Northern Ireland Assembly, 16 September 2014

457 contributions from 62 members. The official report.

Assembly Business

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Mr Storey has sought leave to present a public petition in accordance with Standing Order 22. The Member will have up to three minutes to speak.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

Thank you, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker. I present the petition, which asks the Minister of Education and the Northern Ireland education and library boards to ensure that the education and library boards' policy on home education accurately reflects their legal status, duties and powers, and respects the parents' duty to provide an education. It is signed by 3,360 persons.

I present the petition regarding the issue of elective home education, which has caused much concern among many families who have chosen to exercise their legal right to educate their children other than at school. In recent months, the education and library boards have published a consultation exercise in relation to changes to the elective home education policies. I am at a loss to understand why the issue has emerged at this time, when it appears that the current practice within the boards has been, and is, working satisfactorily. I and many of my fellow MLAs have been lobbied about this issue. It has generated great concern among parents, many of whom have made a conscientious and positive decision to home educate their children. That is their legal right, and they now feel that they are being targeted for being responsible parents.

It is not clear from the consultation document why the consultation was initiated at this time, who initiated the process and if legal advice was sought on whether the revised proposals were consistent with article 45(1) of the Education and Libraries (Northern Ireland) Order 1986. Clearly, when the issue was raised with the Minister of Education in the Chamber on 2 June, he was keen to distance himself from the consultation exercise. He was also keen to stress that this exercise was undertaken independently of his Department.

My party and I support parental choice in all aspects of education. That is in keeping with article 44 of the 1986 order, which has been a fundamental tenet of our education system for many years. Our schooling system has been developed in accordance with that principle. Education, however, is not the same as schooling, and some parents wish to exercise their legal right to educate their children other than at school.

Many of them do so for religious reasons, and we, as a party, support and uphold that right.

Many of these parents, who are part of a wider international education support network, have no desire to be part of the current state schooling system. Indeed, there is no requirement in law for them to do so. I understand that it is for parents to become involved in schooling systems or to advise, or to seek permission from, state institutions such as the boards to undertake that activity. There is also no requirement for parents to seek permission to withdraw their children from schooling to educate them at home.

As I present the petition, I trust that the Education Minister will take seriously the issues raised, and I look forward to his response.

Mr Storey moved forward and laid the petition on the Table.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Thank you, Mr Storey. I will forward the petition to the Minister of Education and send a copy to the Committee.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

The motion will be treated as a business motion. Therefore, there will be no debate.

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

I beg to move

That this Assembly nominates Ms Megan Fearon as a full member, and Mr Fearghal McKinney as an alternative member on the UK delegation to the Committee of the Regions; and notes that the Northern Ireland Local Government Association has nominated Councillor Trevor Cummings as a full member, and Alderman Arnold Hatch as an alternative member.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Before I proceed to the Question, I advise Members that the motion requires cross-community support.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved (with cross-community support):

That this Assembly nominates Ms Megan Fearon as a full member, and Mr Fearghal McKinney as an alternative member on the UK delegation to the Committee of the Regions; and notes that the Northern Ireland Local Government Association has nominated Councillor Trevor Cummings as a full member, and Alderman Arnold Hatch as an alternative member.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

As there are Ayes from all sides of the House and no dissenting voices, I am satisfied that cross-community support has been demonstrated.

Ministerial Statement

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

With your permission, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, I wish to make a statement regarding a meeting under the auspices of the intergovernmental agreement (IGA) on cooperation on criminal justice matters, which was held in Dublin on Friday 27 June. I represented the Executive at the meeting, which was hosted by Frances Fitzgerald TD, the new Minister for Justice and Equality, who was attending her first meeting under the auspices of the IGA. It was the eighth formal ministerial meeting under the intergovernmental agreement since the devolution of justice in April 2010. As I previously said in statements to the House, I am committed to keeping the Assembly informed of meetings held under the auspices of the agreement on the same basis as North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC) meetings.

The meeting provided us both with an opportunity to review final progress against the 2013-14 joint work programme as well as to formally agree a joint work programme for 2014-15, which will run through to the summer of 2015. It was gratifying to note the positive progress that has been made.

A hate crime-related seminar held in Sligo during May, which was hosted by an Garda Síochána and attended by the PSNI, was the result of the outworking of the criminal justice and social diversity project advisory group.

The sharing of information and training on programmes to challenge offending behaviour between the respective probation services, including exploration of opportunities for collaboration in interventions for domestic violence and violent offenders, are further instances of progress.

The PSNI has made strides on the development of a potential information-sharing agreement with an Garda Síochána covering domestic and child abuse, and this work will be further developed during 2014-15 in the registered offenders project advisory group.

Those are just some of the examples that demonstrate the excellent ongoing cooperation between criminal justice agencies across both jurisdictions on this island.

I have attached to the printed version of the statement a copy of the joint work programme for 2014-15 agreed during the meeting. The current joint work programme seeks to build on the 2013-14 programme and on the progress made last year. I intend to give a brief progress report in December following our next IGA meeting, which is scheduled to coincide with the fifth annual seminar on public protection issues on the island of Ireland. In the interim, progress against the actions will be monitored by the working group of officials.

Six project advisory groups provide the mechanism by which work is taken forward. They focus on the areas of public protection, registered offenders, youth justice, forensic science, support for victims of crime, and social diversity. Each of the project advisory groups has continued to promote and support cooperation across the broad spectrum of criminal justice agencies on both sides of the border.

Examples of cross-border cooperation that will be taken forward include work on the further development of a forensic partnership strategy and action plan covering the forensic science services of Northern Ireland, Ireland and Scotland; delivery of seminars by the police services on this island to marginalised groups of people, building on the seminars with the Roma communities in the South; ongoing discussion on the European victims directive in the support for victims project advisory group following the joint presentation by senior DOJ and Department of Justice and Equality (DJE) officials during the meeting; and the further development of staff exchanges and information sharing between the juvenile detention facilities in Northern Ireland and Ireland.

There continues to be excellent cooperation at an operational level between the PSNI and an Garda Síochána on the management of sex offenders. I am pleased to report that there remains good progress in supporting and promoting North/South cooperation to make the whole island a safer and more prosperous place for everyone.

As the House will be aware, the IGA is not purposely intended to provide for discussion of cross-border security issues. However, I used the opportunity on 27 June to briefly discuss with Frances Fitzgerald some general wider cross-border security-related issues. Those included the work being done in the areas of tackling organised crime, fuel and tobacco fraud, human trafficking and rural crime. I also relayed my appreciation to an Garda Síochána in supporting the work to tackle ongoing security challenges.

Finally, the intergovernmental agreement provides an extremely helpful framework for supporting North/South cooperation on criminal justice matters, but we are seeing the true benefits of cooperation when individuals in the criminal justice agencies have developed good working relationships with their respective counterparts. It is that real type of practical cooperation that the new Irish Justice Minister, Frances Fitzgerald, and I are both committed to further enhancing.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Minister for bringing the statement to the House today. Can he give any indication of whether the National Crime Agency (NCA) was raised in his discussions at this meeting in the context of tackling organised crime, fuel and tobacco fraud and human trafficking? What are the implications of the continued non-implementation of the full powers that it should have to tackle those very serious issues? Is there any indication that organised crime gangs in the Republic of Ireland are seeking to exploit the weaknesses that now exist in this jurisdiction, particularly because of the inability to cover civil assets that criminal gangs are obviously living off?

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I thank the Chair for his question. Certainly, the non-operational status of the NCA in the devolved sphere was mentioned in the meeting. However, his wider questions go a bit beyond the meeting's remit. I can confirm that I have meetings arranged over the next few days with most of, if not all, the other Executive parties, and I certainly hope that they will enable us to make progress on the basis of the document that I circulated last week. It is absolutely clear that we are losing out because of not having the NCA to deal with major issues such as environmental crime and civil recovery. However, I cannot give any specific information at my level on the question of cross-border activities that exploit the opportunities that are presented by the absence of civil recovery powers at this stage in Northern Ireland.

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as an ráiteas sin. I thank the Minister for the statement, which I welcome. In particular, I welcome the ongoing work on cooperation and harmonisation. However, does the Minister intend to look some time in the future at legal highs? The recent legislation that was passed in the Oireachtas allows for legal highs to be dealt with more speedily and to be identified and prohibited as quickly as possible.

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I thank the Deputy Chair for his question. The issue of new psychoactive substances, which are more simply called legal highs, is of concern on both sides of the border. I have certainly discussed the approach taken in the Republic, but the reality is that the issue is not currently devolved here and we are bound by changes that are happening at Westminster. We are expecting the review from the Home Office sometime this autumn, and I hope that that will enable us to make progress in Northern Ireland, because it is clear that we need to see the most robust action taken against those who are seeking to promote legal highs in a way that is seriously damaging to public health.

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

I welcome the Minister's statement. The Minister said in the penultimate paragraph:

"As this House will be aware, the IGA is not purposefully intended to provide for discussion of cross-border security issues."

The Minister then went on to identify some of those issues:

"tackling organised crime, fuel and tobacco fraud, human trafficking and rural crime".

Is that apposite because is not the reality that, when one talks about cross-border security issues, is one not talking really about dealing with paramilitary activities, subversion and activities of that nature rather than crime per se? I would have thought that fuel laundering, for example, would be a totally appropriate subject for both Ministers to discuss in an official capacity and to deal with directly.

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I appreciate Mr Maginness's point. The specific way the IGA was set up was a matter for the UK and Irish Governments; we operate it as best we can in the devolved sphere. When the Member raises the issue of paramilitary concerns, issues of concern relating to paramilitary terrorist activity are discussed in a general way but are not the primary responsibility of this. There are also clear indications of the involvement of some paramilitary organisations in crimes such as fuel laundering, tobacco smuggling and potentially even human trafficking.

That is where there is a clear crossover between what would be seen as terrorist activity and what is seen as organised crime. It is important that we see the agencies on both sides of the border cooperating across that range of issues and not producing artificial separations.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for the update. Although he indicated that it is not the purpose of the IGA to provide a discussion on cross-border security issues, I was just wondering whether any new initiatives were suggested or are coming forward in relation to fuel and tobacco fraud.

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I thank Mr Elliott for the question. The key issue around fuel fraud is more the issue of laundering than anything else. Work is ongoing, led by the Revenue Commissioners in Dublin and HMRC in London. I am expecting to receive an update shortly from HMRC in the context of the Organised Crime Task Force, which brings together local and UK-wide agencies in Northern Ireland, where a number of subgroups have cross-border cooperation.

Work is ongoing about developing a different marker, which, it is hoped, will make laundering if not impossible then potentially uneconomic. Tobacco smuggling is a classic smuggling operation, and we need the best possible cooperation across a number of agencies, and not just on this island. Given the way that smuggling can tend to operate across Europe and further afield, we need the widest possible international reach, which is, of course, another point where the National Crime Agency may come in as well as the good work that is being done by agencies cross-border.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

Thank you, Minister, for the excellent cooperative work that you are doing with your Irish counterpart. In the statement, you made reference to a forensic partnership strategy between Northern Ireland, Ireland and Scotland. Is that new or ongoing work between those forensic agencies?

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

The forensics cooperation has been ongoing for some time. I signed an agreement shortly after I came into office with Alan Shatter as the Irish Justice Minister, but the three forensic science services have been cooperating for a number of years looking at how they can promote cooperation and provide resilience between them.

There is now in place not just a bilateral agreement between Northern Ireland and the Republic but a trilateral agreement involving Scotland. What is clear is that changes to the forensic science services in England and Wales have made it more important that we cooperate across the public sector with the agencies on either side of us, regardless of constitutional status. It is clear that significant help is being given between the three jurisdictions.

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

The Minister is aware that the Leinster House Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality has unanimously agreed to recommend that the purchase of sexual services in the Irish Republic become a criminal offence. He raised the issue of human trafficking. Is he aware of that Committee's report, and was the issue discussed during the meeting?

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

Yes, it was. I thank Mr Wells for giving me the opportunity to point out that, alongside the issue of human trafficking, the issue of sexual offences in general was raised. Frances Fitzgerald is considering the evidence that has been put to her before she considers the way forward for her jurisdiction in the same way that I will consider the evidence from the research that is being commissioned in Northern Ireland before I consider the best possible way forward in this jurisdiction.

Sean Lynch (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as an ráiteas sin. Minister, in relation to the management of sex offenders, you say that there is excellent cooperation between the two services on the island. Has there been any progress on the development of an all-Ireland sex offender register?

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I thank Mr Lynch for giving me the opportunity to point out the level of cooperation. There is a clear and significant benefit to both jurisdictions from information sharing because of the ease of travel between the two jurisdictions. The Member talks specifically about a single register, but we also need to look at the fact that it is equally easy to travel between this island and Great Britain and then into Europe. The important issue is that we have ensured that sex offenders who travel notify the police or the Garda of the details. In that context, we have good arrangements.

I will look at whether anything can be done to ensure that the border is not used to allow people to escape justice. There is not necessarily any more benefit in having a single register rather than the two that we have, which fully cooperate and engage in information sharing with the registers in GB.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Minister for his statement. I welcome the cooperation between the police in this jurisdiction and the police in the Irish Republic.

The Minister will be aware that sex offenders, human trafficking, fuel laundering, tobacco smuggling, drugs and paedophile activity are huge issues facing Northern Ireland. I have written to the Minister on a number of occasions about the National Crime Agency, and I also raised the issue with the Secretary of State on a number of occasions. The SDLP today raised the issue of paramilitary activity, and Sinn Féin raised the issue of sex offenders. What progress is the Minister making with both those parties on getting their agreement to the installation and extension of the National Crime Agency to Northern Ireland?

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I am not sure whether Mr Humphrey was in the Chamber when I answered the first question, which was from Mr Givan. I made it clear that discussions are ongoing: indeed, I have a discussion with his party in my diary for this afternoon. I am keen to have discussions with all parties to see what progress can be made on the basis of the letter that I issued last week.

I hope that we will be able to reach agreement on the basis of the significant mechanisms for answerability and accountability in Northern Ireland, which do not exist in other parts of the UK, so that we can get the benefit of the NCA in the fight against crime.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

[Interruption.]

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

Mr Humphrey may point across the Chamber, but we need to ensure that we have agreement around the Chamber.

Rosaleen McCorley (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a ráiteas agus as a fhreagraí go dtí seo. In the Minister's discussions with his counterpart in the South on human trafficking, was there agreement on how to prosecute offenders, to prevent human trafficking and to protect the victims of human trafficking?

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I take Ms McCorley's point about getting the maximum possible cooperation. Of course, the precise mechanisms for things like support are not exactly the same. We have, however, a good system of support for victims in Northern Ireland. We have very good cross-border cooperation on that, as we do on a much wider front.

It is important that we ensure that we get the best possible information so that, if people are being trafficked across the border, across the North Channel and into mainland Europe, as we know they are, we ensure that people report their suspicions, tell the police, the Garda, Crimestoppers or whomever so that action can be taken to rescue those who are vulnerable and are being trafficked and ensure proper protection for them.

