planning process working? When do you think that can be delivered in order to end the uncertainty?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The Member is on the ground in Omagh. I wonder how many parents have stopped him on the street in relation to the recent court ruling on Drumragh. I would say that it is a few if any, because I do not believe that the matter ever needed to end up in court in the first place. I had already indicated that I would review and retake the decision on the expansion of numbers at Drumragh Integrated College before it ended up in court.

The scenario that the Member may want to explore is this: what if I had approved an increase in numbers at Drumragh? Where would those pupils have come from? They would have come from schools in and around the Omagh area. They would not have come from anywhere else. The Member would then have been coming to me and saying, "Minister, why have you approved increased numbers at that school in Drumragh? Do you not realise those pupils are coming out of school A, B and C? What is going to happen to those schools now?" Members cannot have it both ways. You have to make decisions based on the information in front of you, not simply on the needs of an individual school but on the needs of education in an area. That is what area planning is about. We no longer make decisions on the individual needs of one school but on the needs of education in an area.

Fra McCann (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

4. asked the Minister of Education when he will announce his next capital builds list. (AQO 6219/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Chomhalta as an cheist. It is my intention to make a statement to the Assembly before the end of June 2014 to set out my plans for future capital investment in schools across the North of Ireland. One of the biggest challenges that I face when considering proposals for large-scale capital investment in our schools is the need to balance the capital resources available to me with the investment needed across the estate. Therefore, it is critical that I ensure that any major capital investment is shaped by the outworking of area plans and is targeted at ensuring the delivery of modern, fit-for-purpose schools that will be sustainable into the future.

Accordingly, my officials have been working to develop a protocol that will ensure that potential capital projects are assessed and prioritised in a consistent and equitable manner. I can assure the House that I am mindful of the need for significant capital investment across the schools estate. My focus remains on the provision of a first-class educational experience for all our young people that will help them to fulfil their potential.

Fra McCann (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat. I thank the Minister for his answer. Can he provide an update on the projects that were announced in his previous capital build lists in June 2012 and January 2013?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

In June 2012, I announced 18 newbuild school projects. Four of those projects are currently on site: Victoria Park in Belfast, St Teresa's in Lurgan, St Joseph's in Newry, and Dromore Central Primary School. A further three projects are targeted to be on site by the end of June 2014: Tannaghmore in Lurgan, Eglinton Primary School and Bunscoil Bheann Mhadagáin in Belfast. In addition, advanced enabling works have commenced on projects at St Clare's Abbey in Newry and Arvalee Special School in Omagh.

In January 2013, I announced a further 22 newbuild projects. The majority of those projects are at an early stage in planning, principally the economic appraisal stage. My officials are actively engaging with the relevant school authorities on those projects. I also understand that my officials will brief the Education Committee either this week or next on the capital builds programme.

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

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as an fhreagra chuimsitheach sin. I thank the Minister for his comprehensive answer. I speak as chair of the all-party group on construction. Of the projects announced in January this year, how many can the Minister guarantee will be on site with construction work commenced as soon as possible, and I mean within this year?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

In fairness, the Member will realise — I said it when I made the announcement in January 2013 — that those projects were in the early stage of planning and they have to move forward through that process. Since I made my first announcement in June 2012, I have become an expert in everything from bats to hogweed and anything else that can delay a planning application or a building. I have no doubt that we will continue to encounter problems as we move forward with the further building works, but I can assure the Member that every effort is being taken to move the projects forward as quickly as possible. Indeed, I have restructured branches even within my own Department to move the projects forward.

We are trying our best to resource and finance the boards to move those matters forward as well, and there is a significant learning process going on all the time as to how to move projects forward. However, there are certain elements that I cannot avoid and which, as I have said in the House before, take far too long to complete, such as business cases and economic appraisals, which we have to complete because of financial guidance and things that have been put in place by various Committees of the House which maybe were seen as a good idea at the time. I can assure you that the more complicated the processes and the more red tape that you have around a project, the longer it takes to deliver.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

The Minister mentioned Arvalee school in east Belfast. Will he confirm whether it is a 14-classroom school, as opposed to a 12-classroom school?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I think that the Member may mean Victoria Park Primary School in east Belfast. I have recently had correspondence from the Belfast Education and Library Board. It is seeking to increase Victoria Primary School to a 14-classroom school. Again, we are currently working through the paperwork in regard to that matter, but I hope to be able to confirm that it will be a 14-classroom school in the future. A few i's remain to be dotted and t's remain to be crossed in relation to discussions with contractors, etc, but I do not see any major problems in the road of that scheme.

Steven Agnew (Green, North Down)

I declare an interest as director of the Northern Ireland Council for Integrated Education (NICIE). Will priority be given to schools such as St Colmbanus' College in Bangor, which are shovel-ready projects that had funding approved in the past until capital allowances were cut?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

There are a significant number of schools which were committed to builds in the past. I have resisted the temptation to announce lengthy lists of schools that can move forward in the future. I have always said that I will only announce schools which I am confident can move forward within a reasonable period of time. Even in doing that, I have seen delays which were never envisaged to projects.

