Northern Ireland Assembly, 23 June 2014

333 contributions from 65 members. The official report.

Assembly Business

David McIlveen (DUP, North Antrim)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I want to raise an issue that arose at Question Time with the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure last Tuesday. I asked a question that is of considerable import to all communities, but particularly the Protestant unionist community. The question was asked in a respectful way, whilst I fully accept that the content might have been uncomfortable for the Minister. I was given an answer that ended with this tirade:

"You are belligerent and begrudging. You will not acknowledge and recognise equality across the board." — [Official Report, Vol 96, No 4, p36, col 2].

Mr Speaker, I would appreciate your ruling as to whether that language is parliamentary. It is also entirely untrue. Anybody who knows me knows that I am none of the three things that I was accused of being. Perhaps, Mr Speaker, you would be so good as to rule on that and suggest appropriate actions.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

As the Member will know, it is a longstanding ruling that it is not up to the Speaker or Deputy Speakers to make a judgement about how a Minister might answer a question. That has been a longstanding convention in the Chamber, because it would be difficult for the Chair to sit in judgement on how Ministers answer questions.

I know that, from time to time, Members are not happy with the way that Ministers answer questions. I know that even from looking at Members, and their body language, in the Chamber. In saying that, I also know that the original question was about tourism, and it ended up as a political question. I suppose that the Minister felt that she needed to give a political answer to a political question. Sometimes Ministers are put in a very awkward position because they are asked political questions that are not part of their official ministerial responsibilities and are left with no choice but to answer those in a very political way. However, I agree with what the Member has said. I know that, on many occasions, Members, especially Back-Benchers, are not happy with how Ministers answer questions. That is for all Members of the Chamber, but let us leave it there and move on.

David McNarry (UKIP, Strangford)

Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. I appreciate the summary that you have given in response to Member McIlveen. I will introduce what I need to say, but, on the same issue, as a Member, I was astounded and shocked to hear the manner in which the Minister addressed the Member. I think that many Members will have shared that view.

The point that I wish to raise — and I understand the convention and the manner in which you have addressed the question, but is there a time when the Chair or the person in the Chair would have the capability of addressing the issue when it arises? Should the Minister perhaps have been reminded of her status, her conscience and her role as part of this Assembly, albeit not as part of a role in which you would have to have any demonstrable access to her? Is there a role that you might consider with your Deputy Speakers so that issues such as this could be dealt with at the time so that the matter is dealt with there and then, and perhaps the Minister would understand that such language was quite intolerable and was certainly shocking for me to hear?

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member will know that, from time to time, I have had to check not only Ministers but Members. Encouraging good temper and moderation of language is very important, not only for Members but for Ministers, so I take the Member's point. On occasions, I have done it, because I believe that, although a Minister or Member can make a point, it does not have to be offensive. I have to say to the Member that I try to avoid interrupting Ministers if possible, and I would only intervene in extreme circumstances. I say that to the whole House.

Ministerial Statement

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Minister of Enterprise — the Minister of Employment and Learning wishes to make a statement to the House this afternoon. Minister, I apologise.

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

Not at all. With your permission, Mr Speaker, I wish to make a statement to the Assembly on my Department’s planned consultation on zero-hours contracts, which will be launched today in conjunction with this statement.

The use of zero-hours contracts has generated significant public, political and media interest in recent months, both in Great Britain and here in Northern Ireland. Indeed, a number of MLAs have raised the matter in this House and elsewhere. As Members will know, Northern Ireland is the only part of the UK to which employment law is devolved. Given the general concerns that have been raised, and my own commitment to ensuring the operation of a fair and equitable employment relations environment in Northern Ireland, I have decided to review the use of these types of contracts, initially through a public consultation. The purpose of today’s statement is to give the House an understanding of the current extent of the use of zero-hours contracts and their legal status, and how we intend to examine that further; and to outline the key issues that will be explored through the public consultation.

Zero-hours contracts have been used responsibly, in many cases, for years. They can support business flexibility, making it easier to hire new staff and provide pathways to employment for young people and other jobseekers. These contracts and other flexible arrangements can also give individuals more choice in managing work and other non-work commitments. However, for others, zero-hours contracts, in particular when restrictions are applied, are associated with problems such as the ability to negotiate credit and eligibility for benefits payments, because of the uncertainty about working patterns and income. Also, some people on these contracts feel that they are penalised by their employer if they are not available for work when required. Furthermore, zero-hours contracts can be disruptive to family life and create challenges in childcare planning.

Accordingly, I recognise that there have been significant concerns expressed with regard to their potential misuse, and I therefore want to ensure that zero-hours contracts, in their many guises, do not compromise the integrity of the employment relationship. This consultation will help to determine the extent of their use in Northern Ireland and to provide a clearer picture of their benefit to our economy. It will also seek views on key elements such as exclusivity clauses and whether there is sufficient transparency for employees around the detailed conditions that apply to these contracts.

As with any contractual arrangement, people on zero-hours contracts must understand the basis of their relationship with an employer. It is important to bear in mind that the labour market continues to evolve. As a consequence, zero-hours contracts are an increasingly common aspect of the modern approach to work. Given that reality, if people are to have confidence in the use of zero-hours contracts, then we need to consider how best to regulate them in ways that promote the interests of employers and employees.

During the summer of 2013, the UK Government conducted an informal information-gathering exercise on the use of zero-hours contracts. That was followed in December 2013 with a full public consultation, which closed in March this year. The response to the consultation is not yet in the public domain but we know that the intention is to use the Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Bill to address exclusivity clauses in zero-hours contracts.

I want to assure the House that our own Northern Ireland review will be conducted in line with better regulation principles in seeking to establish arrangements that provide businesses with the necessary flexibility to compete effectively whilst ensuring that the rights of individual employees are protected.

There is no legal definition of a zero-hours contract in Northern Ireland or Great Britain employment law. It is a legitimate form of employment contract drawn up between the employer and individual, providing both parties freely agree to it. In general terms, a zero-hours contract is an employment contract in which the employer does not guarantee the individual any work and the individual is not obliged to accept any work offered. Such contracts may also be described as non-guaranteed-hours contracts.

In its November 2013 guide, the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development described a zero-hours contract as:

"an agreement between two parties that one may be asked to perform work for another but there is no minimum set contracted hours. The contract will provide what pay the individual will get if he or she does work and will deal with circumstances in which work may be offered and possibly turned down".

There are concerns that individuals who work under zero-hours contracts have no protection under domestic employment law or that they cannot be an employee. This is not a correct assumption. As in any employment relationship, the employment rights that an individual is entitled to will depend on their employment status. Most people on those types of contracts will have certain core employment rights, for example: national minimum wage; protection from unlawful deduction of wages; paid annual leave; entitlement to rest breaks, and protection from discrimination.

There has been a lot of anecdotal commentary about the use of zero-hours contracts, but only limited analysis about the extent of their use in the labour market. The existing research and evidence base on the use of zero-hours contracts clearly demonstrates that there is no precise understanding about the numbers of workers on zero-hours contracts across the United Kingdom.

The Office for National Statistics UK-wide labour force survey for the period October to December 2013 found that 583,000 people categorised themselves as being on a zero-hours contract. That was an increase on the 250,000 reported for the same period in 2012. Most recently, the Office for National Statistics published the results of its survey of 5,000 employers, which indicated that employers in Great Britain are using around 1·4 million employee contracts that do not guarantee a minimum number of hours. We can make some extrapolations from these figures to give a general estimate of the prevalence of zero-hours contracts in Northern Ireland.

The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development also completed earlier research, which suggested that there could be around one million employee contracts of this nature. The preliminary information-gathering exercise conducted by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills indicated that zero-hours contracts can be useful and valuable for employers and individuals in specific circumstances, providing flexibility for both parties. Some regarded zero-hours contracts as a vital element of a modern, flexible and responsive labour market and an important reason why unemployment has been lower and the levels of employment higher than might have been expected during the recent economic downturn.

However, the analysis also identified certain concerns around the use of exclusivity clauses as well as a lack of awareness amongst workers about the consequences of being on such contracts. An analysis of that research and a further literature review conducted by my officials leads to a number of observations.

There is a need for further research to gain a better understanding of the exact number of zero-hours contracts and where they are most prevalent.

Zero-hours contracts are more prevalent in the private sector than in the public sector. Larger companies are more likely to use zero-hours contracts, while workplaces in the hotel and restaurant sector and the health and care sector are more likely to employ staff on zero-hours contracts. Those employed on zero-hours contracts tend to work fewer hours — on average, 21 hours a week — than those who are not, who work 31 hours a week. Those who are employed on zero-hours contracts tend to receive lower gross weekly pay on average, of £236 a week, than those who are not, who receive £482 a week.

I am conscious that most of the current research does not provide a separate analysis for Northern Ireland and, in particular, of how zero-hours contracts may impact on our local economy. I have therefore decided to initiate Northern Ireland-specific research on the use of zero-hours contracts. That further qualitative and quantitative research will be taken forward in parallel with the public consultation.

A survey of 500 Northern Ireland employers is under way using a suite of questions that are based on the employer survey by the Office for National Statistics that I referenced earlier. That will give a better sense of the number of zero-hours contracts in Northern Ireland, and figures should be available later in the summer. My Department is also arranging a number of engagements with expert research organisations that have published papers on the use of zero-hours contracts. As part of the public consultation process, a series of stakeholder events will be held to gather more intelligence on the current use of zero-hours contracts and to identify those elements that may require remedial action for the mutual benefit of employers and employees.

The public consultation will seek views on the following options: banning exclusivity clauses in zero-hours contracts or prohibiting the exclusivity clauses in zero-hours contracts that guarantee less than a given weekly level of gross pay or hours; introducing a right to request guaranteed hours or fixed-term working on the part of a worker on a zero-hours contract following a period of continuous employment; introducing minimum payment in lieu of work, where no work is provided but where there existed an expectation that there would be work; the provision of annualised hours instead of zero-hours contracts in some circumstances; encouraging the production of an employer-led code of practice on the fair use of exclusivity clauses; and continuing to rely on existing common law redress that enables individuals to challenge exclusivity clauses.

To improve the transparency of zero-hours contracts, I am also seeking views on improving the content and accessibility of information, advice and guidance; encouraging a broader, employer-led code of practice that covers the fair use of zero-hours contracts generally; and the value of producing model clauses for zero-hours contracts.

The consultation also includes a number of questions that are aimed specifically at employers and employees. I thought it important not just to target the key stakeholder organisations but to offer individual employees and employers the opportunity to offer their personal perspective on how zero-hours contracts are being used and whether any change is required.

I want to thank the Employment and Learning Committee for its thoughtful consideration of the issues relating to zero-hours contracts to date. My officials recently briefed the Committee on the areas to be covered by the public consultation. The Committee raised important points about the equality and regulatory impact of the proposals, and those have been reflected in the consultation document.

The findings from the research and the public consultation will provide a more informed basis on which to determine whether there is a need to bring legislative proposals to the Assembly or whether the development of user-friendly guidance for employees and employers is a more proportionate response. Following the close of the consultation, I will publish a summary of the responses and seek Executive and Assembly approval of any changes that require legislation.

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his statement and for the inclusion of the recommendations and some comments made by the Committee in the consultation. I also thank his officials for their engagement with the Committee.

Minister, I want to ask you about a couple of points in your statement. You said that zero-hours contracts are used more in the private sector than in the public sector. It has been documented in Committee that 19,600 zero-hours contracts are used in the Northern Ireland health service. Has the Minister had any negotiations or contact with his ministerial colleagues on that issue?

He also referred to the:

"provision of annualised hours instead of zero-hours contracts in some circumstances".

He is doing a piece of work that will look at the problems associated with zero-hours contracts, but will he also look at the associated problems that come into play with annualised-hours contracts?

The Minister mentioned exclusivity clauses a number of times. Does he feel that exclusivity clauses are compatible with zero-hours contracts?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Chair of the Committee for his questions and for his comments on the nature of the engagement with my officials. I reassure him that we very much want to continue that work with the Committee over the coming months. I stress that, as this may well involve legislation, the views, first, of the Executive and, in due course, of the Assembly will be vital in ensuring that we find the right level and the right balance of any regulation, if, indeed, regulation is appropriate for the particular circumstances in Northern Ireland.

On the health service, we know that zero-hours contracts will be used in different aspects of the public sector in Northern Ireland. I am somewhat loath to go into any particular sectors at this stage and make comments because any comments would be largely speculative, but I will be seeking to have engagement with ministerial colleagues around all this. We are very mindful of unintended consequences. There clearly is concern around the use of these contracts, but, equally, they may well provide benefits to a number of different sectors, whether that is in the public or private sector. In seeking to provide a better footing in regulation, we need to be careful that we avoid unintended consequences that disrupt how particular sectors operate, provided that those behaviours are indeed reasonable. So, there will be debates that we will have to have in that regard.

The point about unintended consequences also applies to any move in the direction of annualised hours. There may well be some superficial attractions in that regard; equally, there may well be consequences that we need to factor in. Again, the consultation is so important for us to try to bottom out those issues. In particular, I recognise that the Committee was very keen to have that point included in the consultation.

I regard exclusivity clauses as perhaps being the crux of the issue. Our consultation is somewhat broader than that in Great Britain, but that was the central issue of the discussions in Great Britain, where they are planning to legislate at this stage. It is one that we will need to give proper consideration to. There may well be, in some limited circumstances, due cause as to why an exclusivity clause is merited, but, at face value, that seems to be the area where most concern may well be justified in terms of the comment to date.

Tom Buchanan (DUP, West Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for his statement. Minister, if you choose to go down the road of introducing a code of practice for employers rather than a statutory duty, what teeth would this have and how would it be policed? Also, in your statement, you talked about initiating Northern Ireland-specific research. Will that be done in-house?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for his comments, and I will respond to the two issues that he raised. A code of practice is one option of many that potentially are available to us. Of course, we have the option of putting that on a statutory basis or seeing it evolve on a voluntary basis. Obviously, there is a trade-off to be had in terms of the level of teeth for the enforcement of any code, and that is subject to the basis on which is any code is introduced and copper-fastened into our employment relations system. That will be a discussion where the Committee and the Assembly will very much have a role to play in shaping the future direction of travel.