It really is important that the good work being done by the agencies be matched by good work between the agencies and the general public in both jurisdictions.

Sydney Anderson (DUP, Upper Bann)

I thank the Minister for his statement.

Minister, you have highlighted the fact that that there continues to be excellent cooperation between the PSNI and an Garda Síochána at an operational level on the management of sex offenders. Can you outline the current position regarding the potential loss of the European arrest warrant (EAW) and whether that has been satisfactorily resolved, given the significant operational benefits that it would have for Northern Ireland?

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

Members seem to be very good at getting nearly any justice matter that they want to talk about into questions on these statements. I can happily say back to Mr Anderson that the specific issue of the European arrest warrant is one of those that was discussed as part of our general summing-up of cooperation. I have concerns that we have not yet seen full clarity between the UK and the European Union on the opt-back-in measure for the European arrest warrant, which no doubt is more significant for Northern Ireland than it is for other regions of the UK and is particularly significant between Northern Ireland and the Republic. It is important that we have the EAW back in operation, not just for sex offenders but for a range of criminals. I hope that the British Government, having made their opt-out plans clear, will ensure that they tidy up the loose ends on opting back in so that we do not have a gap in our arrangements later this year.

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

May I return to the wider conversation that you had with the Justice Minister in the South about organised crime? Given that the biggest illegal waste dump in the history of these islands was found outside your own city a couple of years ago, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker; that the police say that they did not have any intelligence or information on it; that the Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA), the predecessor agency to the much-applauded National Crime Agency, says that it had no intelligence or information on it; that the Organised Crime Task Force (OCTF), of which you were a member, Minister, did not have any working group on it; and that those responsible got £50 million out of the illegal waste dump, can the Minister confirm what conversations he is having with the Minister in the South about organised crime, what conclusions he has come to and what actions he is taking?

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

Mr Attwood correctly raises the point that waste crime is one of the significant issues of organised crime. Sadly, some of the follow-up work on and part of the investigations into that particular waste dump had to cease when NCA officers were unable to continue on the basis of the change in status from SOCA to NCA last year. That is one of the reasons why I want to see the NCA fully operational. However, we also clearly need to get intelligence and ensure that it is properly shared North/South, because many of the waste dumps have had a cross-border element. We need to ensure that we get that sharing. We also need to depend on public information.

There was a very useful meeting between officials from the Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA) and the Organised Crime Task Force, which is merely a coordinating body, not an operational one. That gave the opportunity for a range of agencies to hear from the NIEA on that issue. We cannot set up a subgroup of the OCTF for everything, but what we can ensure is that we get the maximum possible cooperation between the agencies. I believe that we have now got that, perhaps as a result of that discovery.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

I thank the Minister for his statement and for his ongoing commitment to keeping the Assembly informed of the work being done under the intergovernmental agreement.

Victims have already been mentioned. The Assembly is aware that the Minister has placed the needs of victims at the centre of his reform agenda. Can he tell us whether the commitment to meeting the needs of victims is also at the centre of the cross-border work that is being carried out under the intergovernmental agreement?

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

Whilst I thank Mr McCarthy for the question that he has asked, I will say that the precise detail of how matters are carried out in the Republic is clearly not something for me. However, I do believe that there is significant work being done. Of course, the European directive affects all of us, and there is work going on to ensure that both jurisdictions are in line with that. I believe that, in terms of the victim and witness strategy in Northern Ireland, we are well ahead of it, but it is certainly an issue that, as I understand it, is of significant concern to the DJE. Perhaps the fact that Frances Fitzgerald is, like me, a social worker means that we have an interest in the needs of victims across both jurisdictions. The key issue is the cooperation that is being carried through by officials and the work that is being done to ensure that people learn lessons from others' achievements and that we share best practice across the island.

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

The Minister may not be aware that today is the 40th anniversary of the murder of Judge Rory Conaghan and his colleague Martin McBurney. Can the Minister assure me that there is maximum cooperation between North and South to ensure that Irishmen such as judges Conaghan and McBurney do not lose their lives in the future carrying out their jobs to change society for the better?

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

Mr Dallat brings us back to some of the very serious points that confront us even on this day, never mind looking back 40 years. I cannot give any assurance about what happened 40 years ago, but he asks about seeking to ensure that work is being done to protect Irishmen whichever side of the border they happen to be on, and I believe that, from the reports that we receive, as Ministers, from the Garda Commissioner and the PSNI Chief Constable, we have an extremely good set of cooperative arrangements North/South at the moment.

We can always make cooperation better, but I believe that we have it at a high level. It will be the task of the new Garda Commissioner, as opposed to the acting Garda Commissioner, to see how that works in the future, but from what I see in the reports that I receive from the PSNI and from my discussions with Frances Fitzgerald I believe that we have very high levels of cooperation. Very significant work is being done, particularly as far as we are concerned, in the Southern jurisdiction, and that is aiding the fight that the PSNI is leading against the kind of terrorist crime that the Member referred to, which, sadly, could still happen today and not just 40 years ago.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

The Minister has been very effusive in praising North/South cooperation and, indeed, has highly commended the Garda, yet, yesterday, the chief coroner in Northern Ireland had occasion to be highly critical of the total lack of cooperation from the Garda in the preparation for the pending Kingsmills massacre inquest. What actions has the Minister taken to raise that issue with his counterparts? That is a disgraceful situation. If he has not done anything, why has he not done anything and will he now seek to engage on that important issue? The coroner says that he wrote to the guards in February and April looking for cooperation and has had no response. Is the Minister prepared to sit back and allow that to continue or will he get active on that issue?

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

There are a number of points in Mr Allister's comments. First of all, I do not operationally direct the PSNI, and I need to be very careful about suggesting that I might operationally direct an Garda Síochána in those circumstances — [Interruption.]

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Order.

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

Let us be absolutely clear, it is a major difficulty to resource the issues of the past, whether it be the work of the police in the Historical Enquiries Team and other matters, whether it be the work of the Office of the Police Ombudsman on its historical issues, or whether it be the work of the Coroners' Courts in this jurisdiction. We have significant financial problems in dealing with that with a budget that is only for today and which is being cut at this stage whilst some of those issues are enormously expensive. So, we need to be realistic about the expectation as to what a Minister in this jurisdiction could do to enforce anything on a police service in a different jurisdiction.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Do nothing.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Order. That concludes questions on the statement.

Executive Committee Business

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

I call the Minister of Justice, Mr David Ford, to move the Bill.

Moved. — [Mr Ford (The Minister of Justice).]

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Members will have a copy of the Marshalled List of amendments detailing the order for consideration. The amendments have been grouped for debate in the provisional grouping of amendments selected list. There are two groups of amendments, and we will debate the amendments in each group in turn.

The first debate will be on amendment Nos 1 to 13 and amendment No 19, which deal with the appointment and guidance of the director of legal aid services. This group comprises amendments to appoint a director of legal aid services, rather than designate a civil servant to the post; to remove the requirement for the director to comply with departmental direction; and consequential amendments to related provisions of the Bill.

The second debate will be on amendment Nos 14 to 18 and 20 to 22, which deal with Assembly scrutiny of rule-making powers and other technical amendments. This group comprises departmental amendments requested by the Justice Committee on the advice of the Examiner of Statutory Rules to upgrade the Assembly statutory scrutiny mechanism for significant rule-making powers to draft affirmative procedure, and two technical amendments to change the name of the Legal Services Commission to Legal Services Agency in related legislation.

I remind Members intending to speak that, during the debates on the two groups of amendments, they should address all of the amendments in each group on which they wish to comment. Once the debate on each group is completed, any further amendments in the group will be moved formally as we go through the Bill, and the Question on each will be put without further debate. The Questions on stand part will be taken at the appropriate points in the Bill. If that is clear, we shall proceed.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I beg to move amendment No 1:In page 2, line 9, leave out "designated" and insert "appointed".

The following amendments stood on the Marshalled List:

No 2: In clause 2, page 2, line 17, leave out "designate a civil servant in the Department as the" and insert "appoint a".— [Mr Elliott.]

No 3: In clause 3, page 2, line 27, leave out paragraph (a).— [Mr Elliott.]

No 4: In clause 3, page 2, line 30, leave out "those" and insert "the Director's".— [Mr Elliott.]

No 5: In clause 3, page 2, line 32, leave out "a direction or".— [Mr Elliott.]

No 6: In clause 3, page 2, line 35, leave out "a direction or".— [Mr Elliott.]

No 7: In clause 3, page 2, line 37, leave out "directions and".— [Mr Elliott.]

No 8: In clause 3, page 2, line 39, leave out "Directions and".— [Mr Elliott.]

No 9: In clause 4, page 3, line 5, leave out "A direction" and insert "Guidance".— [Mr Elliott.]

No 10: In clause 4, page 3, line 6, leave out "require" and insert "advise".— [Mr Elliott.]

No 11: In clause 4, page 3, line 8, leave out "direction" and insert "guidance".— [Mr Elliott.]

No 12: In clause 4, page 3, line 10, leave out "direction" and insert "guidance".— [Mr Elliott.]

No 13: In schedule 2, page 8, line 36, leave out "designated" and insert "appointed".— [Mr Elliott.]

No 19: In schedule 2, page 12, line 23, leave out "designated" and insert "appointed".— [Mr Elliott.]

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Thank you for outlining that process and procedure.

The main purpose of the Bill is to dissolve the Northern Ireland Legal Services Commission and transfer its functions and staff to an executive agency that is to be established within the Department of Justice. The Bill also makes provision for the transfer of staff from the commission to the employment of the Northern Ireland Civil Service.

Clause 2(1) states:

"The Department must designate a civil servant in the Department as the Director of Legal Aid Casework (“the Director”)."

I have personally been a long-time advocate of having senior civil service positions more open to public competition. Therefore, it is no surprise that I have concerns that this position will be an in-house appointment instead of being for open competition. My amendment is not designed to exclude existing civil servants from applying for the post. It is designed to allow for an open competition. Indeed, Department of Justice officials were questioned at length about that in Committee. When asked by the Chairperson, Mr Givan, whether there would be an internal or external competition, the official reply was clear:

"We do not have any plans to do that at this point."

Obviously, there are some ambiguities around whether it will be an internal or external position.

Again, when pressed by the Chairman of the Committee on the matter, the official again replied:

"There would not necessarily always be a competitive process. There are a number of ways in which people get moved around in the Senior Civil Service (SCS). You could have a direct competition into the post; you could have a competition within the existing grades of staff across the SCS in all of the Departments; or you could be looking at a managed move within the Department or, more generally, across the SCS."

That indicates that there is no requirement for an open competition and that it could be just an in-house post.

There was also an acceptance by the Department that, although it may not be the normal way of doing it, there is a mechanism to have an open recruitment process and not just confine it to civil servants. The Department indicated:

"There is an individual who is currently the chief executive of the Legal Services Commission, and we would have to look at what happens to that individual and the potential for retaining the expertise over a transition period, then look at how you fill the post again in the future."

Again, I assume from that statement that the current chief executive of the Legal Services Commission would be transferred to the new agency as its director.

While the Department is looking at the potential of the retention of experience in the new agency — I totally understand that — there is a concern that this process is just about rearranging the deckchairs. I think that, more importantly, this needs to be future-proofed to ensure that such appointments are not made on a basis of moving senior civil servants around, either within a Department or between Departments, in the future. While there has been an indication from the Department that the appointment may be as the result of an open competition, that is not assured. All that I am seeking is an assurance that there will be an open competition for the director's post.

I have serious concerns about amendment No 3, which relates to clause 3(1)(a). That clause states:

"3. — (1) The Director must —

(a) comply with directions given by the Department about the carrying out of the Director's functions".

Other amendments in this group are also connected to this matter. I am sure that the Minister will indicate that he, or any other Minister, has a general power of direction to civil servants in relation to decisions. If that is the case, why is there a need for this clause? If that general power of direction is there, why do we need this separate clause? We are aware that the Minister is effectively the Department, so I do not see any difference in saying that this is a Department's power and not the Minister's power. As far as I am concerned, one is of the other.

During the debate, there may be specific reference to amendment No 5, which proposes removing the option for the Department to give direction in carrying out those functions in relation to an individual case. I proposed that amendment on the basis that we were removing the other clause that gave direction, but I am willing to listen to the Minister's view. If Ministers have a general power to give direction anyway, I am prepared to reconsider that particular amendment and allow that to remain. However, that will not dilute the overall aspect of why we should add the powers to the legislation that a director must comply with a direction from the Minister.

There are also provisions in the legislation for the Department to give guidance to the director. I have no difficulty with that whatsoever; indeed, I would expect that the Department or the Minister would give guidance to the director. I fully support that and have no issue with it at all, but there is a significant difference between the director having to comply with the direction from the Department and the Department giving guidance to the director. There is a major difference there.

I have clearly set out the issues as simply as possible for Members to consider, and I am willing to address any further issues that Members have.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Before addressing the amendments, with your indulgence, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, I wish to make a few general remarks about the Bill in my capacity as Chair of the Justice Committee. The Bill forms part of the wider programme to reform the legal aid system in Northern Ireland and, as such, it is generally supported by the Committee. There have been ongoing issues in relation to inaccurate financial modelling and forecasting of criminal and civil legal aid spend; a lack of accountability; and significant budget overspends for some considerable time, and it is imperative that measures are taken to address the situation.

The change of status of the Legal Services Commission from a non-departmental public body to an executive agency of the Department of Justice provides an opportunity to improve the governance arrangements relating to legal aid and increase transparency, accountability and efficiency.

As part of the deliberations on the Bill, the Committee sought evidence from key stakeholders, as well as the Department of Justice. Written submissions were received from 20 organisations, and the Committee held an oral evidence event on 14 May this year. Seven organisations attended that to discuss various issues relating to the Bill, particularly the requirement for the Department of Justice to designate a civil servant in the Department as the director of legal aid casework, and whether there are adequate and sufficient safeguards to protect and ensure the independence of decision-making once the executive agency is established and the director appointed to take decisions. I will address those specific issues shortly in the context of Mr Elliott's amendments.

At the request of the Minister to keep the Committee Stage as short as possible to enable the Bill to receive Royal Assent in the autumn and allow the agency to be formed shortly thereafter, and given the fact that the Bill is largely technical in nature and that supporting subordinate legislation will also be required, which will provide opportunities for further scrutiny, the Committee completed the Committee Stage in 10 weeks. Despite the short timescale, the Committee scrutinised and considered all aspects of the Bill in a thorough manner. I thank the members for their diligence and contributions. I also thank the witnesses, who provided useful written and oral evidence, and the departmental officials, who provided additional information and clarification for the Committee throughout the process. I also thank my Committee staff, who, as always, served the Committee with their professionalism.

Turning to amendment Nos 1, 2, 13 and 19: issues regarding the requirement for the Department of Justice to designate a civil servant in the Department as the director of legal aid casework were highlighted in the evidence the Committee received. Views were expressed that it may be better for the post to be filled by someone outside the Civil Service with no pre-existing loyalties in the Department. Members explored that point further with departmental officials when they appeared before the Committee on 28 May this year.