I am currently working my way through a capital announcement. We have asked the various managing authorities for their priority list. I need to match that against area planning and the needs and conditions of each of those buildings. However, I have to say, Members, that, following this Question Time, we will be discussing area planning. Members who vote to stop area planning are effectively voting to bring to a complete and utter end any capital builds programme for the foreseeable future.

Gordon Dunne (DUP, North Down)

5. asked the Minister of Education what plans the South Eastern Education and Library Board has to increase board-controlled nursery places within the Holywood, Bangor and Donaghadee areas. (AQO 6220/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The South Eastern Education and Library Board has advised that all children in the Holywood, Bangor and Donaghadee areas — postcodes BT18, BT19, BT20 and BT21 — whose parents engaged fully with the preschool admissions process to the end will have received the offer of a place, following the end of key stage 2, which was on 30 May. In the Donaghadee area, all children who applied were offered a pre-school place in a setting of their choice at stage 1 of the process. I understand that 17 children in the Holywood area and 41 in the Bangor area did not receive the offer of a place at the end of stage 1 and that some 12 families decided not to submit further preferences at stage 2.

I have strongly encouraged the parents and guardians of children who did not receive the offer of a funded preschool place at the first stage of the process to consider the full range of preschool provision that remains available and provide a range of preferences at stage 2 to increase the chance of securing a place for their child. A number of funded places remain available in both areas, and parents are advised to engage directly with the providers.

Gordon Dunne (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his answer. Does he fully recognise the need for such board provision in the north Down area, taking on board the increase in population and demand and, of course, to ensure equality of opportunity for parents and children regardless of their background or ability?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I recognise all those matters. I also recognise that I am dealing with a Programme for Government commitment, and I hope that the Member recognises that, over the last number of years, preschool education and the number of placements for it have improved dramatically. We have provided a significant number of additional places across the North.

The information before me tells me that there are sufficient places in the Holywood, Bangor and Donaghadee areas to facilitate parental demand. However, it is up to the local preschool education advisory group, working along with the education and library board, to request additional places if need be.

If there are settings in the area that believe that they could and should facilitate more children, they are more than entitled to bring forward development proposals.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I am conscious that my question could be constituency-specific. It relates to the allocation of preschool places. If needs be, I can accept your reprimand or go ahead and ask the question.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

I will not prejudge what the Member might ask, but he is right: it is a constituency-specific question. The Member might be inclined to widen the question out — that is maybe what his plan is — and I would prefer that he did not do so.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I accept your advice on that.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

It is unfair on the Minister as well.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat.

Pat Ramsey (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

6. asked the Minister of Education how he will ensure that the benefits of the entitlement framework funding become a lasting legacy for all young people. (AQO 6221/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The entitlement framework is about broadening access to courses for all pupils in Key Stage 4 and post 16, courses that are relevant to young people, engaging and motivating for them and that have clear, relevant progression pathways for them to continue in education or move into training or employment.

In 2003, some of our young people could choose from only six GCSEs and, in the worst cases, one A-level course. Schools are now working well towards the full implementation of the entitlement framework on a phased basis. It will be important for them to focus on meeting the full statutory requirements of 24 and 27 courses from September 2015.

Schools are funded through their core delegated budget to deliver their statutory obligations, including the curriculum. The additional entitlement framework funding has been a transitional arrangement, a contribution to the costs associated with developing an expanded curricular offer at Key Stage 4 and post 16. Although you will be aware that I extended the additional funding to the end of this budget period, it has never been intended as a permanent funding stream. Rather, the delivery of the entitlement framework will have been mainstreamed in schools and across area learning communities. However, I will continue to explore funding in future years if it is available.

The legacy of entitlement framework support will be the delivery of a broad and varied curriculum on an area basis so that every child can follow the right pathway for him or her. It has helped us all to focus on what is important, which is meeting the needs of our young people and ensuring that they are supported and equipped with the knowledge, understanding and skills necessary to drive the economic future for us all.

Pat Ramsey (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Minister for his response. Along with me, he will acknowledge that many young people who struggled or could not cope in the normal school environment have taken advantage of that funding mechanism and obtained good qualifications in a college. As part of the wider NEETs strategy, is he not concerned that that will have a further detrimental impact on young people coming out of the system and becoming NEET?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The funding for the entitlement framework was never there to subsidise the role of the further and higher education sector. I accept that the sectors have worked well together and that it has been a good collaboration. Indeed, Minister Farry and I have discussed it on several occasions, and I have met representatives of the sector on several occasions to discuss how it has worked out. I have also brought a DEL representative on to my area planning steering group so that we can coordinate facilities much better in the future.