In terms of the research, we have some figures emerging from Great Britain, and Members will note from the comments that I made that the estimates on the numbers of contracts vary significantly. We have two different estimates: one of 1·4 million and another of almost 600,000. So, there is a huge variance between those two figures. That reflects probably two things. One is a lack of understanding of exactly what a zero-hours contract is. There is also the fact that, because there has been so much more publicity around the issue in recent months, people are now more aware of the situation and are speaking up and saying that they believe that they are on such a contract. We can extrapolate those figures to Northern Ireland, and that tends to give us a figure of between about 20,000 and 30,000 zero-hours contracts locally.

In parallel with this consultation and as well seeking views from individual employers and employees, we are conducting our own survey to try to get an estimate for Northern Ireland, subject to the health warnings that I mentioned. I think that there is sufficient public concern to justify us moving ahead with scoping out the policy, but it is important that, before we take any decisions, we have a clear understanding of their prevalence in Northern Ireland. We will have that by the end of the summer.

Bronwyn McGahan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat. I welcome the statement. Minister, will you accept that zero-hours contracts create a hierarchy of workers within which you have secure and insecure contracts and workers with rights and entitlements and other workers with none?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for her question and for welcoming the statement. It is important to recognise that there is a spectrum of opinion on zero-hours contracts. There is evidence that some people welcome zero-hours contracts, given the flexibility that it provides to them. Equally, others expressed concern around their application and the implications that may arise. Indeed, I have received a lot of correspondence over the past number of months from people in Northern Ireland who have expressed concern around that situation and have given me testimonials of their experiences so far.

It is also worth stressing that people on zero-hours contracts benefit from a large number of employment rights already, so, in that sense, there is not a hierarchy of the protections available, but there is a difference in the nature of the contractual relationship with the employer. As I have highlighted, a number of consequences flow from that, including the ability to plan for the week, the uncertainty over earnings and the implications that that has for access to credit, and the interface with the benefits system. A whole host of consequences flow, particularly for those in low-earning situations around zero-hours contracts. Again, it is worth stressing that, while we do overly associate zero-hours contracts with people who tend to be on the lower income end of the spectrum, they are used in a whole range of different walks of life, and people on quite high earnings can be in that situation for some particular reason. Obviously, we want to focus our attention to ensure that we do all that we can, where appropriate, to protect those workers who find themselves in a vulnerable situation.

Pat Ramsey (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I welcome very strongly the statement to the House and the Department's intention going forward. In his response to Bronwyn, the Minister referred to those on the very low end accessing benefits. Will the Minister assure the House that, if it is shown to be the case during the consultation — I suspect that it will be — that there is huge difficulty with people at the very low end of zero-hours contracts, he will have discussions with the Minister for Social Development to bring through a variety of issues that will resolve those complications for those on low benefits?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for his comments and his welcome for this. I am happy to speak with the Minister for Social Development. Obviously, the evolving situation with universal credit will have an impact. It is perhaps one of the more desirable aspects, or the only desirable aspect, of welfare reform. As we speak, there is uncertainty on the fate of that, given developments in Great Britain and the knock-on consequences for us, notwithstanding our own local difficulties around agreeing welfare reform.

The Member is right to highlight the fact that, in many respects, the core issue where people are feeling vulnerable on zero-hours contracts is around uncertainty of income and the difficulty of how that interacts with the benefits system. To turn that on its head: the Member knows that we want to encourage people to move on from being unemployed or economically inactive. Although, in some ways, a zero-hours contract can offer people a pathway into employment and, hopefully, a progression route into more secure and sustained employment, equally, for some, what is on offer may not be sufficient to encourage them to make the leap from benefits. This may be an opportunity to take people off benefits, but equally it may act as a benefits trap. So, we need to be mindful of both those dynamics, and those need to be bottomed out as part of the consultation.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the Minister for bringing the statement to the House. I welcome the Northern Ireland-specific consultation and research that will be carried out. I hope that that shows devolution in action. Does the Minister agree that public confidence in the use of zero-hours contracts will require regulation that balances flexibility with workers' rights? Is there any timescale for potential legislation to achieve that?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for his comments. He is right to stress that this is all about finding a balance that is appropriate to the particular circumstances of Northern Ireland. While the issue of banning can be considered as part of the consultation, in practical terms we are talking about regulation.

It is important that we note that the world of work is evolving here in Northern Ireland, elsewhere in these islands and around the world, as is the nature of the employer/employee relationship. Different forms of employment contracts are emerging. It is important that we have confidence in those types of contracts if they are to become an established part of our employment landscape over years to come.

I agree that finding the appropriate balance is very much in the interests of the employer and employee because, if we have confidence in the robustness of the systems that we have in place and are satisfied that vulnerable people are protected and that the risk of abuse or misuse is checked, we can move forward with that flexibility with great confidence. That is the objective that we have to hold out for.

On the timescale for legislation, the Member will be aware that Great Britain has, in principle, decided to legislate. Indeed, a Bill announced in the recent Queen's speech may well be through before Parliament rises for the general election, presumably next March or early April. However, that timing may be tight, and that Bill could fall. We in Northern Ireland have the opportunity to legislate, notwithstanding what happens in Great Britain. Early in September, I intend to bring a paper to the Executive on the wider review of employment law. We will look for an employment law Bill, and it is my intention that any particular aspects of this that require legislation will be added to that.

Alastair Ross (DUP, East Antrim)

Of course, the Minister's statement acknowledges the fact that we do not have a lot of information about the situation in Northern Ireland — whether there is huge usage of zero-hours contracts and whether there is, indeed, a problem. So it is, perhaps, premature to be talking about policy options until we have that picture. I am sure that the Minister will agree with me that, for small businesses, which make up the majority of companies in Northern Ireland, zero-hours contracts are hugely important, particularly for those in the catering industry who, perhaps, cannot judge how much their workload will be from week to week. Any move to ban the use of zero-hours contracts, particularly for those small companies, —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

I encourage the Member to come to his question.

Alastair Ross (DUP, East Antrim)

— could put them out of business. I am sure that the Minister will want to make sure that we do not do that.

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I am grateful to the Member for his comments. My personal view, at this stage, is that we are unlikely to move to a situation in which we seek to ban this type of contract. That is for several reasons, the first of which is that we have to recognise that it provides flexibility for some employers and employees.

Secondly, if we go down the road of a ban, people will probably invent something different to get round our efforts to ban it. So there are two practical factors that we have to take into account. That said, that is my personal view at this stage. If the consultation and the Assembly as a whole take a contrary view on the matter, we can have that discussion, and a decision to the contrary can be made.

I also say to the Member that the limited evidence that we have, to date, suggests that larger companies probably use these contracts slightly more than small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), although they feature in a range of businesses. The research to date shows that they tend to be more prevalent in certain sectors than in others.

The key point to stress is that they may well provide SMEs with a lot of business flexibility and may, indeed, be essential in that regard. The key reform that we may need to focus on is the issue of exclusivity. A business may, in reflecting the uncertain nature of business, have the ability to call on staff, but, in turn, those staff would not be penalised by being restricted, if that is the case at present, in seeking other employment to ensure that they have a balanced income going forward.

Fra McCann (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his statement. It contains quite a lot of good stuff and made good reading, but I have become fairly cynical about consultations and people abiding by the contents of their outcome. Can the Minister assure us that, if the vast majority of people consulted come back and ask for zero-hours contracts to be banned, he will move to ensure that that is legislated for?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for his comments. I do not share his cynicism about consultations. Certainly, I have found them hugely valuable. During my term of office, I can reflect on having made changes to initial policy assumptions on the basis of feedback that we received from formal public consultations and wider stakeholder engagement. I have no doubt that that will be the case with this as well.

I have given my personal view on an outright ban, and I am sceptical about it. However, given that any ban would be a matter of legislation in the House, I am very much a servant of the Assembly in that regard, and any Member could put forward that view. I suspect that we will receive a range of views in the consultation, and I have no doubt that a considerable number of people will suggest that we go for an outright ban. However, I seek to caution against that for the reasons that I gave to Mr Ross, namely that there is a danger that we could have unintended consequences. We could disrupt fairly benign practices among many responsible businesses that employ a zero-hours contract approach, which some employees argue that they benefit from. It is important that we take a balanced approach, but all options are very much on the table.

David Hilditch (DUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his statement. Minister, you mentioned that an employer-led code of conduct will be encouraged. Why will it be employer-led? The consultation should be about equality, so is that a good message for other stakeholders?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

It is important to give a good voice to employers in how we address the issue. That proposal has to be seen as part of a spectrum of interventions. We can go for light-touch intervention, whereby employers seek to regulate zero-hours contracts, through to the Assembly seeking to put legislation in place to regulate them or, as Mr McCann suggested, go for an outright ban. There is a spectrum of activities, and the approach you mentioned may be towards the more flexible end of the spectrum. It is for the public consultation and the Assembly to determine if and how we intervene in the matter.

Sammy Douglas (DUP, Belfast East)

I thank the Minister for his statement, which I welcome. His officials have been very helpful at our Committee.

Minister, your statement refers to Northern Ireland being the only part of the United Kingdom to which employment law is devolved. You also mentioned research. Will you outline some of the key findings of that research, not just those relating to the United Kingdom but to Europe. Will you detail the contribution from the employers' representatives and the trade unions that represent the workers?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for his comments. The Member is right to identify that Northern Ireland is the only part of the UK to which employment law is devolved. That may change, depending on whether there is a yes or a no vote in the referendum on Scottish independence in the autumn. That gives us an opportunity to shape things so that they fit our local circumstances. It also challenges us to ensure that what we have in Northern Ireland reads across well compared with what happens elsewhere in these islands, particularly for employers who work across jurisdictions. It is an ongoing challenge for us to find the right balance between those two objectives.

The consultation document will outline the conclusions that are clear. They are based largely on research across the UK. We had the option of going into that to give a Northern Ireland perspective, but, given the sample sizes that were being talked about, we would not have got any reliable relevant data for Northern Ireland, so there was no point in us being part of that research.

We can, however, extrapolate from what was done in Great Britain and get some understanding about the situation in Northern Ireland. Until we do our own research, however, that will be largely speculative, and there may be factors locally that cause us to diverge from a straight extrapolation from the situation in Great Britain. That said, I have no doubt that zero-hours contracts are commonly used in Northern Ireland, and I received feedback from individuals who expressed concerns about the implications of them being used in their own circumstances.

Again, in the wider European context, there are references in the consultation document to our understanding of what applies elsewhere in the European Union. They tend to be used much more frequently in these islands than they are in other parts of the European Union.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Given that it is unlikely to be in the interests of the Northern Ireland economy for us to have radically different employment laws, and given that in GB there has just been a consultation on zero-hours contracts, although the outcome is not yet published, why does the Minister think it necessary, in advance of that outcome, to proceed himself to a consultation? Would it not be better to wait and see what is suggested in the rest of the United Kingdom? That may well be the sensible path to tread, particularly if the essential mischief addressed is that of exclusive terms in those contracts. That apart, do zero-hours contracts not have a part to play in a flexible economy?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for his questions. The statement recognised a case for them being made by employers and some employees. That has to be factored in to taking a balanced approach to what is appropriate on the way forward.

People often accuse this Assembly and devolution of being something that simply replicates what happens in Great Britain, albeit with a delay. Also bearing in mind the considerable public concern that has been voiced in relation to these, we have a duty to act now rather than be seen to be sitting on our hands for a couple of years to see what happens in Great Britain before we act.

There are people in Northern Ireland suffering from the consequences of the misuse of a zero-hours contract. People have corresponded with me to express that in a testimonial of their own situation, so there is an imperative for action. That said, it is an option for my Department and the Assembly, for our own reasons, to take a decision to mirror what happens in Great Britain in terms of the legislation that is about to work its way through Westminster. It is very much our right to do so, but it has to be a decision we take locally that that is the best way forward, but it is certainly one of the options open to us.

Steven Agnew (Green, North Down)

The Minister referred to the employment rights of those on zero-hours contracts and stated that they have the same rights as other workers. How can someone on zero-hours contracts get the right to paid annual leave and, indeed, sick pay? How can we ensure that that is calculated fairly, given that there are no contacted hours on which to base it?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for the question. The point we are making in relation to this is that employment rights go with an employee and different rights go with the worker. They are slightly different concepts. A person on a zero-hours contract is still an employee or worker, depending on the nature of the contractual relationship. Attendant rights go with that status.

That said, due to the situation that someone finds themself in due to a zero-hours contract, there are then consequences of flow in terms of their ability to access the benefits that go from being an employee. Those are things I indicated in my comments today. Those are issues that we want to hear feedback on from employees as part of the consultation exercise so that we have a full and rounded picture on which to take any decisions.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

The Minister acknowledged the importance of the flexibility that zero-hours contracts afford the economy and to many employees who may not wish to have fixed hours. Given the fact that all the issues that were raised in his paper are also issues that were raised in other parts of the United Kingdom by all parties, would he give an assurance that, before he comes to any final conclusion, he will take into consideration the views and decisions that will be made in other parts of the United Kingdom, so that we do not find ourselves in a situation where employment law is radically different in Northern Ireland from that elsewhere? Given that it will take about two years for legislation to come through here, there should be a body of evidence available to him.

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I am happy to give the Member reassurance on two points. This will be an evidence-driven process and that is what we are seeking to do, through the constitution and the Northern Ireland-specific research that we are undertaking.

I can also give him an assurance that we will certainly take into account what is happening in other jurisdictions. Because the powers are devolved, we are not beholden to decisions that are taken elsewhere, but the only responsible thing for us to do is to pay attention to what is happening in other jurisdictions and fully factor that in to any decisions that we take in our situation. He is right to highlight that there is an issue about finding the balance and, indeed, that it may well be in the interests of some employers and employees.

I will also stress that, while our consultation does, to an extent, touch on the same issues that were raised in the consultation in Great Britain, our consultation goes somewhat further in exploring other types of remedies that we may wish to consider. So, we are adopting a somewhat more comprehensive approach than has been the case in Great Britain, and that may give us more flexibility in determining a way forward that suits our circumstances while taking into account the fact that businesses operate across jurisdictional boundaries.

Executive Committee Business

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I beg to move

That the draft Sexual Offences Act 2003 (Notification Requirements) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2014 be approved.