Members sought clarification, given the way clause 2 is worded, regarding whether the post could be filled by someone external to the Department or whether it had to be filled by a civil servant. The officials from the Department indicated that the post, which will be a Senior Civil Service post, did not necessarily have to be filled by a civil servant but that a person employed in an agency is normally a civil servant. Therefore, the person to be recruited would be appointed to the Department first, and the Minister would then designate them as the director of legal aid casework. The officials outlined that the post could be filled in a number of ways, such as direct recruitment, competition in the existing grades of staff across the Senior Civil Service in all Departments, or a more managed move of a particular person in the Department or, more generally, across the Senior Civil Service. They also indicated that the Department had no plans to hold an external competition and stated that consideration needed to be given to the current chief executive of the Legal Services Commission and the potential for retaining the expertise over a transition period and then considering how to fill the post in the future.

When considering clause 2, some members were of the view that it could be better worded to ensure that there is not a perception that a person in the Department must be appointed to the post of director of legal aid casework. Other members, however, noted that it did not preclude the recruitment of someone from outside who then becomes a civil servant.

Briefly, before moving on to the other amendments, I will speak on behalf of the Democratic Unionist Party. This was an issue that I pressed a number of witnesses on when they came before the Committee. I asked them about the process of designation as opposed to a public appointment process. Obviously, I share a number of the issues that Mr Elliott raised. I think that the Committee was of the view that this should be ventilated as openly as possible. However, when I pressed a number of the witnesses, I did not see material evidence brought to the Committee to substantiate why there needed to be a different process from the designation.

Issues were certainly raised about the need to present by way of perception that there was no conflict of interest, but, in my view, evidence was not brought to the Committee to demonstrate where, indeed, there have been issues in the past in respect of the Legal Services Commission. For that reason, I will be interested to see what the Minister of Justice has to say about Mr Elliott's amendments. We are open to listen to those arguments that are coming forward, but at this stage I have not seen material evidence provided to the Committee that sufficiently assures me that such a change is necessary. We remain open to be convinced at this stage of the debate.

I move on to the amendments relating to clauses 3 and 4 in my capacity as Chairman. One of the primary concerns raised by stakeholders was whether there are adequate and sufficient safeguards included in the arrangements to protect and ensure the independence of decision-making once the executive agency is established and the director of legal aid casework appointed to take decisions on individual cases and the grant of civil legal aid. Issues were raised regarding the need to ensure the independence of the director and the potential for a conflict of interest given that the director would be designated as a departmental official who would have to adhere to the Civil Service code.

Questions were also raised regarding whether the arrangements are suitably robust to provide the operational independence required in making individual decisions, whether the director will be able to challenge directions from the Department and whether individual decisions could be compromised through guidance from the Department in relation to a certain class or category of legal case, which may have the potential to impact on a particular case.

Some stakeholders were, however, satisfied that the legislation reflects the independent role of the executive agency from the Department in considering individual legal aid applications. In response to the issues raised, the Department set out for the Committee the range of safeguards covered in the legislation to protect the independence of individual decisions on the grant of civil legal aid. These include a requirement that the Department not give direction or guidance in relation to an individual case, that directions and guidance must be published, the establishment of an independent appeals process and the imposition of a duty on the Department to ensure that the director acts independently of it when applying any guidance or direction to an individual case.

The Department emphasised that any direction or guidance could not override the provisions of the relevant primary or secondary legislation and might be challenged in the courts, as can any funding decision by the director of legal aid casework by way of an application for judicial review. It also expressed the view that the requirement to publish any directions and guidance would ensure transparency and provide a robust protection against any attempt to influence the director’s decision-making in an inappropriate manner. The Department indicated that, under the proposed new arrangements, the independence of the director’s decision-making in any individual case would be no less than the independence of the Legal Services Commission’s decision-making under the current arrangements, and it is not the intention to place the primary duty of the director as obedience to departmental direction but rather that all the safeguards are of equal importance.

When considering clause 3, some Committee members noted that the requirement to follow directions and guidance issued by the Minister already exists and were satisfied that any direction could not override the provisions of the relevant primary or secondary legislation and that individual decisions by the director will be made on the basis of the statutory tests. Other Members did express reservations about the proposed framework to ensure the independence of the director in relation to decisions in individual cases and whether adequate safeguards were in place. The Committee is clear that the independence of individual decisions on the granting of civil legal aid by the director must be protected. The key question is whether the Bill as it stands delivers that or whether Mr Elliott’s amendments are necessary to strengthen the safeguards. Having heard Mr Elliott’s explanation of the purpose of his amendments, I await with interest the view of the Minister on them.

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I will take the amendments in the two groups as they were presented by Tom Elliott. I think that all of us in the Committee raised the issue of the appointment of the director, and some of the points that Tom Elliott raised and which the Chair touched on were reflected across the Committee discussion.

When we initially asked the question, the Bill was perhaps not as clear as we wanted it to be, in that it looked like this would be an internal competition only. However, I think that the officials, to their credit, said that there have been instances — and this would be one of them — in which there would be a wider, and what you might call an open, competition.

Obviously, I will listen to what the Minister says, but, at present, and if we get the assurances from the Minister —

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Member for giving way. I accept that there was an indication that it could be by open competition and process, but there was no assurance of that. Is that fair to say? Do you accept that there was no assurance that it would be by open competition?

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

I suppose that you could say that it was not as explicit as you and others, including us, would perhaps have liked, but there have obviously been situations in which someone external was recruited to a position. The fact that such individuals had to be covered by being members of the Civil Service has been brought through. I think that, again, it is a matter of listening to the Minister and satisfying ourselves. If we then feel that the Minister is saying that it will only be internal, your amendments will better come into play.

Similarly, concerns about clauses 3 and 4 were laid out this morning. We have to ensure the independence of decision-making in relation to legal aid and the granting of legal aid. It is very clear that the Minister has no role whatsoever in individual cases, and quite rightly. When it comes to policy and so on, the Minister is guided by legislation and other regulation, so we are satisfied with that. What we need to do — I think that there is provision for this — is ensure that whatever guidance or direction comes from the Department and the Minister is open to consultation with and scrutiny by the Committee. Should we feel that there is any encroachment into an area of policy that the Department is trying to skew in a particular way — I am not suggesting that there would be — there are mechanisms in place to protect from that.

We will listen to how the Minister addresses those issues, but, in the main, we were satisfied enough with the Bill after scrutinising it. We are certainly willing to hear what the Minister has to say.

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

In general terms, the SDLP welcomes the change that the Bill will bring about in establishing an executive agency in the Department to deal with legal aid. Clearly, the previous commission had become unfit for purpose, particularly its forecasting and financial assurance. The commission failed, and failed quite badly. Now, there is an opportunity for a new body to deal efficiently and effectively with legal aid. We hope that that can be achieved through the changes.

We have already indicated our support for the Bill, but the amendments tabled by Mr Elliott raise a number of interesting points about the director of legal aid casework. His amendments are certainly very well intentioned, because their purpose is to ensure that proper independence is established in the exercise of this new office. He emphasised the importance of a fresh incumbent being brought in to this very important post. That incumbent could be a civil servant but could also be somebody from outside the Civil Service. I agree with him: I think that that is a very strong point to make. He is not being prescriptive; he is not saying that there shall not be a civil servant or that there should be an outsider but that there should, at least, be an opportunity for an outsider to come in.

Given the way in which the body has been run for so many years, I think that it is important that there is a new leadership. I understand what the Minister says about a transition. I think that it is important that there is, at least, a continuity in the transition to the new body. I accept that the current chief executive would be appropriate in that position, although how long that transition would last is a matter that should, in fact, be clarified. The important thing, however, is to allow an opportunity for this House and members of the Justice Committee in particular to be reassured by the Minister that there will be an opportunity for non-civil servants to compete openly for this position at some time in the near future.

That is the intent of Mr Elliott's amendments. I understand that there is some concern in the Department that Mr Elliott's amendments will not achieve that purpose and will, in fact, undermine it because, at this moment in time, there are open competitions. For example, I believe that there was an open competition for a permanent secretary in the Northern Ireland Civil Service recently. The question for me and, I think, for others in this House is this: does the current system permit that to happen in this instance, or is it necessary for Mr Elliott's amendments to be made to bring that about? I think that that is the question that we have to ask ourselves. There are indications coming from the Department — I will put it no stronger than that — that Mr Elliott's amendments could, in fact, undermine that. It would certainly be unintended and extremely unfortunate if that were to be.

Again, as the Chair stated, one awaits the Minister's reply to Mr Elliott's very cogent arguments on his amendments. It is difficult for Members to make up their minds now without hearing the Minister. It might even have been appropriate to have the Minister speak immediately after Mr Elliott so that we could, in fact, evaluate the Minister's arguments.

The other aspect is the independence of decision-making. The Minister and the Department have indicated a number of assurances, reassurances and safeguards on individual decision-making by the legal aid casework director. However, when you are outside a Department looking in and you see things like directions and guidance and so forth in the legislation, you begin to wonder whether independent decision-making is, in fact, safeguarded. That is the problem for us as legislators. What Mr Elliott is doing in his amendments is emphasising the point that there has to be that independent decision-making. That is the intent of his removal of direction. I am informed, again by the Department, that that could, in fact, have the opposite effect and confuse the whole business of the independence of decision-making. I am uncertain as to whether that would be the effect. If that would be the effect, obviously Mr Elliott's amendments should not be favoured. So we are in a quandary. I ask the Minister to provide clarity for the House on Mr Elliott's amendments.

Could I make one further point, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker? It relates not to individual decision-making but to the power of direction in relation to a category of cases. I know that the Law Centre in Belfast was quite concerned about this, as were others from the Law Society and the Bar Council, and individual practitioners. Take as an example the Department running short of money, or something of that nature, and deciding to direct that the legal aid fund should not fund judicial reviews taken against public bodies and governmental decisions. That would be a very powerful instrument in the hands of government to prevent ordinary citizens without proper funding from taking action against the Administration, the Executive or some public body. That would, in my opinion, have a detrimental effect on civic life and could occasion injustice. I would like the Minister to tell the House whether, in dealing with that category of cases, and in those circumstances, that could actually happen. Could that category of cases, whether it be judicial review or any other type of case, be prohibited from being considered by the legal aid fund? It is very important that the Minister reassure the House and those outside the House who have raised the issue before the Committee.

I will conclude there. I look forward to the Minister's comments on Mr Elliott's amendments. I commend Mr Elliott for bringing forward the amendments, because they do exercise one's mind, and the mind of the House, and raise important and quite fundamental issues in relation to the Bill.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

I place on record my thanks to the staff of the Committee, who have worked with us and assisted us in the process of getting to where we are today. I also thank all those who came to us, from the Department and other places, to talk about the content and import of the Bill. I thank Mr Elliott for bringing his amendments to the House. As Mr Maginness just said, these are complex areas of law and it is important that the House does what it is doing today: debate the issues and points and come to a conclusion. We are doing what we were sent here to do by the electorate: to legislate.

That is very important, so I value the amendments that Members table.

Mr Elliott's concerns regarding the designation of a director are important. However, in the Department's evidence to the Committee during the clause-by-clause consideration of the Bill, it confirmed that there are a number of ways in which posts could be filled that would not prevent external recruitment. The person recruited will be appointed as a civil servant, but the point at which he or she will be appointed as a civil servant will be a matter for the process, and he or she could be appointed as a civil servant after his or her appointment. The words "must designate a civil servant" do not prevent the appointment of someone who is recruited externally and who then becomes a civil servant. I hope that the Minister will be able to explain that to the House in much more cogent detail than me, and other Members asked the Minister for a clear and open explanation of that point. That, I hope, will assist Mr Elliott's understanding of the import of what the Minister and the legislation are trying to achieve. I hope, therefore, that it will encourage Mr Elliott to support the Minister's proposals.

Mr Elliott's amendment Nos 3 to 12 focus on preventing the Minister from issuing directions to the director of legal aid casework about the carrying out of the director's functions. Those amendments have the potential to cause concern. Amendment Nos 5 and 7 are key.

Amendment No 5 would remove the instruction that the Department must not give directions about carrying out those functions in individual cases. That, coupled with the fact that the Minister is already subject to direction by Ministers under the general law — Members referred to that — has the potential to lead us into very difficult and perhaps even dangerous territory. The Minister could become involved in individual decisions about granting legal aid. That would be contrary to the recommendations of the access to justice review, which envisaged a system in which decisions would be taken without the involvement of the Minister. Similarly, in Mr Elliott's amendment No 7, the proposed removal of the Department's obligation to publish any directions given when the power to issue directions exists in general law has the potential to compromise openness and transparency. That, again, is contrary to the recommendations of the review and the wider strategic objectives of the Bill.

Like other Members, I will listen carefully to what the Minister says, but when officials came to the Committee, they persuaded me and, I hope, others that the course that the Department and the Minister propose to take is the right one. I hope that Mr Elliott understands that I value the amendments that he has tabled. I am fascinated by the debate, and I think that it is important that we listen to all the arguments and to what the Minister will tell us.

It would be unfortunate if we were to pass amendments that, on the surface, have good intent but that would actually have the effect of reversing that good intent. I believe that the Bill has been carefully designed as a package to work well within the existing general statutory framework and that the amendments have a potential risk of damaging that design. On that basis, I am not inclined to support the amendments.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I wish to make a contribution to the debate, which of necessity, the House may be glad to hear, will be brief. I am due to meet a Minister in a few minutes, and I do not wish to keep him waiting unduly. On that basis, I apologise in advance to the Minister in the House for not being able to stay to hear his reply.

It seems that the Bill, in its general intent and direction, is about tightening the noose of control by the Department over legal aid and all such related matters, yet there seems to be a reluctance to acknowledge that that is so. That becomes pretty clear when you look at the response in the House and, I suspect, the response from the Minister as foreshadowed by his party colleague in the debate to the very modest but I would say necessary amendments by Mr Elliott. That response, which ripples across the House, seems to be, "Yes, we might sympathise with you, and we think that you are raising good points, but we do not want to tie the Department's hands in any way, because we are so deferential and compliant with the purpose of the Bill that we want to give the Minister as free a hand as we can to tighten that noose over legal aid". That is the sense that I am getting from the debate.

I must say that Mr Elliott's amendments are modest and sensible, because they are saying that, if someone is going to be in the position of director, that should be a proper appointment, not just a matter of putting in a placeman who will act as a puppet on a string. It will be hard enough for the director to stand up for himself or herself in the climate that the Minister and the Bill try to create. That will be hard enough, but, if someone is put in as a placeman, or placewoman, not even with the authority of having been recruited in an open competition and therefore having some status in that regard, that person's opportunity and inclination to be anything but that puppet on a string is going to be considerably reduced.