Concerns have been expressed about the costs associated with working with the colleges sector. That needs to be explored further and if those costs can be reduced or managed in a better way it will allow us to move forward in a greater way.

The entitlement framework covers a wide range of subjects, and it has allowed many of our young people to flourish in different ways and choose career paths that were once not open to them. It has certainly helped us to ensure that many more young people leave school with relevant qualifications and a career pathway set out for them.

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

7. asked the Minister of Education for an update on the progress of the rebuild for the High School, Ballynahinch. (AQO 6222/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

There are no specific plans at present for a newbuild project for the High School, Ballynahinch. It has not been identified by the South Eastern Education and Library Board (SEELB) as one of its priorities for newbuild, nor has any application been received during the recent call for projects under the schools enhancement programme.

The draft SEELB post-primary area plan, dated October 2013, states that enrolment at the High School, Ballynahinch is below the sustainable schools policy threshold. The SEELB is currently considering options to secure the retention of a controlled, non-selective post-primary school in the Ballynahinch area.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

That concludes questions for oral answer to the Education Minister. We will now move to topical questions.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

1. asked the Minister of Education who made the decision to close Ballee Community High School and why was the decision taken in the middle of the election period. (AQT 1181/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I made the decision. I made the decision on the basis of the information provided to me in the development proposal and from engagements and discussions that I had with interested parties and local elected representatives. I have said in the House a number of times, I believe, to Mr Swann that those who were supportive of Ballee high school were dedicated to the school and the young people in the school. There is no question about that. My concern was about whether they had arrived on the scene in time to turn the situation around. Enrolment at the school was in such a state, and the prospects for increasing that enrolment were practically zero. I had serious concerns about the educational well-being not only of current pupils at the school but of future pupils at the school if I were to continue with that school open. I decided to close it, and I believe that I made the right decision.

I was pressed on making a decision on 20/21 May because letters had to issue to parents by 23 May. I accept that that was not an ideal time to make it, and, if I had to do it again, I would maybe make the decision much earlier or after the election. I did not announce the decision to the media on election day: others announced it to the media on election day. The press release from the Department of Education did not go out until, I believe, 23 May.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his answer. Can he guarantee that we will not have another Orangefield? What steps has he put in place to ensure that pupils all have places, that parents have choice and that schools are prepared and ready for September 2015?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I will not compare one school with another school or whatever it may be. The Member will be aware that my decision on the closure of Ballee Community High School from 1 October is also aligned with the increase of the enrolment of Dunclug College. Provision is being made in the area for pupils to move across to whichever school they wish, and I have certainly increased provision at at least one school in the area. I want to see provision being planned, and this goes to the crux of the debate that we are having before and after Question Time. I want to see area planning at the heart of all these decisions. Often, those decisions can be difficult and emotive for everyone involved, but I believe that the decision around Ballee was the correct decision. It in no way undermines those who campaigned for or who worked in the school. Clearly, they were dedicated to the young people they served, but, as I said to them at the meetings that I had with them and as I said to Mr Swann in this Chamber, I had to ask myself whether they had arrived on the scene on time — they had not. That is the sad thing about that.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

2. asked the Minister of Education to outline how the area planning process facilitates increased sharing between schools. (AQT 1182/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

This goes back to the entitlement framework. A number of factors are at play in relation to sharing in our schools estate. Area learning communities have been working away quietly with each other for several years on sharing across the curriculum, and, in many areas, that has broadened to the broader understanding of sharing between the communities and sectors and better understanding of each other. The very terms of reference of area planning refer to the need to increase sharing across sectors. Each time I meet the sectors at the steering group, I emphasise to them the need to introduce proposals on shared education and for them to challenge each other and to challenge communities, where we can, to think, at times, the impossible and take the next step towards sharing in the local community.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for that response. Given recent events, can he outline how, if at all, the area planning process has been affected by the recent developments regarding ESA?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Ideally, area planning should move forward under a single planning organisation, that being ESA, with representatives of all the sectors and all the major political parties around the table, it has to be said. It would be a very democratic and collective way of moving the process forward. The absence of ESA has hampered area planning, but it is certainly not necessary to stop area planning because of it. We have to work round the obstacle of not having ESA in place. Indeed, I am reviewing the area steering group and considering breaking it down into more localised steering groups to work in board areas, rather than an oversight committee. However, I think that the structures that we have in place are fit for purpose.