The aim of the draft regulations is to increase public protection against the risk of sexual offending. The Sexual Offences Act 2003 sets out the legislative framework that requires sex offenders in the community to notify personal details to the police. That information is provided to the police to assist in the prevention and investigation of crime and for the protection of the public. Notification requirements are commonly known as "the sex offender register". The draft regulations will introduce a requirement for convicted sex offenders to provide the police with additional personal information.

The 2003 Act imposes notification requirements on offenders convicted of certain sexual offences. Specifically, it requires those offenders to notify certain personal information to the police, such as their name, date of birth, national insurance number and home address. That information must be updated periodically and when any changes have been made to the information originally provided. Failure to comply with the notification requirements is a criminal offence punishable by a maximum penalty of five years' imprisonment. The 2003 Act also provides the power to make regulations prescribing additional information to be notified by the offender. The draft regulations that I am proposing today are being made under that power.

The notification requirements of the 2003 Act also extend to the other two UK jurisdictions. Scotland made changes in 2007 and England and Wales made changes in 2012, and our regulations largely flow from those. As a consequence, the draft regulations before the House today will remove a number of differences between our law and arrangements in the rest of the United Kingdom, and I believe that that is important to enhance the overall effectiveness of the risk-management process.

The draft regulations will require any sex offender who has no fixed abode or regular address to make a notification to the police every week to confirm a place where he can be found. That will vastly improve the current requirement, where such an offender has to notify only on an annual basis or if any change has occurred. The regulations will require an offender to notify the police if he has resided or stayed for 12 hours or more at an address where there is a child under the age of 18. That information will help to ensure that there is a focus on child protection. Offenders will also have to give information to the police in relation to any bank accounts and credit and debit cards held by them, either alone or with another person, for private and business purposes. Passport details and other forms of identity document will also be required.

Finally, the regulations will amend the existing provision in the 2003 Act that requires notification of travel outside the United Kingdom of more than three days. Under the new requirements, offenders will instead have to notify all travel outside the United Kingdom, regardless of length, except for cross-border movement, which will remain as it is with notification for periods of three days or more. That is necessary to allow for those who routinely cross the border — for example, to visit a relative — or those who commute to work there.

The draft regulations are proposed to the Assembly as a further step towards the Department's continuing commitment to increase public protection and to enhance confidence in the justice system's ability to deliver on that aim. The police and probation services support the measures to enable them to manage risk and to reduce offending. I am confident that their efforts to do that will be enhanced when, I trust, the provisions come into force tomorrow, along with measures passed by the House last year in the Criminal Justice Act 2013 that also reinforce notification requirements and improve risk management.

I wish to thank the members of the Justice Committee for their consideration of these proposals. It is with their support that I bring these draft regulations before the House. I also add my thanks to the Examiner of Statutory Rules for his input into the detail of the regulations. I commend the draft regulations to the House.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Let me apologise to the House for being slightly late for the Minister's opening statement.

I will speak briefly on behalf of the Committee for Justice on this particular issue. The Minister has outlined the proposed rule which will introduce new information requirements which offenders subject to notification requirements under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 must provide to police.

As the Members and the Speaker know, the Committee is well aware of the importance of the notification requirements in the management of the risk posed by sex offenders, having received a briefing on the public protection arrangements in Northern Ireland last year. In December 2012, the Committee agreed that it was content with the policy intent of the proposals to strengthen existing notification requirements. Following a delay while the Department waited on the outcome of a judicial review in England and Wales of the requirement to notify banking details to police — the outcome of which was to uphold the requirement — the Department provided the draft rule for consideration by the Committee at its meeting on 28 May this year.

The Committee welcomed the draft rule — noting that it will enhance the ability of the police to keep track of the whereabouts of sex offenders, prevent perceived exploitation of the system and ensure a greater level of consistency in approach across Northern Ireland, England, Wales and Scotland — and agreed to recommend to the Assembly that the rule be approved. The Committee, therefore, is content to support the motion brought forward by the Minister.

I will speak briefly as a Member of the House. Obviously, we welcome any steps that are taken to strengthen the notification that sex offenders must provide to the police. The public protection arrangements in Northern Ireland have been praised by different inspectorates as being very robust, and it is critically important that the public has confidence that those arrangements are protecting our children and young people from sex offenders in Northern Ireland. In England, Members will be more commonly aware of Sarah's law, and there is always a debate about the public's right to know where a sex offender lives within the community and, obviously, the inherent risks that that means for the sex offender by way of their own public protection. However, we believe that the rights of the community, parents and families to know that their children are being protected, and that they know where sex offenders are residing in Northern Ireland, are the paramount critical test that should be met.

Therefore, it is vital that these further enhanced notification requirements are put into proper effect and the public protection arrangements are always assessed as being the most robust possible, because failure to do that will tip the balance towards the offender, if it is not already there. The community should have the right to know where sex offenders are living.

Having said that, I commend these notification requirements, but I make that point to the Minister especially. We must ensure that the system is robust, and I ask him to give proper consideration to the community being empowered with the information, so that they know that their children are safe.

Sean Lynch (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I welcome the new draft regulations announced by the Minister. The new draft additional regulations on offenders convicted of sexual offences are intended to assist the police in the management of the risk of harm to the public posed by those offenders. They are also to ensure that this purpose continues to be achieved as effectively as possible. Public protection must be at the heart of society, and these requirements will form an extra tool for the authorities and will enhance the management of offenders.

To conclude, these new notification requirements will add to the powers of the police to tackle serious sexual crimes and bring the perpetrators to justice. They will also prevent relevant offenders from seeking to exploit gaps in the system.

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

I support the motion and the draft statutory rule on the notification requirements for sex offenders. I reiterate what the Chair said: it is important that the public, in particular children and vulnerable adults, have confidence that they are being protected by way of the public protection arrangements that exist in Northern Ireland. The statutory rule will enhance the public protection arrangements that we already have, in so far as new information will be required to be given by sex offenders to the police. It is important that, if we are to manage the risk posed by sex offenders, we strengthen these arrangements. As the Chair pointed out, the Committee was briefed last year on public protection arrangements in Northern Ireland. We were impressed by the extent of those arrangements. It is important that that is noted by everyone.

It has been noted that, under the new requirements, bank details will need to be given to the police. That, of course, was delayed by the fact that there was a judicial review in Britain in relation to the matter. That has now been cleared, and the court is supportive of details being given to the police.

It is important that there are regulations for cross-border travelling. The three-day notification is, I think, an important one, given the porous nature of the border between here and the Republic.

The requirements are consistent with what is happening in the rest of the UK. It is important that there is consistency, so that people cannot exploit any legal loopholes in public protection arrangements.

I conclude by reiterating our party's support for this important enhancement of public protection measures through the notification requirements to the police by sex offenders.

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I thank Members, plural, for their contributions to the debate. Normally, on occasions such as this, I seem to thank only the Chair, but I welcome the support for the robust public protection arrangements that we have in Northern Ireland that has come from across the Chamber.

The legislative framework that we have forms the basis for the way in which the criminal justice agencies work together to deliver public protection and enhance confidence in the system. There is no doubt that, as was said most recently by Mr Maginness, the public protection arrangements in Northern Ireland work extremely well. For that, we owe a considerable debt of thanks to the police officers and probation officers who have primary responsibility for dealing with that. However, it is important that the Department keeps the arrangements in the legislative framework under review and reacts to appropriate developments to ensure that we enhance that protection where necessary.

We should not forget that the requirements are designed for a purpose: to help stop serious harm happening. That is the key issue in stopping offenders from inflicting misery onto other people. I believe that the regulations will strengthen our hand in the justice system in doing that, in managing risk and in enhancing the protection of people in Northern Ireland. I commend the regulations to the House and trust that Members will support the motion.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved:

That the draft Sexual Offences Act 2003 (Notification Requirements) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2014 be approved.

Committee Business

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Committee for Social Development has agreed that the motion to annul the statutory rule will not now be moved. However, the motion stands as an item of business in today's Order Paper and will need to be disposed of formally.

The following motion stood in the Order Paper:

That the Jobseeker's Allowance (Schemes for Assisting Persons to Obtain Employment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2014 (SR 2014/150) be annulled. — [Mr Maskey (The Chairperson of the Committee for Social Development).]

Motion not moved.

Private Members' Business

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

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

Barry McElduff (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

I beg to move

That this Assembly acknowledges the scandal that occurred at the Bon Secours Sisters' institution in Tuam, County Galway, where almost 800 children died whilst in the care of a religious order and were placed in a mass unmarked grave over a period of five decades; notes the intention of the Dublin Government to take steps to establish the best course of action to investigate the deaths of these children and the appalling manner of their interment; recognises that the abusive practices that occurred at the Bon Secours Sisters' mother and baby care home were not unique and were replicated in similar institutions across the island of Ireland; and calls for all government Departments and their agencies, as well as religious orders, to proactively cooperate with any investigation that takes place to establish the truth behind this scandal.

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. My reason for having such a strong interest in this matter is probably because I have been in regular contact with a number of women and girls, in my constituency of West Tyrone and in other constituencies in the North, who have had terrible experiences in mother-and-baby homes, including in Belfast and Newry. I dedicate my remarks today to the women with whom I am in contact regularly, providing a listening ear to them and trying to offer as much support as I can, as well as calling for appropriate action to be taken to support them in their quest for the truth.

One of the women with whom I am in regular contact was, at the age of 17, admitted to the Marian Vale home in Newry and subsequently gave birth to a son. It took a long time before she was reconnected to her son, because her baby boy was taken from her at birth and adopted without her consent. The lady in question is crying to the world, asking what is to be done about this. It is a very harrowing story: her son was taken away, and she was then reunited with him. Her harrowing story includes references to being made to scrub floors while heavily pregnant.

Another lady with whom I am in regular contact is an adoptee who was given away as a baby. She spent decades trying to trace her birth mother. I have in my possession an adoption consent form that was allegedly signed by the baby's mother. That is very much contested, because it is believed that the form was not signed at all by the baby's mother but that her signature was forged. The mother of the adoptee in this case also gave birth to two other children, but the siblings were kept apart, and the mother was forced to keep her secret for 50 years.

She lost her three children to adoption in the 1960s.

I know those women. They are constituents of mine, and I am in regular contact with them. Sometimes, as someone who is not an expert on the subject, one can get overwhelmed by the harrowing nature of the story that one is told. However, this is not just the film 'Philomena'; this is real life. It happened in the recent past. The first lady whom I referred to was admitted to the Marian Vale home in Newry in January 1980. That young woman from my constituency gave birth to a baby boy and that baby boy was taken from her. Again, her signature was forged on the consent-to-adoption form, just like in the other case that I mentioned.

I attended the Dáil debate on Wednesday 11 June. I did so because I was challenged by one of the women in question to sit beside her during the hearing. It was a very powerful evening. There was a vigil outside, which was attended by many people, including my close colleague Michelle Gildernew MP. Michelle and I travelled to Dublin that evening to be of as much support as we could to the mothers and adoptees in question.

The scandal of Tuam has been described as perhaps too graphic and too horrendous to believe, with children and babies being denied a proper, decent and humane burial. It is a reminder of a darker past. It is known that 796 children were buried between 1925 and 1961 there. That was discovered by the research of historian Catherine Corless. Thankfully, in the recent past, the Irish Government have moved to establish a commission of investigation into all of that. The commission of investigation will obviously need to address the shocking infant mortality rates in the mother and baby homes due to a diet of malnutrition, neglect, starvation, TB and other diseases. Mothers were forced to live secretive and sad lives, disowned by their families, shunned by their communities and all of that. They were screened from people should they go to Mass or a place of worship. The issue is cross-denominational; the story of the Bethany home in Dublin makes that clear.

The commission needs to look at all of those things. It needs to be wide in scope because essentially we are looking at the imprisonment of pregnant women, the taking of babies from mothers against their will resulting in a reservoir of great hurt, the burial of children and babies without individual markers or identification and mothers not knowing where their children's final resting place is. There is the whole business of illegal adoption and trafficking to the USA and other countries of an unknown number of children. Perhaps most shocking of all is the subjecting of children to vaccine trials and, on occasions, when a child died, the child's body being dissected for medical research. I have lots of anecdotal evidence from the women I know about how harrowing it was in those homes.

The commission of investigation that Minister Flanagan and others will preside over cannot be limited. It must not be too narrow. It should include any institution that incarcerated mainly unmarried mothers and their children. I emphasise that, in the South of Ireland, it was not a uniquely Catholic phenomenon. It applied to state homes, state-regulated homes and some Protestant homes. It happened in the North as well, as everybody knows. More and more light is being thrown upon it. The reason why I know a wee bit about it is because of the regular contact that I have on the matter with mothers and adoptees from west Tyrone.

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

I thank the Member for giving way. I totally agree with everything that he has said, but it struck me that there is a strong parallel here between the issue that he outlines and that of the disappeared.

For example, I am thinking of the late Mrs McVeigh whose son Columba was taken away, murdered and buried; his remains never to be returned. Does the Member think that it would be helpful to have a commission of inquiry into the issue of the disappeared as well?

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

I just want to say to Members that this is a specific motion on a specific subject, so I do not want them to stray into another issue that is totally separate; that is even for Members who take interventions. I think that we need to be careful.

Barry McElduff (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

I do not think that that matter specifically is the business of today, but it is relevant. My party leader, Gerry Adams, has pledged on the part of Irish republicans all cooperation on the matter. Certainly, if anybody has any information, they should come forward.

I would like as much bipartisanship and as much consensus here today as possible, in the spirit of the motion, because this happened in the North, in the South and all over Ireland. In the North, it was not a uniquely Catholic phenomenon either. I have in my possession now a list of homes; for example, the Mayflower hostel in Belfast, where the voluntary organisation was the Salvation Army, and Marian Vale in Newry. In the period of the 1970s, it is clear that the state was paying for mothers and babies to be maintained in many of these homes. Pre-1948, they might have been known as workhouses, but this is a matter for state homes, Catholic religious order homes and Protestant religious order homes.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Will the Member bring his remarks to a close?

Barry McElduff (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Do I have an additional minute?

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

No.

Barry McElduff (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

OK. I thank Members for listening. They know what I am saying essentially: let us do everything in our power to establish truth and justice for these mothers and babies and ensure that any investigation, North or South, is not too narrow and covers all types of institutions.