Mr Elliott's second set of amendments are also right, in that there should not be facilitated a situation in which the Department, which is the Minister, can overtly and obviously pull the strings by giving directions. Guidance, yes, but directions are something mandatory. They must be followed, and they totally reduce the discretion of the occupier of the office, who is told what to do. The very fact that there is a reluctance, I suspect, by the Minister to give up that power confirms the likely intent as to how it will be used. If the Minister says, "No, I would not be doing that", he does not need that power. Minister, you have residual powers of direction anyhow. So, I fail to see what is the downside in Mr Elliott's considered amendments. They seem to me to bring some modest degree of control to the Bill and somewhat restrict the stranglehold that the Department wishes to exercise over the dispersal of legal aid.

I would be very concerned at the idea, in clause 3, that there could be guidance, or, as the Bill stands, "directions". It is said in the Bill that directions are not given in individual cases, but nowhere does it say "not in respect of a class of case". That is why, as the Bill stands, it would be more than open for the Minister to give a direction that, for example, in view of whatever circumstances, we are no longer going to fund, as Mr Maginness said, judicial reviews or tripping cases, or any selected class of case. I think that that affords far too much power and control to the Minister.

Therefore, I strongly support the amendments that Mr Elliott tabled.

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I certainly appreciate the fact that Tom Elliott has given us the opportunity for more debate at Consideration Stage than looked likely last week, when we merely had some agreements between the Minister and the Committee for the amendments that will appear in our second group. I trust, however, that that does not mean that Members are going to think up awkward points to raise on the second group.

I listened carefully to Tom Elliott's comments and, indeed, to the comments of a number of Members. It is clear that the two issues are almost the same. It is about opening up the appointment process and ensuring the independence of the director. Looking at amendment Nos 1, 2, 13 and 19, it is clear to see that the intent is to open up the Senior Civil Service by requiring that the post of director of legal aid casework be filled by an open competition. If I understand his point, however, such a competition will be open to internal candidates as well as to external candidates. However, as has been highlighted, I think, first, by Mr Maginness, steps are already being taken to widen the recruitment to the Senior Civil Service generally. Already this year, there has been a competition for grade 3 entrants and a competition for grade 5. Those were open to external as well as internal candidates. A point was also made about a permanent secretary post that has been subject to open competition.

All being well, things will be fine So, normal practice in the Civil Service is widening up in that respect, generally by generic competitions rather than by going to the expense of running individual competitions. However, I have to highlight one appointment that predates the establishment of the Department of Justice. A few years ago, the appointment of a director to the Youth Justice Agency was run on the basis of a competition by the Civil Service Commissioners to appoint somebody to the Civil Service who would then be appointed as director of the Youth Justice Agency. The problem is that the amendments would run counter to that because they do it the other way round or back to front. So, I believe that there are better ways to achieve Mr Elliott's aim. There is a real potential that, if these amendments are accepted, there will be the opportunity for confusion and uncertainty.

As it stands, the Bill makes power for me as Minister to designate a civil servant as director of legal aid casework. I think that there is common cause amongst the House, including with Tom Elliott, that, once in place, the director should be a civil servant. If, however, we accepted the four amendments I highlighted — amendment Nos 1, 2, 13 and 19 — and if I appointed a non-civil servant who then became a civil servant, there is no clear way to do that under normal Civil Service appointment procedures. It has to be on the basis of recruitment to the Civil Service and, then, a civil servant, regardless of whether they have been appointed five minutes ago or 30 years ago, becomes the person in that particular post. If the amendments were passed, they would do nothing to introduce any greater opportunities. I fear that they would create a degree of uncertainty and confusion that would have to be addressed elsewhere and which would run contrary to the normal procedures for appointing civil servants. There is nothing in the Bill that precludes the post being offered to somebody from outside the Civil Service on the basis of that open competition. Each time the post falls vacant, consideration will be given to the best way to fill the post, and the provisions that are in the Bill would facilitate that open competition, regardless of how it is.

I am not sure that there is any difference, in effect, between whether I "appoint" or "designate" a director of legal aid casework. Either way, they will have the same safeguards regarding their independence, which are written into the Bill; either way, the Department will have to ensure —

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Will the Minister give way?

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I will give way.

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

In the interests of clarity, is the Minister saying that there can be an appointment external to the Civil Service by an open competition?

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

If it is common ground in the Assembly that the person would be a civil servant whilst they are the director of legal aid casework, there can be an open recruitment competition, which will be open to people internally as well as externally. We could not run it to exclude internal applications. It would be completely open on the basis that the person would be appointed to the Senior Civil Service, and, once they were a civil servant, they would be appointed to the director's post. It would ensure that the Department looked to see about the right blend of skills and experience for that post, regardless of whether they came from internal or external. I believe that the current wording will avoid the difficulties that will arise from the use of the word "appoint" in terms of bringing that person into the Department, because there is the danger that it suggests that you are going outside the normal Civil Service recruitment procedures when, in fact, it is somebody who is to be a civil servant.

The last thing that I want to do is see us fall foul of the Civil Service Commissioners' rules on the recruitment of civil servants. So, I believe that the amendments are unnecessary and would lead into uncertain territory without providing any specific benefit.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Will the Minister give way?

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I will.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Maybe Mr Elliott can address this in his winding-up speech as well.

On the actual wording of the amendment, has the Department taken a view on whether, if the Assembly went with Mr Elliott's amendments, that would automatically require a public appointments process by way of appointing rather than designating? Does that then automatically require a public appointments process to take place?

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I take the Chair's point. I am reluctant to suggest that I could give a definitive opinion, which might, some day, have to be given by a judicial ruling, but it is my understanding that the words do not necessarily guarantee external appointment but merely create confusion about the process.

The designation of somebody who either has already been a civil servant or is recruited to the Civil Service with a view to being designated to that post is a much clearer and less confusing way of making the appointment.

On that basis, whilst I accept Mr Elliott's wish to have openness, I do not believe that what he is proposing is beneficial in doing that and that it adds anything to what is in the Bill as it stands. I urge the House to reject those amendments on that basis.

The second set of amendments — amendment Nos 3 to 12 — is all about limiting the Department's responsibilities and abilities to guide rather than direct the director of legal aid casework on the carrying out of those functions. Whilst I understand entirely the intent to ensure independence, I believe that the amendments would compromise the measures that were carefully constructed to prevent any interference in individual decisions. This has already been mentioned, but I just want to be very specific. Article 4(1) of the Departments (Northern Ireland) Order 1999, which established working devolution, states:

"The functions of a department shall at all times be exercised subject to the direction and control of the Minister."

So, the power that Mr Elliott seeks to remove from clause 3(1) is in fact there in statute anyway and cannot be removed by that measure.

The important thing, I believe, is that we need to read clause 3 as one single unit. While subsection 1 says that the director must comply with general directions and "have regard to guidance", subsection 2 of the same clause makes it absolutely clear that there must be no guidance or direction about an individual case and that the Department must ensure that "the Director acts independently".

Subsection 3 states:

"The Department must publish any directions and guidance".

So that is an open process that is clear and transparent, and it ensures that the general guidance and direction powers do not apply to a specific individual case.

Mr Maginness and then Mr Allister, who used rather more flowery language and is no longer in his place, raised the potential for directions about a class of cases as opposed to an individual case. Article 12(5) of the 2003 order proscribes, in schedule 2, the services that the director of legal aid casework may not fund as civil legal services. Article 12(6) provides:

"Regulations may amend Schedule 2 by adding new services or omitting or varying any services".

Article 46(5) of the order provides that any regulations made under article 12(6) are subject to Assembly control by way of draft affirmative procedure. So, it would not be possible for the Department to give the kind of direction or guidance reflecting the scope of cases that may be funded in the way that Mr Maginness politely and Mr Allister in slightly different language highlighted as possible changes without the approval of the Assembly. I trust that Assembly Members regard Assembly powers as being a reasonably clear way of ensuring that those matters are carried out properly. We have the general case of directions from the Department — or from the Minister, if others wish to say it — and the normal rule that Ministers can direct civil servants in any respects, subject to the law. We then have it clearly set out that individual decisions on the grant of legal aid are not affected by that.

That makes it absolutely clear. Indeed, it is something of the interplay between Mr Elliott's amendment Nos 3 and 5 that makes that point. The Bill was carefully drafted to ensure that we kept matters clear on that and to ensure that the provisions work in harmony with existing and more general statutory provisions in the 1999 order. It is in line with existing powers to give directions and guidance to the Legal Services Commission.

As it is drafted, the Bill has a number of safeguards for specific points that I want to raise on the power of giving directions. First, the Bill expressly prohibits me or my Department from giving a direction or guidance in relation to an individual case. Secondly, any directions and guidance must be published and will be subject to consultation with relevant stakeholders and scrutiny by the Justice Committee, which is the position under the current arrangements. Thirdly, if the director refuses an application for funding or further funding, he or she will be required to set out clearly the reasons why the application has been refused. Fourthly, any such funding decision by the director will be subject to appeal to an independent panel.

As noted in the Justice Committee’s report, any direction or guidance issued by me or my Department cannot overrule the provisions that I have highlighted in relevant other primary or secondary legislation. I believe that the effect of accepting Mr Elliott’s amendments would be to compromise those safeguards as they are constructed. Let us be clear: applications for civil legal aid will be considered on their merits and dealt with individually.

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Will the Minister give way?

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

Yes.

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Alban Maginness made a point in relation to the class of cases. You are stating clearly that for any class of case to be changed — judicial reviews were mentioned, along with Coroners' Courts — that would have to come through the Assembly for approval.

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

Yes, I can confirm to Mr McCartney that it would not merely have to come to the Justice Committee. Because it is subject to draft affirmative procedure, it would have to come to the Floor of the Assembly and not just to the Committee. That is a double safeguard in that respect.

It may be helpful to give Members an example of where I might want to consider a direction under these powers. Under the current arrangements, the Department has a role in decision-making on applications for exceptional legal aid in individual cases. The relevant statutory provision is article 10A of the Legal Aid, Advice and Assistance (Northern Ireland) Order 1981. As Members will recall, the Bill includes provision to give effect to a recommendation of the access to justice review that Ministers should no longer have such a role. It inserts a new article 12A into the Access to Justice (Northern Ireland) Order 2003.

The current statutory provision from 1981 is supplemented by a direction, 'Direction 1 — Representation at Inquests'. That direction was issued by the Lord Chancellor in 2005 and remains in operation today. In brief, it requires the Legal Services Commission to fund representation on behalf of the immediate family of the deceased at an inquest concerning a death occurring in police or prison custody or during the course of a police or other security services arrest, search, pursuit or shooting. To date, it has been utilised in particular to secure the funding of next-of-kin at certain legacy inquests.

However, notwithstanding the change of approach reflected in this new provision, it may be considered appropriate, in order to fully discharge, for example, the state's obligations under article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights, for my Department to give a direction to the director of legal aid casework. Such a direction would be in broadly similar terms to the current 'Direction 1' which I have already referred to. Moreover, as I stated earlier, any such direction would be subject to consultation with relevant stakeholders and scrutiny by the Justice Committee.

I will add a further point on the issue of inquests and the current ministerial role. In a number of cases recently, I have received submissions relating to the granting of exceptional funding for inquests for preliminary stages. In light of the access to justice review and of what we are proposing for legislative change, on each of those I have taken the initial decision and left it to the director of the Legal Services Commission — effectively the future director of legal aid casework — to take the decision on the merits of granting further funding. That is not grabbing power or looking for a "puppet on a string", or whatever airy-fairy language Jim Allister may choose to use. That is putting the responsibility where it lies, which is on an independent official acting on the merits of a case and removing the political influence from it.

On that basis, I am delighted to recommend the Bill as drafted and ask the House to oppose the amendments suggested.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank all Members who participated in the debate. As the Minister said, it caused at least a little more interest in the Bill than might have been appropriate this time last week. I hope that Members and the Minister accept that I tabled the amendments with the best of intentions and with what I believe is the proper —

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Yes.

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

Sorry, I thought that I had made it clear that I appreciated Mr Elliott’s intentions. I am happy to repeat that, if he did not hear it first time.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for repeating that. I did hear him the first time; I was only making the general point that I hoped that Members accepted my intentions.

I genuinely believe in my amendments, which I raised in Committee. I will deal, first, with the point that Mr Maginness and then Mr Allister raised about the classes of cases. That issue is not covered in my amendments. It was raised by one of the stakeholders, but I cannot remember which. I think that Mr Maginness said that it was the Law Centre. I did not bring an amendment on that because I did not feel that it was a sufficiently significant issue for legislation.

I am still determined that I will pursue my other two principal amendments because I believe that they are right. The Minister did not say, even in answer to the Deputy Chair, Mr McCartney, that there would be a guarantee or assurance of an open competition for the post of director. He said that that decision would be taken at the time. The Chair of the Committee, Mr Givan, asked whether it would be a public appointments process, but I do not believe that it necessarily would be. At Committee, officials said that there was a mechanism for making appointments to senior positions through the protocol that allows for open competition. Indeed, the Minister and others said that this has already been used in, I think, the appointment of senior civil servants and maybe even the most senior civil servants in Departments.

So there is a process, but I am looking for an assurance that it will apply to this post, and I do not have that. That is why this is important. If we allow this to go through as it is, the process will be directed by the Department, and, dare I say it, internal processes for the appointment of the director will be more likely. I have heard no assurance otherwise.

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I will give way in a second. At this stage, I do not want to make the process any weaker than it is. I believe that my amendments would strengthen the process. I will give way to the Minister.

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I appreciate the Member giving way — I am trying not to jump up and down all the time. My point in response to Mr Elliott is quite simple. He says that I am not giving a guarantee of an external appointment process. My advice is that his amendment would not create that situation either. Therefore, an amendment that adds confusion but does not produce his desired result does not seem to me to add any benefit to the Bill.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for that, but the point of my amendment is that it would not guarantee that the person appointed had to be a civil servant. There may be an issue with how my amendment is worded or whatever, but the Minister has not dealt with that. If he wanted to deal with the questions asked in Committee by the Chair, I think, and the Deputy Chair, he should have done so at that stage by bringing better wording to the legislation, but that did not happen.

On the issue of the direction that can be given to the directors, the Minister quoted article 4(1) of separate legislation that gives power to the Minister. If that power is already there, why do we need it inserted into this legislation? We do not. If it is already there, we do not need it.

I noticed that Mr Dickson, who I assume has taken the same view as the Minister, seemed to have difficulties only with amendment Nos 5 and 7. Amendment No 5 would mean that the Department could not give direction in individual cases, while amendment No 7 would mean that there would be no requirement to have a report on any direction given. If those are the only two amendments that there is a difficulty with, I am willing to reconsider them and to not move them. If that is the only problem that there is, I am more than happy to do that. You have my undertaking on that.

I believe that my amendments in general will strengthen the Bill and will make matters much more open and equal for the wider community by enabling an open competition

One of the proposals from the stakeholders suggested that any person appointed should have a legal qualification. To be fair, I did not include that, because I do not think that it is an absolute requirement. It may help, but I did not put it in as a requirement. I am trying to ensure that this appointment is not just for a civil servant who goes into one of these positions that goes round in a circle; I want to see a much wider and open competition.