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

3. asked the Minister of Education what steps he is taking to address the concerns being expressed by the majority of primary schools about the educational appropriateness of end of key stage assessments. (AQT 1183/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The most significant step that I have taken was to bring in the OECD, and we brought the OECD in to look at our assessment procedure. Its report has been very valuable in the ongoing discussions between my officials and representatives of the teachers' side in regard to these matters. The OECD points out that our assessment processes are robust and necessary but we have failed to convince those who use them — the teaching staff — of the merits of them, and we have not, up to now, engaged with them properly in moving that forward. Over the past number of months, there have been detailed discussions between my officials, CCEA and the trade unions, and I hope very soon to be in a position to announce that there is agreement — it all depends on agreement — and that we have found a way forward on assessments. I believe that assessments are necessary, but I am not seeking to impose assessments on the teaching profession; I am looking to work with the teaching profession on how we carry out assessments.

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

Thank you for your answer. I welcome your statement that you will work with teachers, but teachers are not happy with this because it is not a good assessment for learning. Would you consider suspending the present system until you can make a more informed decision about good assessment for learning?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

In fairness, the OECD tells us that it is a good assessment for learning, but we have to adapt it and work with those who are delivering it on the ground, so I am not going to suspend it. I believe that our discussions with the unions are bearing fruit, and, if we keep going forward with the discussions that we are having with the trade union side, I am confident that we can reach agreement on the matter.

Michael Copeland (UUP, Belfast East)

4. asked the Minister of Education when he intends to brief the Assembly on the future administrative arrangements for education in Northern Ireland. (AQT 1184/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I would be happy to brief the Assembly once the paper that I have submitted to the Executive hopefully reaches agreement. We are at a critical stage where we are heading towards April 2015, which will see the alignment of the new 11-council model. The boards or board, which is my preferred option moving forward, will have to be aligned to that model as well.

Michael Copeland (UUP, Belfast East)

I thank the Minister for his response. He must surely be aware of the deep concerns prevalent in the teaching fraternity as the result of our inability to foster consensus in education and create a fit-for-purpose education and skills authority, expending on the project somewhere in the region of £17 million that could have been spent on improving literacy and numeracy. Will he outline what steps he will take to ensure that the creation of a single education and library board to replace the current five will avoid the pitfalls — if that is the right word — that the concept fell into?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The old saying is that charity begins at home. In this case, consensus will have to begin at home. I encourage the Member to ensure that his party is in the mood to seek consensus on the paper that will go before the Executive: as he is aware, he has a Minister at the Executive table. He will also be aware that some of the biggest opponents and those who carried out many manoeuvres against ESA were members of the Ulster Unionist Party. If £17 million has been wasted over the past nine years, all the parties in the Chamber will have to put up their hand, but those who will have to put their hand up highest will be the Ulster Unionist Party.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

5. asked the Minister of Education for an update on the home-to-school transport review. (AQT 1185/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The review is moving forward. It has had significant engagement with young people and the education sector. I hope to have the report by the end of August, I believe, and then we will move forward from there with regard to the recommendations.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Can the Minister outline how pupils with special educational needs will be protected moving forward?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Yes. I assure the Member that I am not planning any changes that would deny transport to children with special educational needs. Throughout my tenure and, indeed, that of my predecessor, we ring-fenced funding for special educational needs, and I have no intention of denying transport to children with special educational needs.

Daithí McKay (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

6. asked the Minister of Education to update the House on the recent report from the Irish-medium post-primary advisory group, which should be commended on the significant work that it has carried out since last summer. (AQT 1186/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The group presented me with a report in mid-April. I am studying its recommendations, and I will make a statement on the way forward from that.

Daithí McKay (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I welcome the focus that the Minister has brought to this area. Certainly, the Irish-medium post-primary sector is an area that needs urgent development. Can I ask the Minister what plans there are to action the report?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

As I say, we brought Helen Ó Murchú and her group together to look at how we promote and facilitate Irish-medium post-primary education in particular in and around the County Derry area. I think that the lessons and recommendations that she has brought forward will facilitate our developing bunscoileanna across the North. It has been a valuable exercise, but, as I say, I received the report in mid-April, and I am still studying the recommendations. I hope to make an announcement on the way forward, but, given that we are heading towards summer recess, I suspect that it will be early autumn before I make a full announcement.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

7. asked the Minister of Education to outline whether any finance has been secured or ring-fenced for the proposed newbuild at Devenish College in Fermanagh. (AQT 1187/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I noted that, somewhere during the week, Mr Elliott told an audience that I had no funding to move Devenish forward and that he believed that it would never happen. That is the power of social media.

I made an announcement on Devenish in January 2013. It is part of the building programme, moving forward. As I develop my building programme, I am conscious of the announcements that I have made. Therefore, they are built in to my budget, moving forward.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for that. Could he tell us whether there is any opportunity to separate progressing the Devenish project without it being dependent on the merger of Portora and the Collegiate?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I have not got the full details for the Member's question in front of me. I am also reluctant to comment on an ongoing development proposal for Portora and Collegiate. Standing here, I am not aware of any co-joining of the building programme and the other development proposal, but I will clarify that with the Member in writing after Question Time.