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

I ask myself these questions: what can this debate achieve; how can the outcomes influence what we do and how people are treated in the future; what contribution can I make to break down prejudices, eliminate social inequality, stop moral judgements and achieve a level of healthcare and protection to end, for all time, the inequalities that still exist and affect children here in Ireland and across the world, especially in developing countries in Africa and South America?

The Bon Secours Sisters' institution did not, I suggest, set out to attract the kind of notoriety that is now presented in the media. Indeed, Catherine Corless, the local historian who did the research, has made it clear that she never claimed that there were 800 bodies in a septic tank. However, her research does indicate that, over a 36-year period, 796 children died from disease, tuberculosis, convulsions, measles, whooping cough, influenza, bronchitis and meningitis.

The reality is that it happened and the world was either helpless or stood by, and no one talked or wanted to talk, or they were afraid to talk. Today, the prejudices have gone away, or have they? Do those prejudices and inequalities still exist but are applied to different groups, such as the elderly in some nursing homes, or perhaps to the Travelling community, or indeed to children abused in human trafficking? Is the world still looking on, still afraid to speak out and still not wanting to rock the boat? Indeed, are there still deep-seated prejudices against those who have no voice and no influence? The question is this: what can we learn from the past, from the Bon Secours Sisters' institution in Tuam or, indeed, from other institutions much closer to home?

Do we fully understand or want to speak out about other injustices in the past? I will mention very briefly the great famine, for example, which happened 70 years earlier. I do not think that we have, and — dare I say it? — we still have to find a way to commemorate and to pay our respects to the millions of children who died on this island over the years down through history. Was the great famine not Tuam earlier, when those who could have prevented it stood by idly while stepping up the export of food to record levels and ignored the diseased and destitute dying in the ditch while writing letters to London about their impending peerages? Of course it was, but it was worse; much worse.

You will be relieved to know that I am returning to the motion, which calls for:

"all government Departments and their agencies, as well as religious orders, to proactively cooperate with any investigation that takes place to establish the truth".

behind the Tuam scandal. I believe that we must go much further than that and set aside time to discuss and decide how we commemorate the children, whether they were the victims of the Bon Secours Sisters' institution in Tuam or the other institutions that I mentioned earlier.

Commemorations focused on political and religious events have been very much in our mind in recent years, but, in doing so, we have overlooked the sacrifices and tragedies that have impacted on thousands, and, indeed, millions of people. The Tuam institution, which we are debating today, is but one.

My party and I want two things to emerge from the debate. Yes, I want an investigation or inquiry — call it what you may — but not just for the sake of it. These children were angels who did not even merit the description "legitimate" on their official birth and baptism records. This nation has much to address from our history, including, dare I say it, the recent and tragic deaths of children in what we euphemistically call the Troubles. May God forgive those who were involved. May we all remember them and make amends for those who failed them or were in any way associated with their deaths.

Let this debate be the emergence of a new horizon from which we can look back with contrition on what happened to our children in Tuam and elsewhere. Above all, let us remember them and let us commemorate them because, as was pointed out, they were our ancestors from across the community. It was not exclusively one community or the other.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I am delighted to say a few words in support of the motion and thank the Members who tabled it. We acknowledge that, simply by debating the matter, we raise expectations, not for a few people but for numbers measured in six figures. As far as I can understand it, well over 100,000 people are affected by the issue that we debate today, and they have expectations, which have, heretofore, often been dashed.

Whether dealing with victims as a journalist with BBC Radio and Ulster Television, as a member of the Victims' Commission or as a politician, too often, I have met a victim who feels doubly victimised, first, by the incident, and, secondly, and, to some extent, more shockingly, by what happened after that. Their expectation was that when something went wrong, the state and the agencies of the state would form the wagons into a circle around them, and whatever they needed they would get, whether it was to do with health, social services, education or finances. Often, the exact opposite happens, and it is the case with the people whom we discuss this afternoon.

They also feel that, while there have been a number of inquiries on both sides of the border into these issues, they have been limited and imperfect, including the current historical institutional abuse inquiry, the scope of which denies access to people whose clerical abuse did not take place in institutions.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Member for giving way. In light of what he has just said, I wonder what confidence there is that any further investigations will get to the root of the problem, find where the real problem was and try to bring some comfort to those who are still alive.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member has an added minute.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for that very salient point. It is a question of will, and not just political will. Other very powerful institutions have to open up their books and be transparent about what happened. Mr Elliott's point is well made.

There is a suspicion amongst the victims that inquiries are limited and extended in the hope that time will drag on, the people quite simply will die, and the issue will go away. It will not go away. This morning, Danny Kennedy and I had the pleasure of meeting some survivors and others who had been in homes, including the Bethany Home. Mr Speaker, I will briefly quote some experiences from one survivor of a home who had the courage to tell his story. His name is John Hill. He says:

"I was born in the Church of Ireland Magdalen Home in Leeson Street Dublin ... in 1946 ...

I was fostered out as free labour to farmers from a very young age ...

I was found to be badly malnourished with rickets. I could not walk. I was then sent to a family in Carlow until I was aged 10. I was required to do manual labour from about the age of five or six. I worked before I walked five miles to school each morning ...

We milked cows, collected sheep, fed poultry and generally worked as free child labour on the farm. We were slave labour I suppose. At the same time the family received money for us from public funds. We were isolated from other members of the family. At house parties we were sent off to bed. When the gentry called we were fed separately ...

I was a slave all my young life ...

The Irish state and the church of Ireland were my parents. They let me down, badly. I think they should admit to their sins ...

I want my files that are now held by PACT (formerly the Protestant Adoption Society), and the Rotunda, taken over by the government ... I want to know why my files were transferred to the Nurses Rescue Society and then to PACT. I want answers. I can handle the truth."

If he can handle the truth, we owe it to him to give him access to the truth. That means admissions books for homes; adoption and transfer files; death certificates; burial records for private cemeteries; the minute books from the homes; the records of anatomy schools, including the school of medicine at Queen's; and details of the obligations on those homes to notify the deaths and to whom they were to be notified.

If unionism has questions to answer, it is time for unionism to step up to the plate. If the Ulster Unionist Party has questions to answer, we are at the plate. Tell us what we have to do to put this to rights. We stand ready to do what is right. We are not a religious organisation; we are a political party, and it is our determination today to do what we can to ensure that people like John Hill, who has had the courage to put his personal experience into the public domain, gets access to the truth. He says that he can handle it. The question is not whether victims and survivors can handle it but whether organisations, including political parties and these political institutions, can handle giving access to the truth and admitting when we got it so horribly and horrendously wrong.

Trevor Lunn (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

Mr Speaker, I apologise to you and Mr McElduff for not being here for the start of the debate. Unfortunately, the change of timings caught me out. I support the motion and, frankly, do not know how anybody could do otherwise. I looked up the meaning of "bon secours". It means "good help, assistance or succour". I imagine that "secours" means "succour". The message seems to have been, "Come to us if you need help". That is the image of a caring institution, a place run by a female religious order in tandem with the state, where mothers and babies would be treated with respect and compassion. The truth is clearly different. It was a place where mothers and babies were incarcerated and treated as social outcasts, criminals or sinners, and where the mortality rate amongst the children was far beyond the expected average, or what was found to be the case when compared with the mortality rate amongst children born within marriage. There was a tremendous difference.

The deaths were blamed on disease: measles, meningitis, influenza and malnutrition. Whose fault was the malnutrition? The place was run by the sisters and the poor law authorities. Could they not even feed the children? To compound that, as the children died, mostly before they reached their first birthday, they were put into a mass grave. In the words of Minister Flanagan in the Dáil the other day, they were discarded over several decades. I think that he chose the right word. There does not appear to have been a Christian burial. If it is true that the grave was a disused septic tank — I do not know whether that is true — the horror is complete. It beggars belief that any kind of a society of nuns or a religious institution could behave like that towards innocent children, regardless of the view that society in those days may have taken of their mothers.

This approach appears to have been common across Ireland. I read in 'The Irish Times' at the weekend about Pelletstown, Bessborough, Sean Ross Abbey in Tipperary and Castlepollard, all of which were run by religious orders and all of which had similar experiences. The attitude of the state authorities and those who ran the institutions was deplorable, but it is obvious that the general population either chose or was influenced to turn a blind eye to what happened to these — what they would call — fallen women and, particularly, their offspring.

Every country has its dark secrets. Ireland, North and South, is not unique. From reading the words of Minister Flanagan and the Taoiseach in the recent Dáil discussion, it is clear that there is a recognition that the truth must be established. Likewise, in the North, Sir Anthony Hart's inquiry is under way. I hope that, if there are limitations to that inquiry, those will be removed in the interest of bringing all the truth forward. That is the only way to go with something like this. I hope that all necessary resources and time will be given to bring out the truth of what happened here. We are not immune from all this. Some of these homes did not close until the 1980s, so we are not necessarily dealing with ancient history here. We need to establish the truth for the living and the dead.

This is a sound motion, and I hope that the House will support it. I congratulate Mr McElduff for bringing it.

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful for the opportunity to contribute to this important debate. I thank the sponsors for bringing it forward. I want to clearly indicate my support for this motion.

It is very fair to say that the treatment of mothers and children in homes and institutions throughout Ireland, both North and South, has been nothing short of disgraceful and almost medieval in its cruelty. The stories of children and families affected have gone to the very core and touched the nerve of the entire society. The human feelings, reactions and emotions aroused have clearly impacted on people the length and breadth of this island. The recent story emerging from Tuam has served at least to further highlight what was done either in the name of the state or in the name of religion, which is potentially even more distressing.

I have attempted to give support to the families of the Bethany Home victims and survivors. I had the privilege to attend a memorial service and the unveiling of a new memorial at Mount Jerome cemetery in Dublin in early April. I have sought to raise issues on behalf of the Bethany group with both Taoiseach Enda Kenny and Alan Shatter, laterally Minister of Justice in the Republic.

Following the Tuam exposure, the Government of the Republic of Ireland have indicated their intention to establish an independent commission of inquiry. I welcome that and see it as progress. I hope very much that they will take the opportunity to investigate fully all the issues. There are positive indications that the Bethany Home and others will be included in this inquiry. I hope very much that that will be the case. I believe that we, as an Administration — the Northern Ireland Executive and the Assembly — have a responsibility to fully cooperate with any investigations launched. I go further to say that church records from all churches of all denominations should be made fully available for any such inquiry.

I come from an evangelical Protestant background. It is inescapable to me that there were very clear failures on the part of mainstream and smaller denominations in the Protestant community in respect of these issues.

I believe that it is the Christian duty of all those Churches and denominations that hold records and accounts and which can give insight and shed important light on any matter of the inquiry to give that insight, however difficult and challenging it will be. I believe that, at a Government level, at an institutional level and at a Church level, we must ensure that this issue is fully and comprehensively dealt with. There is a whiff of cover-up. The mark of any decent and civilised society is to ensure that no such cover-up is allowed or continued. If we want to call ourselves a truly civilised society, we must deal with this issue.

Bronwyn McGahan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat. I, too, apologise for being late to the Chamber; I was also caught out by the timings.

I support the motion. This is a real tragedy for those who have lived in and, in some cases, died in mother-and-baby homes. There is no doubt that coverage in the past few weeks will have evoked very painful memories for people. I know, like a lot of Members in this House and members of the wider public, that I was totally appalled by the reports emerging from Tuam. There is no justification for what happened. No one can abdicate their responsibility; the institutions and agencies of the state need to face up to this shameful period.

This discovery in Tuam, Galway, provides a horrific account of absolute neglect and maltreatment by those in charge. These institutions were effectively places of imprisonment for pregnant women. Unfortunately, this was not an isolated case, and our hearts have been much moved by this situation. It is a very difficult subject for many of us to comprehend, never mind stomach. It is clear that the women and babies had no rights. It is useful to look at what the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child states:

"Children shall not be discriminated against and shall have equal access to protection". "All decisions taken which affect children's lives should be taken in the child's best interest". "Children have the right to have their voices heard in all matters concerning them".

It is important that the Government search for a means to help those who have suffered so much for so long. I welcome the fact that the Government have agreed to set up a commission of investigation into all mother and baby homes. This is a hugely sensitive and difficult issue, and it is vital that any inquiry or investigation provide confidence to those communities, particularly for the victims and their families.

I commend the researcher Catherine Corless, who spent weeks going through records in libraries, churches and council offices. She uncovered the fact that, between 1925 and 1961, almost 800 children had died in the St Mary's mother and baby homes run by nuns from those particular orders; but she was unable to find records of where they were buried until last September when she suggested that many of the bodies may have been put in a disused septic tank in a corner of the home's garden, a spot where boys had discovered a pile of children's skeletons in the 1970s.

When speaking about the awful situation in Tuam, I am also mindful of our own inquiry into historical institutional abuse. During consultations, victims and survivors told our junior Ministers that they wanted an opportunity to recount their experiences of the institutions and for those to be heard, believed and acknowledged. The inquiry includes a confidential acknowledgement forum that addresses the issue, which gives an opportunity for victims and survivors to talk about their childhoods in the institutions, how they were treated and what they endured. Victims and survivors have never talked about their experiences. For some, the opportunity to talk, be heard and acknowledged is vital.

Our inquiry is intended to investigate systemic failings in the provision of care in institutions, and it is important to emphasise that all children are vulnerable. Our legislation is rightly focused on those who were in institutions. Those children did not have access to others to speak on their behalf outside the institutions that they were in, so the state must address their needs.

In conclusion, again, it is a real tragedy. I welcome the Government inquiry and urge all Departments, agencies and religious orders to cooperate with any investigation that takes place.

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I too apologise for missing the beginning of the debate; the timings caught me out as well. This is a very difficult debate to take part in. It is a period of our history that has been hidden away, kept secret and largely ignored for far too long. I commend Mr McElduff and the other proposers for bringing the subject to the House today, because one of the real shames in all of this is the fact that people did not feel that they could confront some of the difficult issues that people face every day in modern society. They could not talk about it; people had to hide away, get sent away and get taken away. I think that is as much a shame for all of us as anything else.