I believe that amendment No 7 provides strength by ensuring that there is not a requirement on the director to comply with direction given by the Department.

I thank those Members who participated in what was a useful debate. I also thank the officials from the Department and the Committee for their work in the process, which was extremely helpful.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Before I put the Question on amendment No 1, I remind Members that it is a paving amendment for amendment No 2.

Question put, That amendment No 1 be made.

The Assembly divided:

Ayes 10; Noes 77.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

I will not call amendment Nos 4 to 8 as they are consequential to amendment No 3, which has not been made.

Clause 3 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

I will not call amendment Nos 10, 11 and 12 as they are consequential to amendment No 9, which has not been made.

Clause 4 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 5 to 13 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Schedule 1 agreed to.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

I will not call amendment No 13 as it is consequential to amendment No 2, which has not been made.

The Business Committee has already made its arrangements to meet at 12.30 pm. I propose therefore, by leave of the Assembly, to suspend the sitting until 2.00 pm. Thank you for your cooperation, Members.

The debate stood suspended.

The sitting was suspended at 12.33 pm.

On resuming —

Oral Answers to Questions

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

1. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning whether his Department has responsibility for the advertising of educational funds such as student hardships funds, including their availability in relevant institutions. (AQO 6593/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

In further education, my Department provides financial assistance to students through further education awards and hardship funds, which are administered respectively by the Western Education and Library Board and each of the six colleges. Over the last five years, there has been a net increase of approximately £800,000 in the total amount available in the combined funds, with the budget set aside for further education (FE) awards rising by over £2 million. While the drawdown of resources in the demand-led hardship fund may have decreased by just over £900,000, the spend on FE awards has increased by £1·5 million.

The funds are advertised extensively through a variety of media by the board and the colleges. Further education awards are promoted on the Western Education and Library Board's website and through a television advertising campaign run during May and June each year. In addition, each college promotes both funds through the following channels: prospectuses, websites, prominently displayed posters, and a variety of funding guidance literature, including flyers, mail drops and information in college diaries, which are provided to students. Funding advice is also provided at induction sessions. My Department consults with the Western Education and Library Board regarding the content of its advertising campaign. To ensure consistency across the colleges, my Department provides good practice guidelines with regard to the publicity of the hardship funds.

Higher education support funds are administered and publicised, by the higher education institutions and the colleges delivering higher education, to help students experiencing financial hardship. My Department provides the funding and copies of the conditions booklet to the universities and colleges. We also place information and the conditions booklet on the NI Direct and the Department for Employment and Learning websites.

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

I thank the Minister. Minister, given the recent publicity and media attention on this, are you reviewing to any extent the level of funds available?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for the question and the opportunity to clarify that a lot of the media commentary around this has been very ill-informed. It has looked solely at the issue of a reduction in spend in hardship funds without appreciating that there has been a complementary increase in FE awards and, indeed, that the overall package has increased. That said, I am happy to look at how we promote the schemes. In saying that, however, I exercise some caution in that we have seen an increase in applications to the funds in recent years, which indicates that the message is getting out there. Where further work can be done to better signpost, to streamline that and to make it more efficient and effective, we are, of course, always open to learning lessons. I am more than happy for us to have some internal discussions in that regard to see whether we can do things even better.

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

Minister, you said that you would look at the funding available. In the briefing you gave to the Committee last Wednesday, you indicated that there would be a £3·5 million reduction in student support provision across several demand-led programmes, which included those that were means-tested as well. Will you give clarification to the House now? Are you going to look at increasing, or are you looking at a £3·5 million reduction, which you told the Committee about last week?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Chair of the Committee for his question. It is important that we draw a distinction between what is set in the budget and what is actually spent. The key consideration in all these issues is the spend, which is increasing.

The Chair is referring to the indications I gave to the Committee regarding how we are going to manage the in-year cuts that have been asked of us during this year. We have indicated that we are likely to see some underspends in some areas of student support, including the FE awards. We will have a budget allocated to that. We may not draw down all the money from that, which would create an underspend. Rather than returning that to the centre, we have the ability to offset some of the cuts through what would otherwise be an underspend. However, that in no way, shape or form means that we are reducing money from the front line. This is a demand-led process; where demand is there, it will be met. If we happen to overshoot what is now in a revised budget, we will look for other funds elsewhere in the Department to meet that demand. There is a clear commitment from me that we will meet the demand that comes our way.

Fra McCann (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his answer. Can he advise the House whether he is approaching the forthcoming meeting with the National Union of Students - Union of Students in Ireland (NUS-USI) with an open mind to reconsider his decision to transfer money away from the hardship fund?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I approach every meeting with an open mind, but let me be clear: we have not taken a decision to transfer money out of hardship funds; they are part of a demand-led initiative. We have redirected money to FE awards, which are allocated in advance of the academic year. So, in that circumstance, a student has the support at the beginning of their studies rather than having to apply in a reactive way to hardship funds. I would have thought that, in all walks of life, it is better to intervene early and give people protection and certainty as opposed to leaving them uncertain. I find it bizarre that people are saying that we should take money from elsewhere and go back to a policy of investing in hardship funds when we have a better means of providing support to students. I have to say that people are looking at only one aspect of a budget, and they need to be very careful about drawing conclusions without looking at the full picture.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

I inform Members that questions 7 and 14 have been withdrawn.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

2. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning what progress has been made on the proposals for the relocation of South West College in Enniskillen. (AQO 6594/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

The South West College is working closely with Fermanagh District Council with a view to being a partner in a proposed shared services project at the Western Health and Social Care Trust's former Erne Hospital site. Fermanagh District Council is leading a development group which is seeking to create a public sector shared services hub on the site. The first stage of the plan is that the council will purchase the site from the health trust when demolition work, contamination surveys and title issues have been resolved.

The college is developing a draft business case, which has as its preferred option a new build as a replacement for its Fairview campus. The next stage will see the college submitting a business case, which includes a proposal for the purchase of part of the site from the district council for the development of a new college campus. The Department awaits firm proposals from the college in relation to the availability and viability of purchasing the site. This cannot be completed until the Western Health and Social Care Trust has completed the site transfer to Fermanagh District Council.

Officials from my Department and the Strategic Investment Board continue to support the project. Planning NI has indicated that the redevelopment will be acceptable in principle and will meet planning policy, subject to the normal site-specific planning and environmental criteria. No funding commitment can be made until the business case has been approved by me and by the Department of Finance and Personnel.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for that response. How confident is he that the progression of the new college will happen, and what time frame will he put on that?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for his question. I am optimistic that it will go ahead. I appreciate that it has perhaps taken a little longer to come to fruition than had originally been planned. I think that that reflects the complexity of the outgoing site and its former use. That has brought some challenges with respect to demolition and the environmental aspects around all that.

I expect to be in a position to receive and clear a business case during 2015. While there are other projects in terms of the FE estate that we are keen to advance, I am certainly minded to make a bid to the Executive for this particular project. I appreciate that the shared services site in particular provides potential for synergies across the public sector, so there is a strong case for this proposal.

Phil Flanagan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his answer. I will take him back to the last point that he made about the shared services site. Does he accept in principle that it makes sense to locate a college which has plans to become a rural university on the same site as a public library and a jobs and benefits office? If so, will he try to work with other Departments to make the proposal a reality?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I think that the Member can take considerable consolation in that there is a lot of interest in this particular site across a number of Departments and Ministers. Indeed, the First Minister and the deputy First Minister visited the location a number of months ago, which is an indication of the collective interest that there is in this regard.

Obviously, the more that the site can be used the better it will be for building up different types of relationships. Not every two particular agencies will have a natural partnership, but there will be enough to make the site viable. In turn, that will have further multiplier effects on the local economy, particularly the service sector, given the number of the people who will be working in that vicinity. So, there will be a wider benefit for the town of Enniskillen as well.

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

I appreciate that the focus is on the south-west, but I am sure the Minister will agree with me that there are pressures right across Northern Ireland. Can the Minister assure the House that, despite all the pressures he has, he can guarantee that vocational education, which played an absolute blinder in providing education to people who perhaps missed out the first time around, is bestowed with equality? Can he also guarantee that the capital projects will not simply be put to the end of the queue and that other, greater priorities will not be made?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I can certainly give the Member an assurance that I am very keen to progress a wide range of capital projects, including in further education. I certainly believe that a modern FE estate is entitled to an assurance that we are investing in the skills agenda. As I am sure the Member will agree, the FE sector is incredibly flexible and diverse and covers a wide range of interventions, from essential skills to the provision of higher education.

That said, I have to put on record my concern about the current funding decisions that are being taken. While vocational education is incredibly important to our economy, the Department of Education's budget has been given protection by the Executive but that of my Department has not. That is not a plea from me that my Department should be protected as well; it is rather that I think that we have to reflect on the fact that, when decisions like that are taken, certain inequities will be created in the system. A particular inequity relates to what happens for those young people aged between 16 and 19. Those young people who are at school will benefit from protection, but those who are in further education or training programmes will not. We have to be conscious that some 40% of young people aged between 16 and 19 are in education and training outside of the school sector and that the socio-economic background of that cohort is different to that of the population as a whole. So, that is something that I think we all have to reflect on when considering the future of our budgets to ensure that money is well spent and that we take equality considerations into account.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Mr Alex Easton is not in his place.

Judith Cochrane (Alliance, Belfast East)

4. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning for an update on higher level apprenticeships. (AQO 6596/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I have been actively encouraging and facilitating the development of higher-level apprenticeships. Higher-level apprenticeships enable young people to benefit from working with important employers in Northern Ireland, as well as to gain a recognised qualification at level 4 or above.

I am currently supporting a number of pilots. For example, in ICT, we have 15 apprentices employed by the McAvoy Group, Allstate and Core Systems who are undertaking training at South West College. In engineering, 15 apprentices working with Terex, Kiverco and the Quinn Group are undertaking training at South West College as well. PricewaterhouseCoopers has employed 18 apprentices in professional services, 14 in taxation and four in audit. In finance and accounting, recruitment is currently under way, with expressions of interest received from a range of accountancy employers, including FPM Accountants, ASM Horwath and BHP Accountants Ltd. The training will be provided by Belfast Metropolitan College and the Southern Regional College. In industrial, chemical and life sciences, recruitment is currently under way through Norbrook Laboratories, with training of around 14 apprentices through the Southern Regional College. Those are but a few examples, with further pilots planned in engineering and aeronautical engineering with major employers, including Bombardier.

A further exciting development that I have promoted is the extension of higher-level apprenticeships to the public sector. In June, alongside the Regional Development Minister, Danny Kennedy, I announced a higher-level apprenticeship for around 10 apprentices in civil engineering. Proposals from the Northern Ireland Ambulance Service, the Northern Ireland Fire and Rescue Service and the Police Service of Northern Ireland are also anticipated.

We know that the demand for skills at levels 3 to 8 — that is, A level to doctorate — is set to increase significantly. My vision is that, through the apprenticeship strategy, higher-level apprenticeships will play a major role in meeting that demand.

Judith Cochrane (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the Minister for that very positive information. Can he give us some further information as to what progress is being made to implement the new apprenticeships strategy?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for her questions. As the House will know, we released Securing our Success, our new apprenticeships strategy for Northern Ireland, in June 2014. It is certainly not sitting on a shelf — if anything, it is very much the opposite. A lot of work has been conducted already. We are working through our implementation plan. Over the coming weeks, I will chair meetings with employers with a view to establishing sectoral partnerships. That is a key means of ensuring that we have buy-in from stakeholders in particular industries. Those groups will be used to effectively plan the roll-out of apprenticeships in some current areas and indeed some new areas.

One of the very encouraging things that we have seen, even in response to the fact that we were discussing a new strategy on apprenticeships, is that a lot of businesses and colleges have begun to vote with their feet and come up with new and innovative ideas. Indeed, our strategy has actually been moving to catch up with what has been happening on the ground. I believe that Northern Ireland has a very promising future with regard to apprenticeships. They will become a very effective means of ensuring that employers are getting the right people for their organisations in the future. Indeed, young people will be skilled in areas that are highly relevant to the modern economy and will have much better prospects of securing and sustaining jobs.

Pat Ramsey (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I welcome very strongly the Minister's response to Judith Cochrane's questions. I know how relevant and important it is in my constituency. Alongside the public sector bodies that he has mentioned, is he encouraging or motivating any other sectors to try to bring them into higher-level apprenticeships?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

Yes. We are very keen to work with employers right across Northern Ireland, including in the north-west. Indeed, there may well be potential for things to happen on a subregional basis. Discussions have been taking place with a number of employers in the north-west. We are not at the stage yet to publicise that, but the Member will indeed know who the main players in the local economy are. It is also important to bear in mind that, given the profile of employment in places such as Derry, we seek to develop the public sector as a means of apprenticeships. There will be areas of public sector employment that are highly relevant to that type of training. We are seeing that through a number of organisations where technical skills are relevant that have expressed interest and had discussions with my officials. I think that that will be a very lucrative route in future months.

Gordon Dunne (DUP, North Down)

I commend the work that the Minister has done on the apprenticeships strategy. Considering the failure of Sinn Féin to agree on welfare reform, does he have any concerns about implications that a lack of funding may impact on his strategy?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I will certainly say to the Member that I have considerable concerns about funding. There are a number of pressures out there, of which the failure to date to come to terms with welfare reform is the major one. That will have implications for what we are doing with regard to skills.

As the House knows, investment in skills is perhaps the key economic driver in the transformation of the economy in Northern Ireland. To date, we have sought to act in a strategic way and to avoid hitting areas that are of crucial importance to the transformation of the economy, such as apprenticeships. We also have support from the European social fund in that regard. How long we can sustain that, particularly in the context where the cuts become even deeper, whether that happens this year or in subsequent years, remains to be seen. We will seek to act responsibly in that regard.

What I do fear is that, particularly as Northern Ireland emerges from a very deep recession and when we have a lot of international goodwill, the potential to bring inward investment into Northern Ireland and the potential to grow jobs locally, due to cuts to key economic drivers, whether they be in my Department or elsewhere, we will simply fail to capitalise on those opportunities. There is a real danger here that we will collectively shoot ourselves in the foot and miss the absolutely open goal that is there for us with regard to future investment and job creation.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his answers. It is good to see apprenticeships getting such a high profile. Will he explain what due diligence checks his Department takes to ensure that anybody offering apprenticeships has the necessary ability and accreditation to deliver for students?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for the question. Again, if he refers to the apprenticeship strategy, he will see that quality assurance is absolutely fundamental to the approach that we are taking. That applies particularly to the qualifications network and the off-the-job training that is provided. I am very sensitive about not chasing numbers or trying to label something as an apprenticeship for the sake of it. This has to be driven by quality. Young people and businesses need to respond based on quality and have the assurance that they are investing in something credible. There are no shortcuts. We have to ensure that we can stand over what we are investing in and that people can have confidence in it.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

5. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning for an update on the scheduled move of some courses from the University of Ulster Jordanstown campus to the Belfast campus. (AQO 6597/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

The relocation from Jordanstown to Belfast will see the vast majority of activities transferred to Belfast by 2018. The exceptions will be student residences, the high-performance sports centre and the fire safety engineering facility. The development in Belfast will cost £250 million. My Department is providing £16 million, while the university has secured a £150 million loan from the European Investment Bank as well as a financial transaction capital loan of £35 million. The remaining funding is being raised by the university from a variety of sources.