Judith Cochrane (Alliance, Belfast East)

8. asked the Minister of Education whether, for enrolment to secondary schools, there are provisions similar to those for primary schools, to deal with a situation in which only one of a pair of twins or a set of triplets has been awarded a post-primary place. (AQT 1188/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

It depends on the admissions criteria for the secondary school. I am aware of one set of circumstances in a selective school where one twin did not get in because of the grading that the selective school was using. My suggestion there would be to not use selection; that would solve that problem. Those are the only circumstances that I am aware of where twins or triplets not getting into a post-primary school was raised as an issue with me.

Judith Cochrane (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the Minister for his answer. Is there any advice at this stage that can be given to schools that have already chosen to use the selection procedure and are in that situation?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Stop using selection.

Michaela Boyle (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

9. asked the Minister of Education how many children received a preschool place in the school of their choice this year. (AQT 1189/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Currently, in or around 23,500 children have received a preschool placement this year.

Michaela Boyle (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

I thank the Minister. Will he outline how those who did not receive a place in their school of choice will be accommodated?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The 34 children who have not received a placement are from families who stayed with the system through stage 1 and stage 2. I have asked my departmental officials for a breakdown of their location and why each child has not been placed. On receipt of that information, I will have further discussions with them on how we move the matter forward.

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

1. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning for an update on the funded initiatives under the young people not in education, employment or training strategy, that specifically support care-experienced young people. (AQO 6231/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

The Executive's Pathways to Success strategy for young people not in employment, education or training introduced a number of initiatives to meet the wide-ranging needs of young people, including those in this category.

The collaboration and innovation fund supports five projects with a budget of almost £2 million that target care-experienced young people. DEL's local employment intermediary service (LEMIS) is also available on an outreach basis to individuals with a common employability barrier, including care leavers.

During the 2013-14 financial year, LEMIS providers received just over £2 million to deliver the service, and a similar budget is available this year. The European social fund is providing £2·2 million in 2014-15 for three projects that target care-experienced young participants but are not exclusive to them. The Member will be aware that the policy lead for work with looked-after children lies with the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety (DHSSPS).

My Department has a key role in promoting learning and skills, preparing people for work and supporting pathways to employment for looked-after and care-experienced young people. In this context, my Department has been involved closely with DHSSPS, the Health and Social Care Board and the trusts, and we are working to improve the education, training and employment outcomes for young people in or leaving care. In particular, the Careers Service has, for some considerable time, been working with the trusts and others in an attempt to ensure that these vulnerable young people have access to the right advice about their future.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Questions 6 and 10 have been withdrawn.

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Minister for his comprehensive response, particularly on young people in the care system. How much funding is made available to Queen's University and the University of Ulster to broaden access? How much is spent on care-experienced young people?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

She raises an important point. It is worth stressing that increasing access and widening participation are key objectives of the Department, and that includes vulnerable young people. Those budgets amount to several million pounds a year for the institutions. I cannot give a precise breakdown of those that relate to care-experienced young people. In any event, they would be swept up in the general outreach and support that is made available to such young people. Training for Success is also sensitive to the needs of care-experienced young people in that they are eligible to stay on such programmes longer.

Pat Ramsey (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I welcome the Minister's responses to date. The Committee for Employment and Learning has been engrossed in the whole NEETs area for some time. A key element is the tracking and retention of data. Through the funding mechanisms for young people not in education, employment or training, how many young people with learning or physical disabilities have been through the schemes?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I am happy to come back to the Member with detailed figures on the headcount for the different strands. It is important to remember that a number of interventions across the Department work with vulnerable young people. Some are specific programmes under the Pathways to Success strategy, most notably the collaboration and innovation fund.

Young people also access some of our other programmes, including some under the European social fund, and mainstream training programmes, so there is a very broad reach. It is important that we do all that we can to maximise the potential for everyone to engage in society. Where appropriate, we will invest in resources to address barriers that prevent some people developing and engaging to their full potential.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his answers so far. Will he clarify how the introduction of Together: Building a United Community will affect or has affected his Department's initiatives?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

The main impact will be on the United Youth programme, which will be an overarching framework that will cover a range of existing programmes on a revamped basis. It will also cover some new interventions. My Department is leading on behalf of the Executive and is working in close collaboration with other Departments on the design of that. We hope to be in a position to give some clarity in the near future on the way forward in that regard.

It is worth bearing it in mind that it is a hybrid of volunteering, good relations, community relations and employability, and it is designed to engage with a wide range of young people from different backgrounds with different training needs.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

2. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning how many young people aged 16-25 years in North Belfast are not currently in education, employment or training, (AQO 6232/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

That question has been transferred to DFP. That information should have been sent through.

Oliver McMullan (Sinn Féin, East Antrim)

3. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning how his Department intends to work with the Committee for Employment and Learning's inquiry into post special educational need provision in education, employment and training for those with learning disabilities. (AQO 6233/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I very much welcome the Committee’s inquiry. As requested by the Committee for Employment and Learning, I responded to its call for evidence by the original 21 March 2014 deadline, although the deadline was subsequently extended to 30 June.