There are very few communities — in fact, I would say they are probably none — in the North, never mind across the island, that have not been touched in one way or another by those kinds of issues, but nobody talked about it. Nobody felt that they could talk about it. There was a shame brought upon you if you were unmarried and ended up pregnant. Largely, that shame was on young women. There was not very much discussion about young men who may have played their part in it as well. That is the biggest shame — that people did not feel that they could talk about it or deal with it.

Families did horrendous things to their own — things that I am sure many people regret today. Unfortunately, the state, both in the North and in the South, played its part in all of that as well. Many people look to the Irish proclamation of 1916 for inspiration. It is in most Government buildings in Dublin. That talks about cherishing all of the children of our nation equally. I think we massively failed that standard. Given a lot of the revelations that have come out in the last number of years around how communities, institutions and organisations of the state or otherwise treated children and young people, I think we have a lot of making up to do.

Unfortunately, today we still have a lot of children in this city who are living in poverty. We still have people leaving school with very low educational attainment. I think our job is to ensure that we have the proper investigations into all of the things that happened — I welcome the Irish Government's approach to that — to get the truth out in the open and find some level of justice for the people who were put through some of those things. Our job is also to ensure that we leave a different legacy for people coming forward. We need to ensure that we treat all of the children of the nation — or whatever you want to call it — equally, that people get all of their opportunities, that they do not have to live in poverty and that they get the opportunity to reach their full potential.

I also commend OFMDFM for bringing forward Justice Hart's inquiry that is ongoing at the moment. I reiterate our call and that of other people to ensure that that is not the end of it and ask again that we do not have to wait until that inquiry — which will take another year more than was originally envisaged — completes its work to look at all of the other issues around Magdalene laundries, clerical abuse and other things. For far too long, those things have not been talked about. They have been kept under the carpet, and —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Will the Member bring his remarks to a close?

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Jennifer McCann (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I want to start by thanking my colleagues for bringing this very important motion to the Assembly. As some other Members said, I hope that we will have cross-party support for it.

As some Members pointed out in the debate, there is probably nothing that measures a society more than the way it treats its most vulnerable people. Who could be more vulnerable than babies and young children or mothers who were forced to give up their babies or who were imprisoned in places like mother and baby homes and other institutions? They were treated as outcasts from the rest of society. In fact, they were treated as if they did not mean anything to anybody. The scandal and the shameful way that those women were treated must affect anyone who is tuned into what we hear on the news. The whole of the island of Ireland is engulfed by the shameful way that those people were treated.

As people have said, for over five decades that treatment was meted out by religious orders of all denominations, the state, and wider society, because a lot of people must have known what was going on and simply did not do anything about it. There is an onus on all of us who are part of that society today, whether we are in the Government, the religious orders, the churches or wider society to expose the level of horror and to try, in some way, to make redress to those who are victims and survivors.

Over a period of time, we have witnessed almost a drip-feed of information coming to light through reports such as the Ryan report and the recent exposure of the Tuam scandal. In the North, we have heard some reports coming from the historical institutional abuse inquiry. While that information is coming out and is putting some parts of the jigsaw together for people, it in no way gets to the scale of the problem and the questions that need to be answered: questions such as why so many young infants and children died in those places; why so many were forcibly separated from their mothers and adopted, and how many that happened to. Those children were also trafficked or sold, many to go off and work as cheap labour in other countries. We still do not have an overall picture of just how many children were affected by this or, indeed, how many mothers were affected. We need to talk about that, because, as some Members said, sometimes it is brushed under the carpet. Some of those children were actually used for medical purposes and in experiments.

All the information needs to be gathered, and we need to look over five decades across the island of Ireland, North and South, to get it. We also need answers about how many of the children were sexually abused and the level of state involvement and knowledge when those shameful and horrific practices were going on in those institutions across the island of Ireland. That is the type of information we need to get.

I have spoken to some survivors over a period of years and have met some of them as recently as last week. They told me that they do not have a clear picture or access to the records. We need to do all in our power to ensure that the state records and those of the religious orders or churches are given to these people so that they can try to get some sort of sense about what happened to them when they left the homes, what happened to their mothers and everything else. It is very important that all the information is given.

It is imperative that we have that thorough examination. Some Members mentioned that it was not just mother and baby homes; it was also workhouses and, as I said, other institutions. We need to have the information to hand first so that we can see the level of this.

I know that we already have a sense of the dehumanising practices that mothers were forced to endure in institutions such as the Magdalene laundries, which Members mentioned. Some Members mentioned the ongoing historical institutional abuse inquiry and said that some of the people in the laundries who were over 18 when they were forced to have their baby there are not covered by the inquiry. I am speaking not as a junior Minister but as an MLA, and, hopefully, something can be done to ensure that those women who were over 18 are included in some way so that what happened to them can also be looked at.

Barry McElduff (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

I thank the Member for giving way. Will she further consider a North/South, all-island character to any investigation? The historical institutional abuse inquiry in the North and the proposed commission of investigation in the South should cooperate specifically on the subject of cross-border movements, over many decades, of children, pregnant girls and women and on the forced illegal and international adoption or boarding-out arrangements of the majority of children? That is to ensure that any investigation, North or South or both, be as wide as possible.

Jennifer McCann (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I totally agree with the Member. I think that that has to happen. In some of the cases that I have been discussing with some of the victims and survivors, we cannot call it anything else than this: the children were trafficked from North to South and South to North. We need to have an all-island approach to get the detail of what happened.

I have to say that —

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Will the Member give way?

Jennifer McCann (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I will finish this and give way if I have time.

When I was speaking to some of the people who came to see me about the Magdalene laundries, one thing stuck in my head as probably being one of the most cruel parts about them that I remember. They told me that there was an older lady working alongside a younger person in one of the laundries. They were working day by day together in that laundry, and the younger person and the older woman built up a relationship over several years. When the older woman died, one of the nuns called the young girl aside and said, "By the way, that was your mother".

For me, that shows the level of cruelty and viciousness that those people had to experience. We all have talked to survivors and victims, and I think that we probably all have our own sense of it. I am a mother myself, and I just cannot imagine what it would have been like for a mother to be forced to give over her baby just after the baby is born and to be treated in such a way. We need to help uncover this horror and this barbaric treatment, and we need to help people get the information that they need.

In conclusion, I want to go through some of the main points made by Members. Barry McElduff, the proposer of the motion, outlined, as I said, the human cost of some of the harrowing stories. He also gave a list of all the homes that we have now discovered were in practice in the North. That is by no means a definitive list, so we need to investigate how many more there were.

John Dallat also illustrated this treatment received by people. Mike Nesbitt read out a personal testimony on how people want the records to be made available. Trevor Lunn pointed out that some of the homes did not close until the 1980s. That is a very relevant point, because sometimes we think that this happened back then, but it was happening right up until the recent past.

Danny Kennedy mentioned the records from all Churches and denominations and said that those should be given over to families and people who want them made available. Bronwyn McGahan mentioned the women being imprisoned and their human rights being discarded, and she said that the children in those homes had no voices.

We really need to be their voices and speak for them if we can.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Will the Member bring her remarks to a close?

Jennifer McCann (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Colum Eastwood finished very aptly when he talked about the proclamation and the cherishing of all our children equally. Hopefully, today's debate will get cross-party support. We need to ensure that those records are opened up and that the information is there for people. We need to help the people —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member's time is gone.

Jennifer McCann (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

— in their campaign who do not have the voice to do that.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved:

That this Assembly acknowledges the scandal that occurred at the Bon Secours Sisters' institution in Tuam, County Galway, where almost 800 children died whilst in the care of a religious order and were placed in a mass unmarked grave over a period of five decades; notes the intention of the Dublin Government to take steps to establish the best course of action to investigate the deaths of these children and the appalling manner of their interment; recognises that the abusive practices that occurred at the Bon Secours Sisters' mother and baby care home were not unique and were replicated in similar institutions across the island of Ireland; and calls for all government Departments and their agencies, as well as religious orders, to proactively cooperate with any investigation that takes place to establish the truth behind this scandal.

The sitting was suspended at 1.51 pm.

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

Oral Answers to Questions

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

We will start with listed questions. Question 8 has been withdrawn.

Bronwyn McGahan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

1. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister what impact the revised indicators for good relations will have on the racial equality strategy. (AQO 6398/11-15)

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

4. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister how the racial equality strategy will complement Together: Building a United Community. (AQO 6401/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

With your permission, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, I will answer questions 1 and 4 together. I am pleased that our consultation document for the racial equality strategy is now available on the OFMDFM website. The consultation will last until 10 October 2014, and details of consultation events will be listed soon. As our strategy document, 'Together: Building a United Community', states, the racial equality strategy:

"is not intended to replace or subsume our work on racial equality and

good race relations. Rather it will complement and provide the co-ordinated

framework for aspects of its delivery."

We consider it very important to retain a specific focus on racial equality and good relations. Therefore, we propose to retain the existing racial equality panel to implement the strategy. Where appropriate, the work of the panel will feed into Together: Building a United Community's community tensions subgroup and the ministerial panel or into the structures of Delivering Social Change.

Our review of the good relations indicators highlighted four that were specifically relevant to outcomes for minority ethnic people. It was clear that they would not capture the breadth of information needed for the new racial equality strategy. As a result, a separate set of racial equality indicators has been developed by the good relations advisory group. Those will be consulted on alongside the strategy.

Bronwyn McGahan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat. I thank the Minister for his response. Minister, do you agree that racial intimidation needs to be acknowledged and addressed urgently?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

All instances of racial tension need to be addressed, particularly when they involve intimidation or hate crime or, worse still, attacks on those who can be profiled because of their race.

It is a matter that has caused considerable concern to the PSNI, which has reported an increased number of racial incidents and racial crimes over the last year. I trust that the work arising from the strategy will be acted on, because a strategy without action points attached to it, and funding for those action points, will not help. It is necessary that we start taking action on the work that arises from the strategy.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I understand that the strategy was signed off at the beginning of June. What was the reason for that delay?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

My understanding is that about eight changes to the strategy were required by the deputy First Minister (DFM) side. None at all were required by us, and we were quite content with the changes required by DFM. One of those changes was that included in the strategy would be a foreword from the deputy First Minister and me. That became available to us on Friday and was signed off immediately.

George Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

What steps can the First Minister take to alleviate race relations issues while the development of the racial equality strategy continues?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

As I said earlier, a strategy is an important part of that. My understanding is that, while I have heard a number of people talking about waiting for years, it came into OFMDFM only at the beginning of June. The real requirement is to change people's mindset to ensure that we have a welcoming environment in Northern Ireland for people from all racial backgrounds. That becomes more difficult when people feel that they are not getting jobs and services, and others are. For those of us who speak to employers, the truth of it is that many of them could not operate their businesses without those from ethnic minorities coming in. They provide colour to our community as a whole. They should be welcomed by everybody in Northern Ireland. I hope that the racial equality strategy will help to get that message out and that we can have the action points attached to it, which will encourage people to get involved with their neighbours no matter what background they come from.

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

Does the First Minister accept that it is a duty incumbent on all who hold high office, including his own office and those of other Ministers, to condemn forthrightly and unambiguously, without ifs or buts, any form of racism? I refer in particular to the incident in east Belfast, where a house was allocated to a Nigerian, and the First Minister, in that situation, tended to defend or explain away the reasons for the obstruction by local residents.

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

I did no such thing. Indeed, if one was to listen to the interview in full, one would see that 90% of it condemned any type of racial activity or intimidation. Given that I have two minutes rather than 15 seconds to answer, let me break the issue down.

From a social housing point of view, people can argue for the idea of local houses for local people. I do not believe that that can ever be the only determining factor as to why somebody should get a house. It has been in the past, and points could be allocated for that, but if you have a difficulty with housing allocations or the allocation scheme, the answer is to go to the Housing Executive or your local elected representatives, whether on the council, in the Assembly or at Westminster, and deal with those matters through them. The answer is not to stand outside a house that has been allocated to someone because, no matter what their background might be, that will be seen as intimidation, in my view. If people with a different racial profile are involved, it will certainly be seen by them as being racially motivated.

Local people said that it was never their intention to do it. Some indicated that they never knew whom the house had been allocated to, but, whether or not it had been allocated to someone from a different racial profile, it was still intimidation. Any of us would know how we would feel if we turned up to a house that had been allocated to us, and there were protesters outside saying, "Local houses for local people".

Those are the issues involved. I condemn any form of racial attack. I oppose any form of racial intimidation. It is essential that our communities are open and welcoming to all, no matter what religious, political or ethnic background they may have.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his answers so far and particularly welcome the fact that the racial equality strategy is now out and is to be consulted on. Will the First Minister put on some dates or timings as to when he expects legislation to come through on the back of it and will that include refugees and asylum seekers?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

It seems that, although we were criticised for taking our time in bringing the strategy out, the deputy First Minister and I have, in fact, moved faster than the Civil Service. While the document is on the website, the pages that allow people to answer the questions in the document are not yet up. The consultation process lasts until October, which takes us over the summer holidays, and that is why a longer period is being allowed.

As soon as we have that and evaluate the responses, I not only trust that will there be legislation but trust that we will be able to move forward to real action points. That is not to say that we are not taking action at present on a number of issues — we spend over £1 million every year with one particular fund — but are going ahead with other projects as well. Funding is available for projects, and as for fitting it into the strategy, I hope that that will happen after October.

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

The Macpherson report, which is referenced in the racial equality strategy, states that a racist incident means any incident with a race dimension and covers crimes and non-crimes. Will the Minister now accept that he was wrong to say, when he was interviewed, that the racist intimidation against Michael Abiona was not racist?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

It seems that, even when I go into detail, the Member does not understand the difference between a racial incident and a racial crime. A racial incident is a racial incident because an individual feels that they have been attacked because of their racial background. That makes it a racial incident, no matter what the intention of the individuals concerned was. It becomes a racial crime if there was an intention on the part of the individuals and they did carry out an attack or intimidation.

Fra McCann (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

2. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for an update on the gender equality strategy. (AQO 6399/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

Mr Speaker, with —. Mr Principal Deputy Speaker — maybe a few months too early — with your permission, I will ask junior Minister Jonathan Bell to answer the question.