Good progress is being made with the development across many fronts, and the university remains confident that the project will be delivered on time and within budget. The demolition phase was completed on schedule, and the physical structure of the new university buildings is beginning to emerge. The university is finalising the procurement process to appoint a contractor to construct the main campus building. The university is engaging with the local community in the vicinity of the new campus to ensure that it is involved in a meaningful way, so that the new campus will provide tangible benefits for the local area. The Department is working closely with all stakeholders through inclusive implementation structures to ensure a coordinated approach to the relocation and to maximise the opportunities arising from the development.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

The loss of university courses at the Jordanstown site will result in the loss of jobs for lecturers and a wide range of support staff. Will the Minister advise us what action he is taking to encourage the university to develop alternative job opportunities at that site? In his answer, I did not hear him specifically mention the business incubation unit that was used in the past by spin-out companies. That site and the adjacent Trooperslane site are excellent for such high-tech companies, and both are shortly to have their communication links with Belfast upgraded in the A2 upgrade.

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I am happy to reflect on the comments made and to pass them on to the university for it to consider directly. As for jobs, this is not a reduction in provision; it is a relocation of the vast majority of the Jordanstown campus to Belfast. It is an investment for the future. That said, universities are obviously in a very difficult situation at present. A wider funding challenge predates the current Budget situation facing the Executive, and this year I have had to pass on to the universities cuts approaching 4%. That will be for them to manage, and they will be under a degree of pressure in maintaining existing services. It goes without saying that, when we are talking about cuts of that magnitude, there will be pressures on employment. People need to be very alert to that. However, we will reflect on what the Member said about the future use of the Jordanstown campus. Indeed, I will encourage the university to do so as well.

David Hilditch (DUP, East Antrim)

Mr Beggs raised employment issues, but will the Minister indicate what future the Jordanstown campus holds for higher education?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

As I said in answer to the main question, a number of areas will be retained on the site. However, to be fair, the vast majority of the site is being relocated to Belfast. That will have implications for the east Antrim area, north Belfast and the wider city. There is obviously a wider issue, which the Member will be familiar with, on the future of the site as a whole, which is very large. No doubt he and his colleagues will want to make representations in that regard.

That is part and parcel of the local responsibilities that MLAs and councillors have.

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

The Minister referred to the local community. Would he urge the university to maintain a sustained and meaningful dialogue with the local community, particularly around assistance, not just with jobs but in using the university's facilities and services?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

Yes, I am very happy to follow the approach suggested by the Member and to encourage the university to deepen its existing efforts. We want to avoid a situation in which we build a university in Belfast — in north Belfast in particular — but it is detached from the community. Looking elsewhere in these islands and, indeed, internationally, we can see examples of universities that are in cities but that are detached from those cities and much better examples of such universities that are very much integrated into local communities. We obviously want to see the latter happen in Belfast. More work can be done to ensure that that becomes a reality.

A few weeks ago, I met a delegation of traders from the Antrim Road and the wider vicinity. They made a number of useful points that we are reflecting on. The university should be encouraged to continue and widen its efforts in that regard, particularly as it moves towards the completion of the site in 2018, the successful opening, and commencement of studies in the area.

Basil McCrea (NI21, Lagan Valley)

6. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning whether his Department’s review of higher education funding will seek to increase the maximum tuition fee loan for local students who wish to attend courses in non-publicly funded higher education institutions. (AQO 6598/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

At present, the level of tuition fee loan available for local students who wish to attend courses in non-publicly funded higher education institutions, or alternative providers, is dependent on both the location of the provider and the nature of the course. Following the Executive’s decision to freeze tuition fee levels here, I have ensured that all local students attending higher education providers in Northern Ireland, whether they are publicly funded or not, are eligible to the same maximum tuition fee loan of £3,685. Alternative providers are not, however, subject to fee caps and may charge more than that amount.

When the alternative provider is based elsewhere in the UK, the level of loan available is dependent on the nature of the course. Local students who attend a designated course that is owned by a recognised UK degree-awarding body but delivered by an alternative provider are entitled to a maximum tuition fee loan of up to £9,000. Local students who attend a designated course that is owned and delivered by an alternative provider and simply validated by a recognised UK degree-awarding body are entitled to a lower rate of tuition fee loan of £3,685. That aligns with the maximum loan that is available to students who study in Northern Ireland. It is not uncommon, however, for providers to charge over and above that amount.

The current student support package available to local students, including those who attend alternative providers, is being considered as part of my Department’s review of higher education funding. We are working within a context of constrained public resources, and a major challenge during the review will be to decide where our funding priorities should for student support. A public consultation on the review will commence towards the end of the year.

Basil McCrea (NI21, Lagan Valley)

The Minister may be aware that the Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure recently visited the Andrew Lloyd Webber school of performing arts in Chiswick, where it was informed that the school is the premier location for such activities in the whole of the United Kingdom. Does the Minister accept that, when a citizen of Northern Ireland wishes to attend such a premier institution, it is a little unfortunate that he does not get the support that he would get if he lived elsewhere in the United Kingdom? Will the Minister undertake to look at that case in exception?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

It is difficult to make exceptions. Every case could make that argument, and we have to make decisions that are based on an agreed policy. The case that the Member has outlined is not unusual, and we receive correspondence from a number of MLAs and, indeed, directly from students about similar situations. That is why we are considering the issue as part of the current review of higher education funding. However, whether we are going to be able to close that gap remains to be seen, as it will be dependent on resources.

We decided, back in 2011, when we last looked at issues around higher education funding, that it would be unfair to provide a higher tuition fee loan to Northern Ireland domiciled students attending alternative providers than to those attending our own public providers in Northern Ireland, especially when we are asking those local providers to find efficiency savings. That was a collective decision taken by the Executive. So there is a balance to the argument, but I can certainly confirm to the Member that we are giving it full consideration and are open to a change in policy.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

That brings us to the end of the period for oral questions. We move to topical questions.

Gordon Dunne (DUP, North Down)

1. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning for an update on the progress of the performing arts and technology innovation centre at the South Eastern Regional College in Bangor. (AQT 1441/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

Yes, I am happy to do that. Good progress is being made and, with luck and no unexpected delays emerging over the coming months, we look forward to construction being completed by next summer. Hopefully, the facility will be open and available in the autumn of 2015 to students and, crucially, to the public for the performing arts.

Gordon Dunne (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his answer. Can he give us an assurance about the long-term sustainability of the project? Is he confident that it will provide the much-needed theatre facility for north Down?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

Sustainability will depend on resource funding coming through my Department. Obviously, that will be under increased pressure over the coming years. That said, this is the new investment and we want to make sure that it is a success.

We encourage the college to make as much public use of the facility as it can and, in doing so, the facility can become a theatre and a performing arts space for the wider community in Bangor and elsewhere in north Down.

I can certainly assure the Member that what is being constructed is a full spec theatre. It will have all the facilities that one would expect to see in that type of environment. This is being driven to provide a real-time experience for students, in terms of the whole range of skills involved in the performing arts, whether they are onstage or backstage activities, and the various digital and media support. That full range of activities is going to be provided, and we want to have a world-class facility to enable students to learn in that type of environment. The local community will benefit from that.

Sammy Douglas (DUP, Belfast East)

2. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning for a progress report on the specialist welding academy that he set up recently. (AQT 1442/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for his interest in the issue. Alongside my colleague Chris Lyttle, the Member has been very vocal in encouraging the Department to go down this route. We have responded to concerns to ensure we are facilitating opportunities at a much greater level for people who have some welding skills but have not been able to access employment in recent times due to the need for very specialist qualifications. The advertisement for the first cohort of people going through that has now closed and selections are underway. I hope that the course will be completed within, perhaps, a six-to-eight week window and that people graduating from that will then be eligible to work on projects coming through Harland and Wolff.

Sammy Douglas (DUP, Belfast East)

I thank the Minister for his answers to date and also for the leap of faith he took in supporting this initiative. Does he agree that there is the potential for more oil rigs to come into Harland and Wolff, and so it is vitally important that we train up those unemployed people in particular?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I absolutely concur with that. The Member is aware that there are some advertisements appearing already for a project that Harland and Wolff is conducting at this time, so there is real-life evidence in that regard. That has come perhaps a bit too quickly to allow people going through the academy to avail of those opportunities but, through discussions between my officials and Harland and Wolff, we are very encouraged by the long-term prospects in this area.

The Member is familiar with the fact that an oil rig was in during the first half of this year.

My understanding is that the customers were extremely pleased with the quality of workmanship in that regard. It has placed Harland and Wolff in a good place for future work.

Ian Milne (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

3. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning for his assessment of the Northern Ireland Council for Voluntary Action's (NICVA) recent report on a living wage. (AQT 1443/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

It is important that we approach the issue of the living wage with a degree of caution. I encourage employers to consider the living wage. It is important that people are paid well. I think that we need to be slightly cautious about where we would go for a degree of compulsion for employers to pay a living wage. The first thing that we have to do is recognise that the best way of driving up wages in society is through investment in skills. On the back of that, we would have a productivity gain, and, arising from that, you would have a natural rise in wages.

Obviously, we have the national minimum wage, which is guided by the Low Pay Commission. I believe that there is a case for an increase in that. However, if you end up setting a threshold of wages that is way in excess of what is viewed as being the natural market rate, there may be a danger of unemployment or, indeed, an increase in the prices that a shop or business will charge for their goods, facilities and services, and that will have a knock-on consequence elsewhere in the economy.

We also have a number of employment programmes in which we are trying to get people out of unemployment and into work. We often offer subsidies to employers to take people on. For small businesses in particular, those are decisions that are made on the margins. If we were to shift the goalposts in that regard, a lot of employers would be more reluctant to take a chance on taking on an extra person and addressing our situation with unemployment, where we are making some very, very good progress at the moment. While I have sympathy with the concept, I think it is something that is best approached voluntarily. If we want to go down the line of compulsion, we need to be very alert to the unintended consequences.

Ian Milne (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire go dtí seo. I thank the Minister for his answer thus far. In light of what you have said, would you consider legislative changes as part of the forthcoming Bill on employment law? I take from your answer that you would not.

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

It is probably not within my powers; indeed, it is not within the powers of the Assembly. We may have a discussion in the coming months, depending on what happens on Thursday around the further devolution of powers, or not as the case might be. That may well be something that will enter into that debate. Before we legislate, we need to be fully alert to the full economic picture. I have outlined some of my concerns to the Member. Short of legislation, we can encourage employers to invest in the payment of their workers. There can be benefits to the economy where that is done in a sustainable way. The Member should take some comfort from the fact that, when you look at a lot of the jobs that we have created and announced in the past months, you will see that, increasingly, they are paying higher and higher salary levels. That is an indication that our economy is moving in the right direction.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Question 4 has been withdrawn within the agreed time limit.

Barry McElduff (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

5. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning how closely his Department works and communicates with the education and library boards on student finance arrangements to ensure that everyone is on the same page in understanding the regulations. (AQT 1445/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

At the risk of being contradicted by the Member in a few minutes' time, I will say that we work very closely with the education and library boards in that regard. That is not to say that work cannot be done to make guidance and forms simpler. We are certainly happy to take representations on how things could be done better, which, I suspect, the Member is about to make.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

This is your opportunity, Mr McElduff.

Barry McElduff (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Thank you very much. I hope you are all keeping well. Will the Minister clarify one area, if not now, in writing? I would like clarity on an area that is causing uncertainty — students undertaking second degrees in courses that relate to allied health professional courses. There seems to be a different take at DEL and the Western Education and Library Board regarding the entitlement of students to avail themselves of student finance in second degrees relating to NHS or allied health professional courses. I invite the Minister to comment on that and explore that.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

You should have invited him with a question.

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

It is a very cunning approach that he is adopting to it all.

A number of cases in this regard have been brought to my attention. The particular issue that is arising here is around an issue of double-funding, where, because we have a limited amount of money available for investment in higher education, our preference is to invest for one time in the students accessing higher education. Sometimes that may well be a year for somebody, which then leaves them in eligibility for two or three years, depending upon the nature of the course that they are applying to next. However, sometimes people, where they have done a previous higher education qualification, do not understand why they are not getting full access to funding for the full duration of another higher education course. It is something, again, that we are looking at in the context of the higher education funding review because, sometimes, there can be anomalies in that system and cases where someone really is investing in upskilling and there is a case for giving full support. Obviously, that will be governed by the availability of resources, but we are very much aware of the cases that the Member is referring to.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

6. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning for his assessment of the challenges facing our young people who have been unemployed for over a year. (AQT 1446/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

The Member is very right to highlight the challenges facing young people. Thankfully, our youth unemployment is falling, but, like many other parts of Europe, it is a major challenge. It is worth emphasising that, in the context of Northern Ireland, unemployment is very heavily concentrated among young people. Almost a third of the people who are out of work fall in that very narrow range between 18 and 24, so there is a real concentration and a more disproportionate concentration than in many other societies. That highlights the importance of investment in work experience to enable people to get on the first rung of the ladder. It also reinforces the importance of good careers advice and the importance of investment in the new form of youth training and what we are doing around apprenticeships. Those are some of the structural changes that we are making in our economy to address youth unemployment.

To address the situation as we find it today, we have the youth employment scheme, which has been very successful in giving young people opportunities. As part of the more mainstream employment programmes, the former Steps to Work and now Steps 2 Success will also give support for young people to avail themselves of opportunities to get themselves into employment.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a fhreagra. I thank the Minister for his answer. In light of what the Minister said, what discussions has he had with our newly elected and re-elected MEPs to look towards Europe about bringing in programmes and support to assist our young people in attaining employment?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

We are very happy to have ongoing discussions with the European Union, and, obviously, the MEPs are a very useful conduit in that regard. Already, we have access to the European social fund. That is set to be a bigger pot for Northern Ireland over the next seven years than has been the case previously, so that will create a lot of opportunities for us.

The Member may also be referring to the youth employment initiative, and, due to the way that internal boundaries are drawn for Northern Ireland in terms of what are called NUTS areas — maybe NUTS is an appropriate term to refer to them, but it is a French acronym that I will not bore you with — none of our subregional areas in Northern Ireland were going to be eligible to access that fund. We looked at a whole range of different scenarios as to how we could draw it down. We do have access to resources domestically and also through the European social fund that allow us to offer us a whole range of programmes. Obviously, we need to be mindful of coming budget pressures in that regard, but it is something that I believe should be a priority for me, and I know that it is for the Assembly as well.