The response provided information on issues raised under the inquiry’s terms of reference. In addition, it included comprehensive information on the opportunities offered by my Department and its key delivery partners. I also offered to provide further updates to the Committee about any significant developments on issues that evolved during its inquiry in addition to any verbal updates that the Committee might seek from my Department.

Oliver McMullan (Sinn Féin, East Antrim)

Go raibh maith agat. I thank the Minister for his answer. Is he of the opinion that much more needs to be done to provide opportunities for this severely disadvantaged group of people?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

Yes. It is worthwhile, looking at the overall context, to see how different interventions will fit in. First, my Department is conducting a review of the Disability Employment Service, with a view to having in place a draft strategy by the end of this year. That looks at particular issues around access to employment. We have a range of existing interventions on a broader basis that my Department is also involved with, including access to further education and careers advice. Beyond that, there is a much wider, essentially cross-Executive issue about how we better manage transitions for young people from a special educational needs background who are leaving school at 19 to ensure that they have a range of adequate services available to them.

The Executive subcommittee that monitors the implementation of the Bamford report on mental health and learning disability issues has established a mechanism by which we are looking at the issue. Departments have stated what provision they have, and we are conducting a gap analysis in that regard to see what more can be done. In the near future, we will sit down across Departments to discuss what more can be done and whose responsibility it will be to address those issues.

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

The Minister said that the Executive subcommittee was looking at the gaps shown in the Bamford review. Has he spoken to the Health Minister in regard to the change that is coming for day centres? It is proposed that they will only accept those with severe behavioural or medical needs, and there will be an entire cohort of individuals who will not be able to access day centres. Has he spoken to the Health Minister about that?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Chair of the Committee for that question. That is very much part of the landscape that is before us. It is important that we seek to reconcile the policy direction in health with what can reasonably be done by a Department such as my own, which has a focus on skills and engaging people with the labour market. We need to work out how best to address the gap between those two responsibilities so that we can best service the needs of young people.

What annoys parents more than anything else is a situation in which Department A says, "These are our responsibilities", and Department B says, "These are our responsibilities", with parents almost stuck in the middle not knowing where to turn. It is important that we have a full spectrum of joined-up interventions. What the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety is doing is very relevant to discussions that are happening in the Executive subcommittee. We hope to bottom out what should be a comprehensive suite of interventions in the very near future.

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

Does the Minister agree that, 16 years into the new Assembly, it is time for Departments to stop arguing about who has responsibility for people with special needs? Will he become the voice of those people, who have not benefited from the equality that was enshrined in the Good Friday Agreement?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I assure the Member that I am happy to be a voice, but we need multiple voices from other Departments and, indeed, Members to fully address the issue. I reassure him that the issue is being taken seriously and that Departments are seized of its importance. Like all Members, we are acutely aware of the deep concerns that parents have around that transition phase and the move from the relative certainty of a school setting to the uncertainty about what comes next. My Department has stepped forward to coordinate that discussion on behalf of the Executive subcommittee, but there are other Departments with responsibility, in particular OFMDFM, which has a cross-cutting responsibility for disability issues on behalf of the Executive. There is good communication between Departments as we seek to fully address the issue.

Judith Cochrane (Alliance, Belfast East)

4. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning what lessons have been learned in relation to the review of youth training from his recent visit to Denmark. (AQO 6234/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I strongly believe in the importance of evidence-based policymaking. In recognition of the importance of learning from international best practice for the ongoing review of youth training, I recently undertook a visit to Denmark, building on a previous visit to the Netherlands. The key lessons I brought back from the visit include that work-based learning with an employer is a key element of provision, with learning alternating regularly between college-based and workplace-based approaches. Importance is placed on numeracy and literacy, and funding arrangements are in place to reward colleges for performance and employers for engagement.

I was impressed with the role that Denmark's central trade council and sector-based trade committees play in determining their vocational curriculum, which is securing a much simpler qualifications system than we presently have in Northern Ireland. Such structures have ensured that industry leads the development of qualifications to match the required competencies for each occupation.

The visit provided useful insights into ways of re-engaging young people and promoting a positive image of vocational training. Amongst other things, the Danish approach includes taster courses for those currently not engaged in either work or training and the provision of dedicated mentors to assist young people with issues not directly connected to their studies. There is recognition in Denmark that its system is not perfect, and I was interested in the steps being taken to improve the image of vocational learning and give it parity of esteem with academic routes. I will make a statement to the Assembly later this month that will provide an update on the progress of the review. Those key findings will inform the review of youth training interim report, which will be published in early autumn 2014 for public consultation.