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

In January this year, we took a decision to develop a new gender equality strategy based on the review that was carried out in 2013. Since then, meetings have taken place with a range of key stakeholders and the gender advisory panel to update and include it in the development of a new gender equality strategy. A meeting of the gender advisory panel has been scheduled for early July. The current strategy will remain in place until the new strategy is developed and becomes operational. A new strategy will require full public consultation and Executive approval.

Fra McCann (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh míle maith agat. I thank the junior Minister for his answer thus far. Can he give me an update as to how transgender issues will be taken forward under any new gender equality strategy, given that that was identified as a gap in the current strategy document?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

Transgender is recognised by OFMDFM as a gender issue. Transgender people, whose gender identity conflicts with their biological sex, face lifelong challenges such as victimisation, including physical and psychological abuse and increased risk of suicide. Transgender issues were identified as a gap, as the Member correctly points out, in the current strategy document, and representatives of the transgender organisation joined the panel following the review of the gender equality strategy in 2013.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

Will the junior Minister outline the extent of the Department's engagement with stakeholders while outlining the gender strategy?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

Junior Minister McCann, the office and our staff have had a number of meetings, and we continue to meet groups, organisations and individuals who have an interest in and a view to share on gender equality. So far, junior Minister McCann and I, alongside our colleagues, have met a number of organisations, the most recent being the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland. We have held joint meetings with Man Matters, YouthAction, the Men's Action Network and the Men's Health Forum. We have also met the Northern Ireland Rural Women's Network and the Northern Ireland Council for Ethnic Minorities in addition to the Northern Ireland Women's European Platform.

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

The Minister outlined the necessity for a public consultation exercise but omitted to give us a definitive timescale for the strategy to be published. Perhaps he could give us some further indication as to that timescale and highlight any other stumbling blocks to the release of the strategy.

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

Work on the development of a new strategy has started. It is based on the work that has been undertaken to date and indeed on the current review. As all policies have, the new strategy will require full public consultation and Executive approval. We will keep the gender advisory panel fully engaged on the progress as we make it.

It is envisaged that a new gender equality strategy, allowing time for the key stages required to develop a new strategy, including the 12-week public consultation process, could be published and launched in 2014. The current gender equality strategy will remain in place until that new strategy has been developed and is operational.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

The progress of the review seems to be rather slow. The review happened in 2013, and there have been meetings for six months. Will the Minister advise us whether there are any underlying difficulties or differences of opinion that contribute to that slowness?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

There are no differences of opinion that I can think of at all. The strategy, its aims and objectives, remain relevant and valid. The action plan through which the strategy is to be delivered needs, I think, to link more directly to the strategy's aims and objectives. Actions should be linked to measurable or numerical targets against which the action plan and progress can be established. The targets that we have taken the time to look at should look at where the results and achievements can be made, not just the outputs, that is, the actions that are taken. The monitoring and reporting of performance need to be regular and formalised. The role and membership of the gender advisory panel continues and should be reviewed. Among the issues outlined in answer to an earlier question, the transgender issue was identified as a gap in the current strategy document, and that has been addressed.

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

3. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister how Delivering Social Change signature projects will be evaluated. (AQO 6400/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

In October 2012, we announced a £26 million funding package to allow for the development and delivery of six key cross-cutting Delivering Social Change signature programmes, aimed at issues such as improving literacy and numeracy, family support and pathways to employment for young people. Responsibility for the delivery of each of the six programmes lies with the appropriate lead Department. Departments have already established, in common with the other signature programmes, how they and their delivery partners will evaluate the programmes to satisfy their own requirements.

OFMDFM has worked collaboratively with Departments in the development of the programmes, including developing new approaches to their evaluation. Departments have agreed to include an outcomes-based approach model into their evaluations. That approach differentiates between what we wish to achieve at a strategic level and what each individual project does achieve towards its overarching goal. In addition, we are looking at a number of common metrics that can be applied across all programmes that are being delivered. Those include the well-established international comparators around well-being and also, given local concern around resilience and assertiveness, a pilot of two alternative metrics: locus of control and self-efficacy.

We are using those signature programmes as test beds, not only as new ways of addressing societal challenges but as new and more pragmatic ways of evaluating programme-level impacts. Draft evaluation plans have been received, and our officials are working with their counterparts in the lead Departments to ensure a robust evaluation of the Delivering Social Change signature programmes.

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a fhreagra go dtí seo. I thank the Minister for his answer up to now, and I congratulate him for getting through that mouthful. I suppose that the question that people are asking is, "When will we see the impact of Delivering Social Change on the ground?" I know that you talked about draft plans that have now been received.

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

The answer is that it is already being felt on the ground. If we are not to use any of the more scientific approaches that I have outlined — keeping my tongue firmly embedded between my teeth while I say some of it — the truth is that most of us evaluate it by asking the people who are carrying out the programme, "How is it going?"; and, on that basis, all the programmes are going very well. With regard to the teachers whom we have put in place, we are already hearing from the schools that, in the mid-term testing, those pupils are doing better than their comparators from previous years. Again, when it comes to the hubs and other elements, we are getting very positive messages back.

We will wait for the full evaluation to be carried out by the mechanisms that officials have set in place. It will be those evaluations that will determine whether the programmes should be mainstreamed in the future.

Brenda Hale (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the First Minister for his very detailed answers, and I welcome the news that the food banks are good. What plans are there for mainstreaming?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

If the reports coming back continue in the same positive vein as those that we have received thus far from each of the signature projects — although one is operating a little slower than we would like, and slower than the others — it is very likely that each of the Departments will want to continue with those projects. There will obviously be a bidding war when it comes to setting the budget to ensure that they have resources to meet that requirement. However, I am very hopeful that the steps that we have taken — steps that were, it has to be said, initially resisted by some Departments, because officials like to have good ideas themselves rather than them coming from the centre — will mean that those will be successful programmes. I hope that many, if not all of them, will be mainstreamed.

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

I thank the First Minister for his answers. He specifically made reference to literacy and numeracy issues among children. The First Minister will be aware that illiteracy and innumeracy are still running at over 20%. Is he satisfied that sufficient funding is available to address that as one of the signature projects? If it continues to be a problem, what is the long-term plan to address the terrible injustice of children leaving school not able to read or write?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

I agree entirely with the Member about the scale and impact of the issue. When the deputy First Minister and I brought forward proposals for the signature projects, it was very much on a pilot basis, so that we could test whether improvements come from this kind of project. Early indicators are good. However, if improvements do come, it will be the full flow of the programme that will make the big difference. I do not see us making massive changes in the number of people just through this one programme, but it will certainly signal that this is a way to do it that brings a beneficial outcome.

Barry McElduff (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

5. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for an update on the sexual orientation strategy. (AQO 6402/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, with your permission, I will ask junior Minister Jonathan Bell to answer the question.

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

We have regularly stated our commitment to producing a sexual orientation strategy — in the Assembly, in the text of the good relations strategy and in Together: Building a United Community. To achieve that commitment, we asked officials to commence a public consultation process. The first phase of that process ended on 6 June. Responses received during the 12-week consultation period are being analysed, and the results will be used to inform the content of a draft sexual orientation strategy. The strategy will then be referred to the Executive for final agreement and publication in draft format. A second phase of public consultation will then take place.

Barry McElduff (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

I thank the junior Minister for his answer. Will he outline the timeline for taking forward the various stages of consultation that he mentioned?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for his question. The process is being held over two phases. Phase 1 commenced with the establishment of a project group. The project group held its first meeting in February 2014. The results of phase 1 will help to inform the development of the sexual orientation strategy. Phase 2 will involve the development of the draft strategy, including full public consultation on the final agreed draft. Within that, we have membership of the project group, including our own officials, stakeholders, academia, trade union representatives and our research branch officials from OFMDFM. They are all participating in the project group. It is chaired within our equality and human rights directorate and the group has held a number of meetings. The next one will take place following the analysis of the phase 1 consultation exercise. The consultation was launched by a press advertisement on 14 March 2014 and closed after the 12-week consultation process on 6 June. The consultation document has been made available in hard copy and online, and our research branch has developed an online survey questionnaire to accompany the document. This was used as the primary basis for consultation.

The public were given the opportunity to complete the questionnaire in a number of ways, including on the website. The questionnaire was developed in conjunction with the Department's research branch and the project group. It was also available to be completed in hard copy or by telephone link through a dedicated telephone line for that subject. Members of the public were also able to submit responses in writing via post or email. When we go to phase 2, we will look at the results of phase 1, the analysis of which will inform the development of the strategy.

Michael Copeland (UUP, Belfast East)

I thank the junior Minister. To the best of my recollection, he told the House that this would be published in 2012. Does he accept my cynicism that this could be indicative of a difficulty in agreeing the strategy?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

It is always interesting to comment on another Member's cynicism. Any answer that I give is the best one that I can give at any particular time. We have worked very hard on the strategy; phase 1 has shown the work that we have done. I commend our officials and the groups that have met us and discussed matters and cooperated with us. We have gone through some very complex matters. Phase 1 is now through; you will see phase 2 with the analysis and the development of the strategy. The project group that has been put in place to manage and oversee the consultation process will continue to have oversight of the development of the strategy and its action plan. The draft strategy has to be agreed and, when it is developed, it will be referred to the Executive for final agreement and publication in draft format with a view to implementing a further public consultation process.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Why were so many of the questions lacking in objectivity and presented in a wholly loaded fashion?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

It is an area of sensitivity and complexity. The questions were developed in conjunction with the sectors and groups that were talking to us, informing us and consulting us, and they reflected their needs. The questions that were asked give us a basis to move towards phase 2, see where we can have agreement and bring it forward to the Executive for agreement following full public consultation.

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

6. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for an update on the Bright Start childcare scheme. (AQO 6403/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

With your permission, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, I will ask junior Minister Bell to answer this question.

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for her question. The Bright Start school-age childcare grant scheme was developed to take forward three of the Bright Start key first actions. The scheme was launched on 27 March 2014 and it has, to date, attracted 76 full applications and 60 expressions of interest. The childcare partnerships are assessing applications and assessment will finish on 25 June. The first letters of offer should be issued before September. The Bright Start school-age childcare grant scheme aims to create or sustain up to 7,000 school-age childcare places by assisting current and prospective childcare providers. These envisaged childcare places will begin to address the need for additional school-age childcare services. The grant scheme will assist childcare settings serving disadvantaged and rural communities and settings that are based on the school estate.

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

Will the Minister confirm whether the Bright Start scheme will be made available to private childcare minders?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

From the very beginning, we said that the scheme was never intended to displace existing provision. We have published what we are doing. We sought to find gaps where they exist. We had to follow where the evidence was leading us. Although I would not say that it was overly well provided for, we knew that the nought-to-three age group in particular was better provided for than the school-age group, where research indicates that, in some cases, there could be up to a one-in-19 chance of getting a place.

We never sought to displace private sector provision. I have visited and taken part in a number of private sector projects and standards awards. The reason why we targeted Bright Start was this: families, and young mothers in particular, were telling us was that there was a gap in school-age provision and a need for flexibility and affordability. We took the social-enterprise model because we could target it to meet particular needs where they were identified. I am quite happy to meet, as I have been doing, private sector providers and share with them the project, what we are doing and the reasons why we are doing it.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

That brings us to the end of the period for listed questions. We now move on to 15 minutes of topical questions. Question 1 has been withdrawn.

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

2. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister whether the possibility of an interim report from the historical institutional abuse inquiry has been raised with the chair of the inquiry, given the call for such a report as a compassionate response to victims and survivors, and, further to that, whether OFMDFM has any firm views about an inquiry for victims of non-institutional clerical abuse. (AQT 1302/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

We, of course, gave a remit to a learned judge, who is completely independent in the inquiry that he is carrying out. He has spoken with my colleagues. I think that he spoke to the junior Ministers fairly recently. He does not feel that it would be helpful to have an interim report. I think that one can understand that all his motivation is to get to the finish line in the quickest possible time without prejudicing in any way the depth of the inquiry that he carries out. We have to take his advice on that, considering that he is carrying it out independently.

The clerical abuse issue is to be considered after we receive a report from the judge on this inquiry. Of course, there are always areas, not only those that relate to clerical abuse but others such as the Magdalene laundries, in which there is clearly, if you like, unfinished business and a level of trauma for those involved. We are very sensitive and sympathetic to all those involved. However, we need to carry out our own research to determine whether government intervention on those issues is appropriate. We will consider them more fully after the historical institutional abuse report is received.

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

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the First Minister for his answer. Does he not agree that the needs of the victims of non-institutional clerical abuse also need to be recognised and that they, too, deserve the matter to be looked into fully?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

Of course they need support. There is support available through the various government agencies for those who were involved in the horrendous activities of which the Member, the House and I are aware. As to whether there should be an inquiry into them, I must say that there is a slightly higher threshold to be met regarding the number of instances that there were and whether an inquiry of the size that would be necessary is merited or whether there should simply be individual investigations in the various institutions involved. We will look at those kinds of issues when we see the depth of the historical institutional abuse report.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

4. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister to confirm whether the First Minister and his party are up for serious and intense negotiations to implement the Haass proposals in the coming days. (AQT 1304/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

I am sure that the Member did not intend to indicate that his party is not up for negotiations on the outstanding issues, but, by saying that it is simply about the implementation of the Haass proposals, that is precisely what he is saying.

I can assure you that this party is serious about dealing with the three outstanding issues of parades, flags and identity and, of course, the past. Those are important issues that have to be resolved, whether we resolve them this month, next month or in a year's time, but they will not be resolved on the basis of people digging in their heels on one set of outcomes that suits them. It has to be a set of outcomes that suits all the parties in the House, otherwise it is simply not going to happen. So, I hope that all the parties that engage in these discussions will do so on the basis of getting outcomes that can get widespread support across the parties and the community.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as uchta a fhreagra. I thank the Minister for his answer. Does he agree that these issues need to be dealt with and resolved urgently?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

I agree totally that there is an urgency with these matters. It would have been great if the five parties involved in the discussions last year had been able to reach agreement. That was not possible. I am not sure that raking over the embers gets us very much further. There has been progress, in my view, since then.

The party leaders' meetings have disaggregated the Haass proposals and started to look at the sets of proposals — I think that there were literally hundreds of individual agreements contained in the overall Haass document — and the elements of the document on which there was not overall agreement. I think that we have reduced the number on which there was not agreement at the end of last year. However, some issues still have not been resolved.