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

7. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning for his assessment of the implementation of the McConnell report on the North West Regional College and what steps he will take to monitor it, along with the Committee. (AQT 1447/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for his question. Obviously, the McConnell report gives the opportunity for a new start in the college. A new principal has been appointed, and I have appointed a new chair of the board of governors. I believe that strong progress has been made across the vast majority of the recommendations, and the college is very much seized of their delivery. The Department is keeping a close watch on this, and the Committee has had a close interest in the issue in the past. There will always be bumps along the road and tensions between stakeholders, but we will seek to be of assistance, where we can, to overcome those and ensure that we can invest in the college, which is a key partner in the delivery of the skills agenda in the north-west, which has not always been the case. As we look to invest, particularly in level 2 and level 3, in getting much greater numbers studying STEM subjects and at how we can develop a strategy for economic inactivity in the north-west, the college is a particularly important actor. It is important that we have a college that is fit for purpose and in which there are good industrial relations.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

That is the end of questions to the Minister. We must now move on to questions for the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

The Minister has given notice to the Business Committee that, due to departmental business overseas, she is not available for questions. The Minister of Finance and Personnel will therefore respond to questions on her behalf today. I thank him for that.

I inform Members that question 7 has been withdrawn. Mr Alec Maskey is not in his place.

Trevor Lunn (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

2. asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, in the light of the announcement of new air routes to Iceland and Lithuania, what progress has been made in securing direct air routes to large EU trading partners, such as Brussels, Berlin, Frankfurt or Vienna. (AQO 6609/11-15)

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for his question. I welcome the recent announcements of new routes, including Iceland and Lithuania. I am also very aware that the ETI Minister is committed to improving Northern Ireland's air connectivity. She has already met the new managing director of Belfast International Airport and has also met a number of airlines to explore opportunities for improving our air access position. Indeed, she met a major airline during her recent visit to the United Arab Emirates. DETI officials are in regular dialogue with our airports and will support their route development endeavours by taking a Northern Ireland stand at the World Routes conference in Chicago later this month. However, discussions about specific routes and airlines are of a commercially sensitive and confidential nature.

Trevor Lunn (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Minister for his answer. Any air routes achieved are always welcome, but does he agree that the ones that we have at the moment are inclined to take tourist money out of Northern Ireland rather than bringing investment in? Obviously it would be beneficial to the efforts of Invest NI to have direct routes from trade centres such as those mentioned in my original question.

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

I do not disagree that we want to develop our air routes, particularly into hub airports across mainland Europe. The Member drew attention to a couple of destinations in his question, and I do not disagree with the likes of Berlin; in fact, Germany as a whole is a priority for the Department, whether it be Berlin, Frankfurt or other destinations. I am sure that the Member is aware of efforts to get a route to Istanbul because of the strategic significance of its location.

I agree in some respects with the Member, but I do not entirely agree that the routes into Reykjavik and Vilnius are without commercial or tourism potential. Both have, perhaps to a greater or lesser extent, tourism opportunities in both directions. Vilnius, for example, is in the Baltic region, and the Minister and Invest Northern Ireland have been trying to increase trade into the area. There was a trade mission last year or earlier this year to the three Baltic states. Even though it may appear often to be marketed as a tourist route, there are business opportunities in that region. It is a growing area with huge opportunities for Northern Ireland businesses. I visited it and saw some of those opportunities for local firms. First impressions may be that they are focused on tourism, and, of course, some of the routes are, particularly those that were brought on board this summer, which are outward tourism routes. However, I think that the two mentioned in the question have commercial and tourism opportunities attached to them.

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

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Mo bhuíochas leis an Aire as an fhreagra sin.

Thanks very much, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker — or Mr Speaker, as I should say now. I also thank the Minister for his response.

Can the Minister give us some indication — there is possibly an overlap in this, given that he is temporarily wearing two hats — of what discussions he has had with the British Government and, indeed, Executive colleagues about the reduction in air passenger duty for short-haul flights?

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

The ETI Minister shares my position on air passenger duty, which is this: it is a tax that is not of our making and one that we would like to see done away with. The source of the tax is the Treasury in London. I think that there are ample studies and lots of evidence to show that it has a detrimental impact on connectivity into peripheral regions like Northern Ireland. That has been recognised by Treasury, which has given some allowance on APD for short-haul flights to the Highlands and Islands in Scotland. We would like to see that, as a minimum, extended to Northern Ireland, but, ideally, we would like to see the tax wiped out. Obviously, APD for long-haul flights is gone. The Executive pursued and got the power to reduce that to zero for long-haul flights, but, obviously, we would like to see it done away with for short-haul flights as well.

My Department and the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment continue to work on an air connectivity study, which is very close to its conclusion. That will hopefully identify some opportunities to improve Northern Ireland's air access and will, of course, look at the question of APD. It will also look at other ways in which we can expand routes in and out of Northern Ireland, including better use of the regional connectivity fund, which I think is around £20 million and which the Chancellor announced in his recent Budget.

Sometimes there can be a fixation on APD as a silver bullet for all our connectivity problems. It certainly would be nice if it was done away with, but there are other factors. Sometimes selling the place and getting out and about in the way that the Minister is doing is, I would argue, as helpful as reducing APD.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

I wanted to come in with a question that is more in line with Trevor Lunn's. Do we have anyone who studies what we are good at here, like diagnostics in health? If so, we could use that to look at which countries we want to get into and then get airlines to open up routes to those countries. Is that part of your connectivity study?

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

The connectivity study will look at a range of factors. Trying to dovetail with our broader economic strategy is quite important, although getting an exact alignment between what we are pursuing in terms of inward investment and what routes we are able to get is not always easy. To some extent, it is a commercial decision; it is not driven by us. The airlines that brought, say, the Iceland and Lithuania routes will have seen an opportunity in Northern Ireland. We support and welcome that, but it is not necessarily a matter of us going out and being able to say, "We want that one and that one". There are lots that we want. We want more connectivity into North America — absolutely — something into the Middle East — definitely — and more into mainland Europe, particularly the hub airports, and we will concentrate all our efforts on getting that.

Beyond that, it is very much a decision for the airlines and the airports themselves. Of course, we should not forget that the airports themselves have a route, and I am sure that I will get an opportunity in the not too distant future to meet the new managing director at the international airport. There is an onus on the airport as well, particularly with APD having been reduced to zero for long-haul flights. We have given that to them as an opportunity to go out and sell Northern Ireland. So, as well as DETI, they have a bit of work to do very much in conjunction with DETI.

Cathal Ó hOisín (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

3. asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment what plans she has to meet with the new Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Paschal Donohoe TD. (AQO 6610/11-15)

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

The ETI Minister will meet the new Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Paschal Donohoe TD, in the coming weeks, as soon as diaries permit.

Cathal Ó hOisín (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht an fhreagra sin. Has the Enterprise Minister, working with her Southern counterpart on an integrated tourism strategy, thus ended the process of the marketing of the two parts of this island as separate little competing entities?

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

As I said in my original response, the Minister has not had a chance to meet face to face the new Tourism Minister in the Irish Republic. I am sure that she will take the opportunity as soon as she can, and I am sure that she will want to discuss a range of issues around the subject of tourism. Without wishing to speak for the Minister or to pre-empt what she would discuss, I am pretty sure that her view would be similar to mine in that it is important that, while there are opportunities through Tourism Ireland to work together with our counterparts in the Irish Republic to market the whole of Ireland as a place for visitors to come to, there is a need for Northern Ireland to stand out and have its own strategy for attracting visitors here from all arts and parts. In that respect, while I am sure that she will want to learn from and work with her counterpart on a range of issues, she will still want Northern Ireland to pursue its own tourism strategy to sell the particular niche markets and specialities that we have in this part of the world.

Gordon Dunne (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his answers. In relation to cross-border tourism, will he give us an update on the availability of the new British-Irish visa scheme and the benefits that it will have for Northern Ireland?

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for his question. This is something that is quite interesting and even quite exciting. The Enterprise Minister is fully aware that the British-Irish visa scheme will launch this autumn. My understanding is that, under the first phase of the scheme, Indian and Chinese nationals applying in their country of origin will be able to visit the UK and Ireland using one visa, removing the need to apply for separate visas in each jurisdiction. That is transparently a good thing to have if it removes any doubt among visitors from India and China about where they can and cannot go. It is very good for Northern Ireland and will attract people from India and China, and I am sure that it will be expanded to other countries beyond that. If their entry point is the Irish Republic and Dublin, it will help to bring them north of the border on trips to the Giant's Causeway or Titanic Belfast. Of course, as we know and as the Minister has said repeatedly from this position, the Titanic brand, after Coca-Cola, is the most recognised brand in the whole of China. There are huge opportunities for Northern Ireland if there is increased Chinese tourism, as all the indicators show there will be. Anything that helps to get those people north of the border, if they enter the South of Ireland, should be welcomed.

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

If the Minister has plans to meet Paschal Donohoe in the very near future, will she put on the agenda the impact of the introduction of the road user levy for heavy goods vehicles on small and medium-sized enterprises located in and around the border areas?

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

I am sure that the Minister's officials will have heard that point being raised. Although it is first and foremost a transport policy issue, which would be one of Minister Donohue's remits, it has an impact on the economy. I am sure that the Minister, in that capacity, will be happy to raise it with the Enterprise Minister or the appropriate counterparts.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

4. asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment whether she plans to meet with representatives from Down District Council to discuss new public and private sector employment opportunities across Down district. (AQO 6611/11-15)

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

I understand that the Enterprise Minister met representatives from Down District Council, including officials, in February this year to discuss jobs and investment in Down district. I know that the Minister found this meeting, which covered a diverse range of issues, useful and informative. I assure the Member that the Minister and her officials are doing all they can to promote new job opportunities in the area.

In the last financial year, Invest Northern Ireland offered nearly £2·2 million in assistance to companies located in the Down District Council area. This assistance will help to deliver total business investment of over £8·4 million into the area, promoting 255 new jobs. This assistance included, for example, jobs fund support towards Finnebrogue, the local artisan food manufacturer, to grow and develop with the aim of creating 65 new jobs in Downpatrick.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. As the Minister will know, and as I am sure his Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment will know, in recent years, the Down district has been blighted by a continual erosion of public sector jobs. Will the Minister outline what he and the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment plan to do about public sector jobs? I understand that a requested meeting on the issue did not happen.

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

I attended and spoke at the launch of a brochure that Down District Council had in this Building. I think that Mr Hazzard sponsored the event. The document set out the benefits for attracting public sector jobs to the Down district area and particularly highlighted the public sector campus at the old Downshire Hospital site in Downpatrick.

Whilst I welcomed the brochure, at the launch, I said — I will say it again here, and I think that I said it in the Adjournment debate that Mr Hazzard secured — that, like any area, Down district should have more aspirations than just attracting public sector jobs.

The Member will be aware that her colleague the Minister of Agriculture indicated her intention to move some public sector jobs to Downpatrick. There are more public sector jobs in the Down district than in other parts of Northern Ireland: the average is 31%, and in the Down district at the minute, I think that it is 33%, which is slightly above average.

Like every area, the aspiration should be to increase the percentage of private sector jobs and not to rely on public sector jobs. Whilst public sector jobs are important, they are not the same driver of wealth and development as private sector jobs.

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

Will the Minister join me in the delight that we have one of the top golf courses in the United Kingdom — Royal County Down — and will he give his assessment of the forthcoming arrival of the Irish Open there, which many on this side of the House welcome strongly?

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

When the Member started off, I thought that he was talking about Ardglass Golf Club, a course that I used to play when I was young. In fact, in many respects, that course ruined my game. Anybody who has played it will understand why.

It is absolutely fantastic that the Irish Open is coming back not just to Northern Ireland but to Newcastle. Mr Wells is absolutely right. It is one thing for us to extol the virtues of Royal County Down or Royal Portrush, but time in, time out, Royal County Down is internationally recognised as one of the best golf courses in the whole world. It is one of Tiger Woods’s favourite courses, and he often drops in and plays unannounced if he is on these shores.

There are huge opportunities, particularly for Newcastle, which has developed tremendously well over the past number of years with investment in a public realm scheme. It has attracted events such as the Festival of Flight, which I went to in early August, which shows that Newcastle is more than capable of holding its own and hosting major events. It will be a great host town and course for the Irish Open next year.

The whole Mourne area will benefit considerably from that event. Anybody who is interested in golf already knows that it is a great course. After it hosts the Irish Open, many more people will flock to Newcastle to play on that course and other courses in the area. That will bring a huge economic boost at the time and have a legacy for many years to come.

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

I thank the Minister for his answers thus far. What measures, Minister, do you plan to put in place for public and private sector employment opportunities for disadvantaged areas?

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

The Minister’s work and the Department's strategy are to try to bring investment into Northern Ireland globally. We want investment to be spread right across the country. This topic is regularly debated. There is hardly a Member who does not want more investment in his or her area, particularly the areas that have high levels of unemployment and deprivation.

Every effort will be made to show the wealth of opportunities across Northern Ireland for investment. I understand that it is sometimes difficult to get inward investment companies to look at all parts of Northern Ireland, but I know that the Minister is keen for it to happen.

I was pleasantly surprised when I looked at the figures for Down district, a district that, in part, I represent. I was quite impressed, not just with the investment in events in the area and to assist our tourism economy but with the investment in the likes of Finnebrogue and others that was hoped to reap around 250 new jobs in the past year. So, there have been considerable attempts, if not always appreciated, to attract inward investment to some of the more peripheral parts of Northern Ireland and, more importantly, to try to grow indigenous companies that are embedded in those communities and are less likely to leave their area so that more opportunities can be created for local people, whether they are in deprived areas or not.

John McCallister (UUP, South Down)

I welcome the Minister's earlier replies. He has been driving home the point about private jobs. Is he aware that Invest NI's contribution to tourism businesses in South Down was under £40,000, yet in Fermanagh and South Tyrone it was £840,000 and in North Antrim it was £400,000? South Down, as the Minister will know, has some excellent products, with the Brontë homeland, the Mournes and Saint Patrick's Trail. How will the Department address that clear imbalance when it comes to moneys going to South Down?

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

You can take one area in which the Department is providing funding, and the Member has taken support for tourism businesses. There are a considerable number of tourism businesses in the broad South Down constituency, many of which, owing to the nature of the constituency, are well established. Some of the other areas that the Member mentioned do not have the same level of development.

Take the Tourist Board's support for events in the Down area in this year alone. It supported the International Bread Festival at the National Trust property at Castle Ward with £18,000. The Festival of Flight, which I mentioned before, was a very successful event that attracted over 100,000 people to Newcastle. It was given £30,000 of support from the Tourist Board. The Ballynahinch Harvest and Country Living Festival, which is in a couple of weekends' time, was given £18,000 of investment. The Hans Sloane Chocolate and Fine Food Festival in Killyleagh, which, although it is in the Strangford constituency, is in the Down district area, has received £9,000. Everybody is encouraged to come to Killyleagh this Saturday and Sunday for that. The St Patrick's Day Festival next year is due to get £30,000.