Judith Cochrane (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the Minister for his answer. Will he give us a little more of an indication of how those lessons are being applied to the current review of youth training here in Northern Ireland?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

The Member will appreciate that we are currently conducting that review of youth training. We are seeking to ensure that we have a fit-for-purpose offer for young people who leave school without the necessary qualifications to progress into work, an apprenticeship, further education or higher education. At present, we have a range of programmes that seek to address that particular cohort of young people. At this time, the level of performance and outcomes is not perhaps as strong as it could be. There is also a sense that it is not as relevant to the needs of employers and the economy as a whole as it could be.

There are very clear lessons from Denmark on how we can better engage employers to ensure that the needs of the economy are taken into consideration. There is a strong focus on literacy and numeracy, which are fundamental in ensuring that all young people have the essential skills that are absolutely vital in any aspect of the world of work that someone may want to consider. A strong role for the mentoring of young people is very important. We have to provide that rounded support for young people, almost, in a sense, so that some of the pastoral care and access to extra-curricular activities that young people who remain in school obtain are replicated in the wider youth training offer that we will hopefully have in Northern Ireland in the very near future.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

During his trips to the Netherlands and Denmark, did the Minister come across the issue of hard-to-reach communities, which is something that affects quite a number of communities in Northern Ireland? There are young people in working-class estates for whom outreach programmes and attempts to get them into other programmes are proving very difficult. Did he get any information there that he can apply to Northern Ireland?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

Yes. The Member has raised a valid point. The offers that we put in place have to be very inclusive, and we must seek to maximise participation, particularly among marginalised young people who have, maybe, motivational issues or are otherwise not encouraged to engage in the training opportunities that are out there for them. Particularly from the visit to the Netherlands, there is a very important lesson about the use of the community and voluntary sector and how it can work at a grass-roots level to encourage young people to come forward, and also about shaping the offer to meet the prevailing local circumstances.

It is about creating a culture where vocational training is seen as being as valid, in many respects, as more traditional academic routes so that we raise its status and, in turn, link it into people's aspirations. It is also worth stressing that, although we have a lot of young people who are currently not succeeding in a school-based environment, that does not mean that they do not have the aptitude to engage in the world of work. Indeed, many of those young people are very talented in many respects, but maybe just have not been encouraged to bring their talents to bear.

It is important that we show the value of vocational training as a means by which we draw out those young people's talents and, in turn, that that creates a virtuous loop where they gain their own qualifications. Put in very simple terms, a young person who is interested in being a mechanic and who likes to tinker with cars or motorcycles may not necessarily initially see the value of sitting down and getting a maths qualification, but if they want to progress in doing that, they will need to achieve that maths qualification. The vocational training may encourage that young person to sit down and ensure that they get their basic qualifications.

Sandra Overend (UUP, Mid Ulster)

How do the primary and post-primary education systems in Denmark compare with ours and how would our systems be impacted if a Danish-based model of youth training were to be used in Northern Ireland?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

In most of continental Europe, there are very clearly established academic and vocational routes. At times, they are more differentiated from each other in certain jurisdictions, and, in other jurisdictions, there is a much tighter relationship or an ability to change between the two. There is a much greater parity of esteem between those types of pathways, so there is not the same degree of hierarchy that we see in Northern Ireland society, where the academic pathway is seen as being the greater or more important one than the vocational pathway and where there is almost a stigma applied to those who are doing vocational training. Through our review of apprenticeships and youth training, we are trying to address some of those perceptions and to ensure that we can encourage people to pursue the most appropriate pathway for them so that they can play a full role in society and in our economy.

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

5. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning for an update on the Steps 2 Success procurement exercise. (AQO 6235/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

Steps 2 Success is my Department’s main programme for assisting unemployed and economically inactive people to find and keep work. Steps 2 Success builds on the success of Steps to Work and will increase the flexibility to develop an individually designed programme to prepare participants to find employment. The procurement of Steps 2 Success is being carried out by my Department in conjunction with the Central Procurement Directorate (CPD) of the Department of Finance and Personnel.

The procurement is in two stages. Stage 1 was completed in November 2013, selecting six organisations to bid to deliver the programme in each of three contract areas. Subsequently, one organisation withdrew in the southern contract area. After discussion with the Central Procurement Directorate, it was agreed to proceed with the competition in the southern contract area with five bidding organisations.

Organisations in stage 2 are required to design a comprehensive service delivery model to meet standards set by the Department in service guarantees for each category of participant. Bidders are required to develop a comprehensive supply chain to enable a quality service to be delivered to all participants throughout the contract area. Stage 2 of the procurement is under way, with detailed bids to deliver the programme in the three contract areas presently being evaluated by officials. It is anticipated that I will be able to announce the results of the successful bidders this month, with the programme commencing in September 2014. Officials are also working to ensure that the required legislative, administrative, governance and financial systems are implemented to enable Steps 2 Success to be delivered to a high standard from the start of the programme.