We have attempted to change our method of operating somewhat, in that we are bringing in a secretariat so that, rather than us sitting around the table and trying to take minutes and resolve issues at the same time, we can have suggestions put to us by officials. I hope that all the parties, when they meet later on this week, will agree that that is the right way forward. We produced a paper, which was circulated to all the party leaders. I have not heard anybody indicating that they are unhappy with that way forward. Hopefully, all the parties will sit down seriously and expeditiously to deal with those matters.

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

5. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for an update on the present position of welfare reform in Northern Ireland and whether there have been any further discussions with the UK Government on the subject. (AQT 1305/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

The Executive last considered the matter on the basis of two proposals. The first was that the Executive would meet to deal with the issue on their own, so that they would not lose their focus on other Executive business. The second was that, rather than us bandying about figures and the potential problems that may arise either by accepting welfare reform on the revised basis put forward by the Minister for Social Development or otherwise — there are at least two sets of figures out there on what the likely cost is, as well as all sorts of questions about whether we could undertake the payments through computerisation, what the delay might be and what the cost of that would be — we task some consultant to look at those specific issues so that we have a common reference point, so nobody can argue, "No, it's not £400 million. It's something else".

I think that it is essential that we get to that stage. When we have that, everybody in the Executive will have all the information that they need to take the decision, knowing what the outcome will be if they go for the revised package on welfare reform, and, equally, they will be aware of what the consequences will be if they do not.

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

I thank the First Minister for his answer. The First Minister spoke of consequences. Will he outline whether he has any expectations of any shift in position on the issue of the Westminster Government, and, if not, what the financial consequences for areas such as health and education would be?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

I apologise to the Member. He had a second leg to his first question about the United Kingdom Government's position. I have spoken on a number of occasions to the Secretary of State on the issue. She has made it absolutely clear to me that, as far as DWP is concerned, it has finished its negotiations on the issue. There will be no further concession from Her Majesty's Government on the matter. That was stressed again when the deputy First Minister and I met Nick Clegg in the fringes of the Guernsey British-Irish summit meeting, making it very clear that anything else that we do on welfare reform, we need to do ourselves. So, if the package is to improve, it will improve because we decide to do something in addition to what is in the proposal set by Nelson McCausland.

We are happy to talk about those issues and how the programme can be put out in a form that makes it more acceptable, because, do not forget, within the package that Nelson McCausland brought forward, there was a multi-million pound contingency fund being set up to deal with the hardship cases. So, we can work on that to be more specific about how it would be used. I was at the report stage of the East Belfast Independent Advice Centre last Friday. It has indicated the vast increase in its work because of debt and welfare issues. There may well be a requirement for us, as part of that package, to do something to resource advice centres better to deal with those issues. I know from my advice centre that the number of people coming in with heavy envelopes and bin bags full of bills, some of them unopened, indicates that there are very real difficulties with debt and welfare that we need to get addressed.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

6. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister, building on the very dignified Apprentice Boys’ parade down Donegall Street at Easter, whether the First Minister agrees that Friday night’s Tour of the North parade in Mr Humphrey’s North Belfast constituency was dignified and disciplined, wishes to congratulate the Orange Institution for that, and further agrees that it has set the tone for a very peaceful parading season this year. (AQT 1306/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

I join the Member in congratulating all those who have been involved in expressing their culture in a way that is not offensive to anyone else and which has gone off lawfully and peacefully, and that is the process that I want to see continue. I hope that it is a harbinger of things to come. This Province is set back when there is violence and disorder on the streets. The central issue has to be about tolerance and respect — tolerance of the parades and respect by those on parades. Those have to be the central features of a good summer for us.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the First Minister for his answer. The First Minister, like me, has been at meetings recently with the Parades Commission. Given that the former Parades Commission rewarded violence with its determination last year for the 12 July evening at Ardoyne for the Ligoniel lodges returning, does the First Minister agree with me that the current and new commission is in danger of being seen by the public in Northern Ireland as being intimidated by the threat of violence from dissident republicans?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

The issue is not new. There is a feeling in the loyalist and unionist community that those who wag the largest stick are the ones who get heard. That is not the way for us to go in the Government or in any institutions of Government. As soon as you start rewarding people for violence or the threat of violence, you encourage more violence and more threats and maybe not just from those who have issued them in the first place. If you teach people the message that violence works, they will say, "Well, the only way that we are going to get our parade down the road is to have greater violence."

That is not a message that any politician wants to endorse.

Let us be very clear: the Parades Commission should be taking decisions, and there should always be a presumption in favour of a parade. In my view, attempts must always be made to resolve outstanding issues, but, if they are to be resolved, they must be resolved on the basis that nobody thinks that the default position is automatically going to be that there is going to be no parade.

Michaela Boyle (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

7. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for an assurance of the Executive’s ongoing commitment to the A5 dual carriageway project. (AQT 1307/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

This is an Executive decision, and the Executive agreed to the project. We have had several setbacks, the first of which was when the Government of the Republic of Ireland decided that, because of their economic difficulties, they could not keep the commitment that they had given and, instead, reduced that commitment. We went forward with the reduced commitment, but the courts knocked us back on the basis that some environmental work was required. None of that reduces our commitment to the scheme. Obviously, we await from the Minister for Regional Development information that leads us to expect another application. I hope that it will be submitted in a form that can withstand any challenge in the courts. The next small task will be for the Finance Ministers to find us the appropriate amount to carry out the scheme.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Questions 2 and 12 have been withdrawn.

Jo-Anne Dobson (UUP, Upper Bann)

1. asked the Minister of Education why the North Eastern Education and Library Board sought the legal advice, which led to the consultation on the draft policy on elective home education. (AQO 6412/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I understand that in light of legal advice received by the North Eastern Education and Library Board, following litigation in which a home education issue arose, the education and library board reviewed its arrangements for ensuring that the parents of children and young people who are electively home educated provide an efficient and suitable full-time education for their children.

Jo-Anne Dobson (UUP, Upper Bann)

I thank the Minister for his answer, but he cannot be oblivious to the very real concern among home educators. Therefore, does he agree that proposing massive changes based on an interpretation of the law, which is not shared by the educational authorities in England, Wales or Scotland, is potentially damaging? Will he confirm to the House whether he has sought legal advice on the issue?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

This is not England, Wales or Scotland. We have our own education legislation, including on home education. A consultation is going on. While I will keep an open mind on the consultation and the guidance that will be issued by the education and library boards, I have a concern that the majority of Members who have spoken on the matter have spoken about the needs of the adult and not of the child.

Can everyone in the Chamber reassure themselves? In what way do you reassure yourself that a child who is being home educated is being properly home educated? How do you reassure yourself of that? I ask that because it appears to me that everyone who has spoken on the matter thus far is completely reassured — they have no hesitation whatsoever in endorsing the current guidance and saying, "Yes, children are being properly home educated. We can reassure ourselves, 100%, that, in every case, the children are being properly home educated." However, as I said in my initial answer, it has already gone as far as litigation against one of the boards because that was not the case. Therefore, we have a legal duty to make sure that we are doing it properly. I think that we also have a moral duty to make sure that we are doing it properly.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

It is disappointing that the Education Minister has cast a slur on parents who make the choice to educate their children at home. I think that he should seriously reflect on what he has said in the House today. Will the Minister confirm that representatives from his Department attended meetings of the strategic regional group on this issue?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Mr Storey continues to have selective hearing as well as selective education policies. I have not cast a slur on parents who are involved in home education.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

You did.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

What I am saying is — [Interruption.] What I am saying is — [Interruption.] What I am saying is —

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

It sounded like it.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Order.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Mr Deputy Speaker, if people who wish to be a Minister but cannot make it to the role of Minister continue to interrupt me, it is very hard to do Question Time. The Member appears desperately to require a Dispatch Box in front of him. Perhaps the First Minister, who has just left, will treat him to a Dispatch Box some day.

What I said was that we have a duty of care to the children involved, and we do have a duty of care to those children. In my original answer, I pointed out that this has reached litigation stage and entered the realms of law. The law has said that the guidance requires to be reviewed. The education and library boards have taken it on board and reviewed it. I do not have in front of me a diary of every meeting that my officials have ever attended, nor do I wish to have such a diary, but I regret the fact that the boards did not present me with the consultation documents before issuing. However, I believe that the consultation should continue. I have committed to the House and to others that, at the end of it, I will sign off the guidance if I am satisfied that it is in compliance with the legislation.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a fhreagraí. Will the Minister tell us what arrangements are in place to monitor the education provided to children at home?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The arrangements are broadly as follows. The boards have advised that they do not undertake inspections of home education. While the Education and Training Inspectorate provides inspection services for a number of organisations, it does not undertake inspections of home education provision. The boards have various arrangements in place to monitor the education provided to children who are educated at home. This includes annual visits to a child's home, reviewing samples of a child's work and providing advice to parents on how to support their child's education.

I understand that the boards' draft home education guidance document does not include any reference to the inspection process but proposes that each board will undertake monitoring that will focus on a child's welfare; ensure that a child has access to education suited to his or her age, ability and aptitude; and provide advice to parents on educational resources. It would be very difficult for anybody in the House to disagree with those three points: the boards will monitor a child's welfare; it will be ensured that a child has access to education suitable to his or her age; and advice will be provided to parents on educational resources. Are Members opposite and to my left — physically rather than politically — suggesting that that should not be the case? I do not see any difficulties in any of those three matters. However, I have said, and I repeat, that we will assure that whatever guidance is issued is in compliance with the law.

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

Thanks to the Minister for his answers thus far. Given that there has been no public advertising of the consultation process for elective home education, how would parents who are considering such education for their children know about the consultation?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I do not have the full details of how the programme was advertised, but it is fair to say that the consultation process has garnered sufficient publicity. I have answered questions on it in the House on several occasions. I have quite a healthy-sized mailbag relating to home education, and Members are asking questions about it, so it is out there. People are aware of it, and responses are being made to the consultation. If there are ways to improve knowledge of the consultation, I will advise the boards of those. However, I emphasise that this is a board consultation. The education and library boards have taken on the consultation, and, at this stage, my only role will be to ensure that I am satisfied that the final guidance is in compliance with the legislation.

Michaela Boyle (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

3. asked the Minister of Education for an update on the work of the Anti-bullying Forum. (AQO 6414/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The Anti-bullying Forum comprises departmental and education and library board officials along with representatives of around 20 voluntary sector organisations. Each has a particular interest or expertise in the issue, and the Anti-bullying Forum collectively aims to tackle bullying in our schools and communities.

Over the last year, the Anti-bullying Forum worked with 7,000 pupils in 37 schools to raise awareness and provide anti-bullying training. It has engaged with over 1,000 young people in 26 non-school settings, providing workshops and presentations to youth groups, after-school clubs and community organisations. The forum has held 10 seminars aimed at enhancing anti-bullying policies and practices in schools, attracting 283 school leaders from across all education and library boards and school types. Six hundred and forty schools and 77 organisations took part in the Anti-Bullying Forum's anti-bullying week 2013, and over 1,700 children submitted entries for the art and creative writing competition held as part of that.

At my request, the forum also undertook a review of current anti-bullying legislation, existing guidance to schools, current policies and practices in schools and specialist support services available. I intend to consider all the priority work areas identified by the review, and my officials are in discussion with the forum to agree a joint work programme for 2014 and beyond. However, it is my intention to bring anti-bullying legislation to the House during this mandate.

Michaela Boyle (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for his response. Will he further clarify what issues the forum reviewed and identified as priorities to be taken forward? Is there a timeline for that work? Go raibh maith agat.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The review identified these four priority issues: wide variations in the quality of current school anti-bullying policies; inconsistent recording of incidents of bullying; a need for additional resources to address particularly complex issues such as cyberbullying; and the need for research to identify the true scale and nature of the problem. As I said, I intend to consider all these areas to see what actions can be taken forward in the short and long term. My officials are in discussion with the forum to agree a joint work programme for the 2014-15 year and beyond, which will include bringing legislation to the House to tighten up our anti-bullying legislation.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

The Minister indicated that he intends to introduce some legislation in future. Can he give us an assurance that the legislation will be framed in such a way as to ensure that the maintained sector is held equally as accountable as the controlled sector would be, given that there seems to be an ability for schools in the maintained sector to take an much looser attitude towards bullying than would be tolerated in some of the controlled sector schools.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

There is absolutely no evidence to support that statement whatsoever. Regardless of which sector or school bad practice takes place in, it should not be taking place. The current legislation stipulates that every school has to have an anti-bullying policy. It is the quality and rigour of those anti-bullying policies that have been called into question, by research carried out by the Anti-Bullying Forum and by anecdotal evidence that has come to hand, which is one reason why I believe we have to move towards bringing tighter legislation to the House to protect young people from the impacts of bullying.

There is no evidence to support Mr Wilson's statement, and I can assure him that any legislation that I bring forward will cover all sectors in education, as would be the case under equality legislation for any legislation that is brought to this House.

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Research tells us that tackling bullying effectively must be done in a cross-departmental way. Can the Minister tell the House what kind of work he has done with other Departments and Ministers around cyberbullying in particular?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I have worked with the Health Minister in the suicide prevention group, and one of the areas covered in that is cyberbullying. It has addressed a wide spectrum of areas, including how we tackle the ever-growing and ever-changing phenomenon of cyberbullying. I am involved in that, as are a significant number of other Ministers, and we will continue to engage at that level.

Bullying takes many forms and shapes. It can be brought about by individuals for many different reasons. We often find that those carrying out the bullying are also facing significant challenges, either in their home life, their family life or in other aspects of their life. We have to ensure that schools have proper policies in place to help prevent and tackle bullying when it occurs.

I have to say that there are also many fine examples of schools being proactive in challenging the perception of bullying, challenging bullying behaviour and helping to eradicate bullying from the school. So, while in recent days there have perhaps been examples of poor practice, there are certainly many examples of good practice as well.