In all that, I am not counting the ongoing support that there will be for the likes of the Irish Open. That adds up to a considerable amount of support for events in the area, and that will draw visitors. The Festival of Flight is a good example, with thousands of people coming from all over Northern Ireland to Newcastle for that event and spending money in tourism businesses.

The Member has a narrow way of looking at it, which is direct support to the development of businesses. Arguably a better way of providing support is to support events that will bring floods of people into the area who will spend money in the businesses there. So, there are different ways of looking at it. I am confident from looking at the figures that the Tourist Board and the Minister are doing all that they can to support tourism and tourism businesses in the South Down and Down district areas.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

5. asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment for her assessment of the contribution to the economy by the Ulster Grand Prix. (AQO 6612/11-15)

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

The Northern Ireland Tourist Board’s (NITB) international events fund for 2014 introduced a new model to support the development and sustainability of a number of events. The Ulster Grand Prix fitted the criteria for securing one- to three-year funding following a successful economic appraisal of an agreed business plan. As part of the three years of funding, the NITB commissioned an independent count and visitor attitudes survey for the Ulster Grand Prix in 2014. The results will be available in December.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Minister for that response. I thank the Department again for its continuing support for the Ulster Grand Prix, which is the fastest road race in the world. To ensure its ongoing success and to build on a successful summer this year, will the Department engage with the club and the other private sector investors who came on board this year to put resources into the event to try to help enhance the facilities in order to take the event to the next stage and to continue to improve what is a fantastic day?

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for his question. I realised, while he was asking me that, that I could commit the economy Minister to all sorts of things in this position, and she is not even in the country. Given my other job, that might not be the most responsible thing to do.

It is worth putting on record again, if it needs to be put, the importance of road racing to Northern Ireland, not just culturally and in a sporting way but to the economy. I am sitting beside the Member of Parliament for East Londonderry, and he would remind me too of the importance of the North West 200 and other events around Northern Ireland including the excellent Ulster Grand Prix.

I think that the Minister will be more than happy to engage on the basis that Mr Givan outlined because of the previous success of the Ulster Grand Prix. I noted that, in 2011, it attracted over 16,000 visitors, some of which were from outside Northern Ireland, and generated nearly £1 million for the local economy. You would absolutely want to support something that is as successful and as ingrained in the culture of Northern Ireland as that. I am sure that, as with all such events, the Minister will want to appraise this year's results. Subject to a business case and, of course, the availability of funds, I am sure that she would want to support the Ulster Grand Prix and other road racing events across Northern Ireland.

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

Will the Minister outline what discussions the Enterprise Minister has planned with Mr Donohoe's Department and others on supporting future bids for sporting events on an all-island basis?

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

I could set the agenda for this meeting, and it has not even been put in the diary yet. I am sure that one thing that the two Ministers will discuss along those lines is the ongoing development of a bid for the 2023 Rugby World Cup. A lot of interest is starting to develop around next year's Rugby World Cup. There is a huge opportunity for Ireland, both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, to capitalise on the growth and development of rugby across Ireland by having a successful bid for the 2023 World Cup. I think that it would have huge benefits for Northern Ireland in particular. The Executive, have invested considerably, in particular into Ravenhill but also into Casement Park, as part of the bid. I think that there is a ground in the north-west that may form part of the bid as well. This has been agreed by both Governments in both jurisdictions. I am sure that it is something that, if it is not on the agenda of the first meeting, will be taken forward by the two Ministers in conjunction with the sporting and culture, arts and leisure Ministers.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

6. asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment what representations she has made to UK Trade and Investment regarding the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership. (AQO 6613/11-15)

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

The Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is a trade agreement that is currently being negotiated between the European Union and the United States of America. The negotiations do not constitute a devolved Government matter. It is the responsibility of the Westminster Government to work with the European Commission and other member states to develop a comprehensive trade and investment agreement that reflects United Kingdom priorities.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

The reason I raise this matter is because I saw a small document that had been handed out — I think, in the Lords — indicating that Northern Ireland has only one skill, namely aerospace. Yet, we have good health, agrifood, construction, IT, and high-tech skills. We have a whole mass of things going for us. If they see us as having only one high level skill then it seems as though we should be trying, in some way, to influence what is going on there. That is why I asked the question.

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

I am not sure of the origin or status of the document that the Member is talking about. Perhaps he could furnish the Department with some details. If we are being portrayed on a global stage as having only one skill — whereas, as the Member rightly says, we have many more than that — then I am sure that the Department would be keen to try to correct that and make sure that a more accurate picture of what Northern Ireland has to offer is included in any documentation associated with the free trade agreement.

Phil Flanagan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I am a bit startled that the Minister thinks that the devolved institution should have no role in this given that TTIP could devastate our agriculture industry by allowing foods of a reduced standard and GM foods into our economy, as well as opening up the possibility of privatising the NHS. Does the Minister not think that such issues should be a matter for devolved Ministers? Certainly, if Ministers here are concerned about the NHS being privatised — and maybe your Health Minister is not — they should be raising that with members of the British Government and the MEPs.

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

There is a difference between being interested in an issue and being in the lead on it. The Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, as important as it is to Northern Ireland, is not involved in taking a lead in respect of trade negotiations between the United States of America's Government and the European Commission. That is, of course, dealt with at a much higher level than DETI is at. But it is important that there is regular input from Invest Northern Ireland through its chief executive, who meets his counterpart in UK Trade and Investment regularly and is kept apprised of developments. Where concerns are raised about the nature of any proposed free trade agreement, just as I am sure there will be across the other 28 member states of the European Union, they will be taken up with the officials in Brussels as well.

I am sure that the Minister is acutely concerned about some of the issues that the Member has raised, particularly the suggestion that is being made by some that the proposed agreement will lead to the privatisation of the health service. It has been made very clear by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills in London, which is in the lead at a national level on this, that the commissioning of health services remains the domain of individual member states, and, as a devolved region, we are at a further level down. So, the involvement of the private sector in the delivery of health and social care in Northern Ireland is and will remain a matter for the Assembly to decide upon.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

That brings us to the end of the period for oral questions. We move on to topical questions

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

1. asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment whether, given the potential in numbers and quality, Ministers would care to reflect on the scale of our ambition were we to fully embrace the concept of Northern Ireland as a centre of excellence for cancer drug research and development. (AQT 1451/11-15)

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

I think that there is an increasing awareness that Northern Ireland has huge potential in commercialising the opportunities flowing from considerable public investment in cancer research down through the years. As I understand it, there are roughly 130 life science and connected-health companies based in Northern Ireland that employ around 7,500 people and have an annual turnover of over £800 million. So, whilst we sometimes think of life sciences in the broadest sense as maybe being the area of one or two big-name companies, it is much broader than that and has a wider impact on the local economy than we perhaps think.

The Member specifically talked about development in respect of cancer, and this Department, along with the Department of Health, has engaged the MATRIX panel to undertake a foresight and strategy review for health and life sciences to determine how best to grow the overall sector. Cancer will be included in that. The Member will probably recall better than I will that there was an announcement last year of a £13 million partnership to accelerate cancer-focused drug discovery in Northern Ireland. That was between Queen's University and Almac, one of our leading life sciences companies, and, as part of that project, up to 60 ovarian cancer patients will be trialled with a new locally developed drug. So, there is a growing understanding and appreciation that, as awful as cancer is, there are opportunities to tackle it in a global fight and that Northern Ireland can play a role where we punch above our weight.

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

I thank the Minister for his positive approach. In that context, will he agree that the Health Minister's approach to rejecting 40 cancer drugs that are available in England and not making them available here could undermine that ambition? In that context, will he consider reflecting to the Executive the possibility of at least further and strengthened cross-departmental work, if not a separate subcommittee of the Executive, to look at this, given the health outcomes and economic outcomes that could flow from such an important decision as making this a centre of excellence for the whole region?

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

We are at risk of the Finance Minister answering DETI questions but actually answering a question for the Health Department. We are going on a very circular journey. On the issue of what the Health Minister has and has not done, I do not think that it is a matter of him rejecting the use of particular drugs.

The Member will be acutely aware of the financial constraints that the Minister finds himself in, the difficulties that we have around meeting the huge demand right across the health service and the pressure that his budget is under — pressures that are not helped by a lack of progress on welfare reform that is denying him and the entire Executive much-needed resources. I know that the Minister has made clear his desire to get a cancer drugs fund established in Northern Ireland, and I support him in that endeavour.

I do not think that there is any denial of the ability of Northern Ireland to play a leading role, particularly in cancer research, as we have done already. We should pay tribute to the likes of Almac and other companies in Northern Ireland for the work that they do in that field. It is an area where there is huge scope for development, but a lot of work needs to be put in to support the companies that are already doing that work and also, importantly, to connect what we do in the public sector in the NHS. Sometimes I think that, allied to the type of scare stories that Mr Flanagan came out with about privatising the health service, and no matter what your views are about privatising, there is nothing wrong, in my view, with using the opportunities that are there and that have come from public investment to leverage in commercial opportunities that will create jobs on the one hand and, on the other hand, help to solve big problems around cancer and other serious illnesses.

Christopher Hazzard (Sinn Féin, South Down)

2. asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment what proposals DETI is bringing forward to achieve a sustainable economic recovery, given the recently published PwC ‘UK Economic Outlook’, which painted a bleak picture of stagnant economic recovery, with wages still below the level of inflation. (AQT 1452/11-15)

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

I saw and noted the report from PwC. The Member has highlighted an element of it that stood out, and the media coverage described it as a patchy recovery. In some respects, I do not disagree with that; I said that over the last year. I think that we are in full recovery mode now. However, there will still be elements of the economy that will lag behind a little.

In certain sectors — retail is one and construction is another — I do not think that you will see the same degree of growth or impetus behind growth as, perhaps, you will see in other sectors, including services and the manufacturing sector, which have done quite well over the last year and other years. I do not disagree with the assessment that there will be patchy elements to it, but, from listening to the coverage and reading the report, I do not think that we should be dismissive of the tremendous progress that has been made, particularly over the last 12 months. Unemployment in Northern Ireland fell by 1,400 in July, and that was the single biggest decrease in unemployment since October 1999; so it was since even well before the current downturn. Whilst our unemployment rate is a little higher than the UK average, it is still considerably lower than our neighbours to the south.

The Member mentioned wages, and I had hoped that we might get on to the living wage question earlier, but Mr Maskey was not in his place. For the last number of years, DETI has had, through Invest Northern Ireland, a policy of pursuing companies that are paying well above the median wage in Northern Ireland. That can be seen in the long list — the almost daily list — of new companies that have been investing here in Northern Ireland over the last couple of months, and the vast majority of them are paying well in excess of the living wage and paying well above the median wage in Northern Ireland as well. I think that the whole House is agreed that the way in which we will tackle some of the underlying problems of poverty in our society is by ensuring that not only are there jobs but that there are well-paying jobs in our economy.

Christopher Hazzard (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his answer. Given that at least 15 major reports since the 1957 Isles and Cuthbert report indicated that economic recovery will always be patchy in this state given our lack of control of our own economic destiny, will the Minister offer his support for the devolution of the necessary tools to allow us to carve out a sustainable and equitable economic recovery?

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

I do support the devolution of necessary tools. The Member and I might disagree on what the necessary ones are. In the past, I have supported the devolution of air passenger duty for long-haul flights where there was a very clear need to do that in order to retain that direct connectivity into North America, and I still support the devolution of corporation tax powers to Northern Ireland. We all know that, when we get it — I remain optimistic that we will get it. We await news later in the week about another part of the United Kingdom and what it decides to do. However, I remain optimistic, irrespective of the result there, that the power will be extended to Northern Ireland, and then it is a matter of us deciding what to do with it.

When we do get it, it will be challenging. At this moment in time, that is to the exclusion of all other possible tools, which I am not as convinced would have as transformative an effect on our economy as corporation tax would have. That is the one that I remain focused on; that the Enterprise, Trade and Investment Minister remains focused on; and that the Executive as a whole remain focused on. If we get that power and take the decision to reduce corporation tax in Northern Ireland, then I think that it will have that effect. Whilst not being a silver bullet for our economy, it will have a transformative effect in a way that no other tax-raising or -varying power could have.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

3. asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment to advise what action is being taken to ensure that we have diversity in our electricity generating capacity and to ensure that we are not enabling excessive profits to be made by those generators, given the ongoing conflict between the Ukraine and Russia, which, although it may seem to be a little bit far away, given our reliance on gas, surely must be of concern to us all. (AQT 1453/11-15)

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

The Member may be right to characterise that situation as seemingly remote and distant to the activities of this House, but when civil unrest or crisis happens in eastern Ukraine, it has an impact further afield. The Member is right to highlight the impact that it could potentially have on gas supplies, as so many natural gas supplies for Europe come from Russia and through Ukraine. As I understand it, most of the UK's supply of natural gas that is not our own comes from either liquefied natural gas or from Norway, but those ships can be diverted mid-sea to go to other places where that gas is needed or where a higher price is paid. That is something that we should be aware of. It may not be seen as a pressing matter in this place, but that is one reason why the Enterprise, Trade and Investment Minister and others in the Executive, including me, have long talked about security of supply rather than prices.

We need to continue to focus on achieving our Programme for Government targets for the diversification of our energy sources. I also note that we are on track to reach our target in terms of renewables. We also have to press ahead with improving our infrastructure. That includes the North/South interconnector, which will ensure that Northern Ireland's electricity supply can benefit from having better connectivity to the Irish Republic.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

The latest power station proposal in Northern Ireland has been for a sizeable power station in the scenic Inver area outside Larne. That was initially floated as being a unit for renewable energy storage, although I have noticed that it requires a high-pressure gas supply and so would be heavily dependent on gas in the future. Can the Minister assure me, perhaps from his DFP background as well as while standing in for DETI, that no public funding will be used to create yet another gas-dependent power station, as the future of that supply is insecure?

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

I do not know enough about the potential power station to pass any definitive comment, and I would be cautious about doing so either on my behalf or on behalf of the Enterprise, Trade and Investment Minister. I will therefore refrain from passing particular comment on that. I am not sure what the status of that proposal is or whether the proposer has applied for public money. However, I am sure that officials will have heard the Member raise the query, and I will ensure that they write to him with more detail.

Sean Lynch (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

4. asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment for details on strategies to address underemployment, given that a report from the TUC has shown that locally we have experienced the sharpest increase in underemployment; an increase of 37% since 2010. (AQT 1454/11-15)

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

I can certainly furnish the Member with any specific elements of existing strategies that deal with the issue of underemployment. However, sometimes we focus particularly on elements of unemployment, such as youth employment. Those are problems, but I think that we are making significant process in addressing underemployment. We are also making slow but positive progress in addressing economic inactivity in Northern Ireland. However, we must not forget that there are many people who, whilst they are in work, are defined as underemployed because of the hours that they are doing or the type of job that they are performing. I am sure that what will come back from the Department is that much of what we are doing in trying to attract investment into Northern Ireland and to grow indigenous firms is all aimed at ensuring that, whether it is unemployment, youth unemployment or underemployment, we are strengthening our economy and creating opportunities for everyone.