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

The Minister will be aware that there is major local concern about the provision of the programme. Given the highlighted poor track record of some UK providers of other programmes here, what consideration is being given to smaller local providers who may miss out on the exercise?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

It is worth stressing that the procurement that has been conducted has been done very much in line with advice from CPD. We have a level playing field for the bids that were made. A select list was drawn up at stage one based on the responses received. If organisations did not meet that threshold, that did not necessarily imply that they were not up to delivering it. It was a competitive process, and only a certain number would get through to the second stage. At this point, there are opportunities in the supply chain for organisations across the board. Indeed, it is a prerequisite of bids that the future lead contractors will have a supply chain and will not seek to deliver the programme themselves solely. I am satisfied that we will have rigorous supply chains in place that will create a wealth of opportunities for a wide range of organisations.

Rosaleen McCorley (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a fhreagraí go dtí seo. Can the Minister give a guarantee to small local providers who are telling other Members and me that they will go out of business as a result of how that procurement process worked out, because the work will not filter down and it will be administered largely by organisations across the water that do not have local knowledge or engagement with local people?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I cannot give the Member any specific guarantees about any particular individual organisations. All I can do is reiterate what I said to Mr McKinney, which was that the lead contractors will be required to ensure that they have a very comprehensive supply chain in place and that, in it, there will be a considerable number of opportunities for locally based organisations.

We are fully aware of the importance of local knowledge; that is why the programme has been designed as such. It is important to bear in mind that the rationale for Steps 2 Success is not about the interests, per se, of the delivery organisations, it is about actually ensuring that we have better outcomes in moving unemployed people into employment. That is how we will judge the success of the programme. Throughout that, the way in which we have designed the scheme has had that objective very much in mind to ensure that we have a step change in the level of performance from what has been a very good programme in Steps to Work to an excellent programme in Steps 2 Success. Ultimately we have a duty to all our constituents to tackle the scourge of unemployment.

Michael Copeland (UUP, Belfast East)

At this stage, does the Minister anticipate any legal action on behalf of, or led by, the unsuccessful bidders? Can he give his assessment of the impact of any such actions on the introduction of Steps 2 Success? What steps would he take?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I assure the Member that I am satisfied that great care and attention has been given by my officials, and indeed CPD, in handling that procurement. It is a very big procurement scheme. A lot of people have spent a lot of time to ensure we get it right and that we do indeed follow procedures to ensure that we comply with all the necessary requirements.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Question 6 has been withdrawn. Raymond McCartney is not in his place.

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

8. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning for an update on the proposed review of zero-hours contracts. (AQO 6238/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

On 6 May 2014, I gave a commitment to the House that I would launch a consultation on zero-hours contracts. I also indicated that my Department would conduct further research to establish the extent of the use of zero-hours contracts in Northern Ireland. It is my intention that the planned consultation will be launched before the summer recess and will seek views on a number of areas where action may be required. They include exclusivity clauses, the right of an employee on a zero-hours contract to request a move to a fixed-term contract, and the transparency of these types of contracts. My Department will also take forward a range of qualitative and quantitative projects as part of the consultation process.

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

I thank the Minister for his answer. He mentioned making a start on the consultation before the summer recess, and I appreciate that. He will recall that I have spoken before on the issue. Can he give us any idea of how a programme might be rolled out and how we might reach an end point and result?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

The Member will appreciate that, when he asked me a topical question in the Assembly several months ago, I gave him — this is perhaps unusual in the Assembly — a direct answer. I said that we were looking at the issue in principle and that we were prepared to move on. When I answered that question, we were at a very early stage in the development. At that stage, I had simply accepted in principle that we would do a consultation on the issue and, arising from that, potentially move towards legislation.

On the timescale for moving forward, it is my intention that the consultation will go out before the summer recess and that it will unfold over the next number of months. I will then bring the outcome of the consultation to the Executive, with a view to seeking agreement on the way forward.

In parallel to that, it is my intention to bring another paper to the Executive on the wider employment law review. That exercise anticipates that we will have primary legislation to take into account the outcome of that review. So, it is my intention that we try to join up those two processes in due course and that the Bill on employment law may contain provisions relating to zero-hours contracts.

The Member will also be conscious that there has been a consultation on zero-hours contracts in Great Britain. That closed earlier this year, and there were something like 37,000 responses to it. This is now the final year of the Westminster mandate. As the Member will know, the Queen's speech is happening on Wednesday, so we will watch with interest to see whether there are any plans for legislation in Great Britain.

In that context, we may be the first jurisdiction in these islands to take action on zero-hours contracts, if the consultation process here warrants us taking action. We will take seriously the outcome of that process and see what we need to do.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

9. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning what plans are in place to increase staff capacity in job centres, should welfare reform be introduced. (AQO 6239/11-15)