Michael Copeland (UUP, Belfast East)

Thank you for your answers so far, Minister. Minister, the party to which you belong introduced an anti-bullying private Member's Bill in Dáil Éireann, although, strangely, you have not yet sought to bring in similar standards here. Do you accept that failure to act on the issue, for whatever reason, is having particularly negative consequences for tackling homophobic bullying across Northern Ireland?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I welcome the Member's interest in Dáil Éireann and my party's all-Ireland policies. One of the reasons why I am introducing legislation, as I have already indicated to my colleague Michaela Boyle, is that part of the remit of the review that the anti-bullying forum carried out was to look at the possibility of introducing legislation, and it appears to me that that is the way forward. I have taken steps to work towards the introduction of legislation. However, I want to make sure that we have the proper legislation in place — legislation that is effective against all forms of bullying, including homophobic bullying. We do not need legislation now: homophobic bullying is wrong and should be tackled by schools, and they have the powers to do so [Interruption.] Principal Deputy Speaker, you have competition for your job: Mr Campbell is now yearning to be behind that desk as well as behind the Dispatch Box [Interruption.] It is really a pity for him.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

4. asked the Minister of Education for an update on the current position of Crumlin Integrated College. (AQO 6415/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Crumlin Integrated College entered the formal intervention process on 1 February 2010. The most recent follow-up inspection at the school was in March 2014, and the inspectorate reported that the quality of education provided by the school is now good. I welcome the fact that the school has continued to show steady improvement since the original inspection in January 2010. The Department is now considering whether the school should exit the formal intervention process. It is imperative that the decision taken is fully considered and is in the best interests of the young people attending the school.

Future post-primary education in Crumlin is the responsibility in the first instance of the North Eastern Board, working closely with other stakeholders. On 11 June the board announced that it supported the concept of shared post-primary education in the town. A business case for shared education will be prepared by the board and other potential stakeholders. It will establish whether such provision can be viable and sustainable and meet the educational needs of pupils into the future. I understand that a development proposal or proposals will be presented to the board before the end of October this year. The date for a possible change would be September 2016. Should a new management model be proposed, it would represent a significant change to the character of the school. The board as a managing authority would therefore have to publish a development proposal that would come to me for consideration.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his answer. I congratulate the school on how well it has done and thank the North Eastern Education and Library Board and the working party for all the work that they are doing. We have a very positive future for the school, but there is still one thing that I need the Minister to work on: how do we get positive statements from the boards and the Department to stop parents bleeding away to other schools? We have a very positive future, but it still leaves doubt in people's minds. We have to get rid of the doubt and make people believe that the school will exist. Will he and his Department take that on board and find a way to be positive about the future?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I am not on record as saying anything negative about the school. There have been inspection reports, and they have published their findings. The latest inspection report said that the education at the school was good. My Department has to make some decisions about whether it should exit the formal intervention process. My officials will make that decision as quickly as possible. There are positive developments, and I very much welcome the fact that, through the North Eastern Education and Library Board and other stakeholders, there is advanced planning on schooling in the Crumlin area. However, I am limited in what I can say about any possible development proposals that are published as, after all, I will be the final decision-maker on them.

Paula Bradley (DUP, Belfast North)

5. asked the Minister of Education whether he plans to review the criteria used to determine preschool nursery places. (AQO 6416/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

All preschool providers are responsible for setting their admissions criteria in accordance with guidance supplied by the Department of Education. However, the Pre-School Education in Schools (Admissions Criteria) Regulations 1999 require providers to give priority to children from socially disadvantaged circumstances. Research has shown that children from socially disadvantaged circumstances tend to experience more difficulty at school than other children, so they are given priority in the preschool admissions process as part of my wider efforts to tackle educational underachievement. Social disadvantage is currently defined as parents in receipt of certain benefits. Approximately 24% of children in preschool settings across the North meet those criteria. However, in many settings that percentage is much lower.

The review of preschool admissions recommended that the definition of socially disadvantaged circumstances be examined with a view to mirroring the relevant economic elements of the definition of free school meals entitlement. That area will be reviewed, and I will want to ensure that there remains a process that is fair and transparent, to ensure that the children who are most at risk of educational underachievement are encouraged and supported from the outset.

Paula Bradley (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Minister for his answer. Does he agree that the current criteria, which, as he said, give preference to those who are socially disadvantaged, discriminates against many working families who are themselves socially disadvantaged and are on the breadline? Can you give some justification for that?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The current criteria for social disadvantage are limited to income support, income-based jobseeker's allowance or an award of income support that has been converted into employment and support allowance and the level of benefit has remained the same. I would like to broaden that to low-income families who are working, but the issue of welfare reform and where and how it will be settled has caused a delay in broadening it. I certainly want to ensure that children who face educational barriers such as social disadvantage are included in the criteria, whether their parents are low-income workers or low-income on benefits. There is work to be done there, and we await the outcome of the discussions on welfare reform and how that matter is settled.

Christopher Hazzard (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his answers thus far. Given that a large number of Members in the House seem willfully blind to the legacy of poverty and, indeed, social deprivation, will the Minister reiterate why it is important that preschool admission places acknowledge the effect of same?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The research tells us that that is the case. Indeed, the Member is a member of the Public Accounts Committee, which recently published a report that indicated a need to target and tackle social disadvantage as it has a detrimental impact on young children from those backgrounds. That is one of the reasons why I made the changes to the common funding formula.

It is an internationally recognised concept, as well. A number of times, I have reflected in the House on my educational visits to Canada and how they are identifying the matter and targeting need where it exists. It is a reality in education and something that we have to take on board. If we are serious about ensuring that every young person has an opportunity in life, we have to make those interventions as early as possible.

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

In the first part of his answer, the Minister referred to free school meals. I think that he brought forward an initiative to increase the opportunity for people to apply, on the basis of an income eligibility of some £16,000. Do you not believe that that would be a better measure for preschool play? That would recognise the fact that many people are on incomes that are much less than £16,000 and that working families are particularly under pressure with affordable childcare.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I would not argue against the Member on the point, and the fact that we brought in that criterion for free school meals entitlement is a recognition that many families who are working are on low incomes and are facing the challenges that come with that. We have hesitated to review the social disadvantage entry criteria in preschool settings, because welfare reform has always been looming. That has delayed our implementation of any review in that regard. However, if there is continued delay in the implementation of welfare reform — I have to say that I am not arguing against that — I may well move forward and introduce different criteria for preschool settings as well.

Steven Agnew (Green, North Down)

6. asked the Minister of Education what assessment has been made of the demand for integrated education in areas where no integrated schools currently exist. (AQO 6417/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The Department funds the Council for Integrated Education to encourage and promote integrated education. The council received £646,000 of public money last year to fulfil this role. The funding available to it this year is £665,000. NICIE’s mission is to lead, promote and facilitate the development and growth of integrated education through a range of approaches, including innovation, influence and working with others.

The council has appointed a panel of associates to assist in fulfilling its role, particularly in relation to area planning. I have commissioned the education and library boards, working in conjunction with the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools and engaging with other sectors, to coordinate strategic planning in each board area to shape the future provision of education in that area. Given the respective roles of the organisations involved, it is clear that planning for new integrated education provision is dependent on collaboration between NICIE, the boards and the CCMS. It is the responsibility of the proposer of new integrated education provision to make the case for change on the basis of robust evidence that demonstrates demand and is based on the creation of viable and sustainable provision in line with the sustainable schools policy.

Steven Agnew (Green, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his answer and declare an interest as a director of NICIE. In this process, what work is being done in recognising the lack of Catholic maintained schools that have transferred in the past and on how we can meet the demand for integrated education in areas where the Catholic sector is dominant?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

In my tenure, I have never been responsible for bringing development proposals for schools in the controlled sector or any other sector to convert to the integrated sector, and I do not believe that previous Education Ministers have been responsible for that either. This is a matter for local communities, and it is a matter for the parents whose children attend the schools in those local communities to make the decisions that the Member has outlined. It is not within my legislative remit to demand that any individual school or any sector makes development proposals to convert their school to the integrated sector. This has to be community-led, parent-led and school-led. We fund the integrated sector with a not insignificant amount of money, it has to be said, to facilitate and assist in that process.

Ian McCrea (DUP, Mid Ulster)

The Minister told us what is not within his remit, but it is within his remit to ensure that all integrated schools are compliant with the legislation that establishes integrated schools. Can he outline what he is doing to deal with that problem?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

There has been an interesting shift in positions on integrated education over the last number of weeks, particularly from the Member's party. Last week, we had them voting against a motion in the Assembly that promoted and supported integrated education and called on me as Minister to live up to my statutory duties. Members voted against that, and now we have a Member calling on me to carry out an audit of all of the integrated schools to see whether they are fully living up to the legislation. My role would be much better served by me living up to my statutory obligation and the comments made by others in the Chamber in relation to integrated education, rather than what the Member seeks me to do, which is to go around and start going through the books of every integrated school.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

Has the Minister discussed the implications of the Treacy judgement with the integrated sector, and when will he make a statement to the House on this?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

On the implications of the Treacy judgement I still await a final briefing from the Department's legal advisers, so I would much prefer to wait for a full legal briefing from them on the matter. The House has had an opportunity to discuss the matter: only last week, there was a motion before the Assembly that had been tabled by the Alliance Party. That is the debate that I referred to, when some Members who had previously been quite vocal in support of integrated education voted against the facilitation and promotion of integrated education. I am more than happy to make a statement to the House if need be, and I still have a question mark in my head on whether there is a need for me to make a statement to the House on the most recent Treacy judgement. I will take that into consideration after I have had discussions with the legal advisers.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

Is the Minister aware that the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister is proposing to remove reference to integrated education as an indicator in the good relations indicators held by OFMDFM? Has he considered the alternative suggestions put forward on the inclusion of integrated education?

If so, will he support its inclusion in good relations indicators, given his statutory duty to facilitate and promote integrated education?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I have been aware of it through a number of interventions from the Member, possibly in the House but certainly in the media. If he wishes to provide me with more details, I will certainly take a more careful and considered examination of the matter and respond in due course.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

7. asked the Minister of Education when he will authorise commencement of the new capital school build projects in East Antrim. (AQO 6418/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

My capital announcement to the Assembly on 22 January 2013 included two new primary school projects for east Antrim to be advanced in planning; namely, Corran Integrated Primary School in Larne and a new school to meet the needs of children in Islandmagee and the surrounding area. An economic appraisal for the Corran Integrated Primary School project is currently being prepared. The allocation of capital budget to progress design and construction will not be made until the economic appraisal has been approved. The Islandmagee project has been withdrawn pending a development proposal and consultation process by the North Eastern Education and Library Board.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

I regret that the time is up for listed questions. We now move on to topical questions.

Ian Milne (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

1. asked the Minister of Education to comment on the recent Institute of Education report, which concluded that selective schooling systems increase inequality. (AQT 1311/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

It is yet another useful piece of research, carried out beyond these shores it has to be said, that perhaps gives an opportunity for political parties and educators in this society to tackle the question of academic selection and its negative impact on both education and our society.

Ian Milne (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Mo bhuíochas don Aire go dtí seo. I thank the Minister for his answer. Does he also agree that the report provides further evidence, if further evidence were needed, that academic selection prevents the creation of a broad social mix in schools, which international experience shows benefits all learners?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Chomhalta as an cheist. The report does exactly what the Member said: it provides further information in that regard. However, much of that information has been available from the early 1970s and into the 1980s. Whatever the motivations were for introducing academic selection six decades ago, those motivations no longer stack up. If people were serious that academic selection was a tool to increase social mobility, all the recent evidence from here, from Britain and internationally tells us that it does not promote social mobility. In fact, it restricts it.

Ofsted said recently — I know that some Members held Ofsted in high regard during a debate in the Chamber last week on inspection — that academic selection stuffs grammar schools full of middle-class kids. Some may argue that that should be the case, but international evidence shows that, where you have a social mix and an ability mix in a school, the outcomes for all the children are better. So, if we are serious about social mobility, if we are serious about the educational well-being of all our young people, and if we are serious about having an economy that has the skills to move forward, and to continue to move forward, through the 21st century, there is only one answer: you have to end academic selection.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Mr Tom Buchanan is not in his place.

Mickey Brady (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

3. asked the Minister of Education for an indication of the total value of the projects he will announce tomorrow in his statement on his capital plans. (AQT 1313/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Chomhalta as an cheist. I hope to be in a position tomorrow to announce projects somewhere in the region of £180 million moving forward. I could be in a position to read out a lengthy list of schools that require being built, and there are many, many schools in our society that require rebuilding. However, on coming into office, I made the conscious decision that I would announce a number of schools on each occasion. I am confident that those schools can be moved forward reasonably quickly. Even with that, as I have reported to the House before, there can be delays.

Mickey Brady (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Minister for his answer. Regarding previous capital announcements, can the Minister give any indication of how many projects are now on-site? Go raibh maith agat.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

In my statement to the House in June 2012, I announced 18 newbuild school projects. One of those is complete, seven are on-site, and a further eight are expected to move on-site before the end of the current financial year. The remaining two schemes are at an earlier stage of development and are not expected to be on-site until the 2015-16 financial year.

In January 2013, I announced a further programme of 22 newbuilds. At the time, I announced that these projects were in a very early stage of planning. They continue to move through the economic appraisal stage and the various design stages that are set forth.

Michael McGimpsey (UUP, Belfast South)

4. asked the Minister of Education whether he will bring forward proposals and recommendations to make the South Eastern Education and Library Board membership accountable and democratic, as opposed to continuing with the current appointees. (AQT 1314/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

While I accept the principle of the board being accountable and democratic, the reason why the delay has been so lengthy in appointing elected representatives to the South Eastern Education and Library Board has been the elusive topic of the Education and Skills Authority (ESA). At least two Programmes for Government had commitments to putting ESA in place during the time frame for those mandates of the Executive.

It is now clear to everyone that ESA is not going to happen. I intend to bring forward a paper to the Executive, hopefully in the next number of weeks, that will set out the pathway ahead, which will see the South Eastern Education and Library Board, along with other boards, being collapsed into one board, with elected representatives in place.

Michael McGimpsey (UUP, Belfast South)

I thank the Minister for that answer. Does he agree that the fact that he is now into a judicial review situation with parents whose children go to Newtownbreda High School is an indication that he has been poorly served by this board, given its lack of connection and understanding of the views of the local community?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Given the fact that that judicial review is sitting today and tomorrow, the least said is easiest mended.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

5. asked the Minister of Education how many pupils who currently attend Ballee Community High School have been placed in other schools for September, when the school will have closed, and how many have yet to be placed. (AQT 1315/11-15)