Northern Ireland Assembly, 13 January 2015

336 contributions from 59 members. The official report.

Assembly Business

Mitchel McLaughlin (Speaker, South Antrim)

I inform Members that I have received a valid petition to refer a ministerial decision to the Executive Committee under section 28B of the Northern Ireland Act 1998. The petition relates to the decision by the Minister of Education to approve changes to post-primary education in Fermanagh, discontinuing the Collegiate Grammar School and Portora Royal School, as announced to the Assembly on 28 November 2014. In accordance with the Act and Standing Order 29, I have consulted with the political parties whose members hold seats in the Assembly. Having consulted the parties and given the matter full consideration, I have certified that the Minister's decision does not relate to a matter of public importance. I will not, therefore, refer the decision to the Executive Committee for consideration.

Ministerial Statements

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

I wish to make the following statement on the seventeenth North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC) meeting in the health and food safety sectoral format, which was held in the NSMC joint secretariat offices in Armagh on Wednesday 12 November 2014. Minister O’Neill MLA and I represented the Northern Ireland Executive at that meeting. The Irish Government were represented by Leo Varadkar TD, Minister for Health, and Dr James Reilly TD, Minister for Children and Youth Affairs. Minister Varadkar chaired the meeting. This statement has been agreed with Minister O’Neill, and I am making it on behalf of both of us.

The Council noted that considerable EU funding opportunities are available in the health sector, and we have encouraged our respective officials to continue to identify joint projects that can attract European funding. We welcomed the collaboration that is taking place to draw down funding, in particular the Cooperation and Working Together (CAWT) project, which is delivering cross-border health services to improve patient care.

Ministers noted the progress on the alcohol-related harm prevention strategies in both jurisdictions. That included the work of the North/South alcohol policy advisory group and the establishment of a North/South hidden harm group, facilitated by Cooperation and Working Together.

The Council noted the ongoing work on minimum alcohol unit pricing. We discussed the jointly commissioned University of Sheffield study on the potential impact of minimum unit pricing in both jurisdictions. Minister Varadkar and I are committed to working towards the introduction of minimum unit pricing at the same time. That commitment from the Minister in the Republic that we will work together on this issue was a very welcome outcome of the meeting. We can all understand why that is important because if Northern Ireland was to go down the road of minimum unit pricing on its own and the Irish Republic did not, that would obviously lead to many smuggling opportunities.

The Council was informed that the tobacco products directive came into force in May 2014, following European Union member states' final approval. Ministers noted the ongoing work under the EU action plan on childhood obesity. Ministers welcomed the progress on the development of the two new suicide prevention strategies. We also welcomed the commitment to share knowledge arising from media and public information campaigns on mental health.

It is unfortunate that the Chair of the Health Committee is unable to be with us this morning because I am sure that she would be very interested in the next section of my contribution, which deals with Altnagelvin Hospital. The Council noted that a memorandum of understanding and a service level agreement for the operation of the radiotherapy unit at Altnagelvin had been signed, that works had commenced at the site and that the project remained on target for completion with an operational date of autumn 2016. I am sure that everyone in the House will welcome the considerable progress that is being made in that much-needed and much-welcomed project. Ministers welcomed the continued progress of the Ireland-Northern Ireland-National Cancer Institute cancer consortium and the proposals for sharing information to support the work streams of the consortium.

The Council noted the report from the latest meeting of the tri-jurisdictional steering group for the US-Ireland R&D Partnership which took place on 29 September 2014. We noted that the meeting included discussion on the various application success rates in the different research priority areas, opportunities for promoting partnerships to increase visibility, particularly in the USA, and new funding mechanisms, including centre-to-centre cooperation.

Ministers also welcomed the update on the ongoing work of the All Ireland Institute of Hospice and Palliative Care, including the recent launch of the children and young people's website.

The Council recalled the discussion at the NSMC plenary in Dublin on 3 October. Ministers noted that the child protection work programme continues to be progressed and that updates will be reported at future meetings. We also noted that a North/South child care in practice conference on authoritative early intervention was held on 22 October 2014 in Dundalk.

The Council noted a progress report provided by the recently appointed chief executive of safefood, Ray Dolan. Ministers were briefed on the continued development of the awareness campaign targeting childhood obesity and overweight. We also noted the success and development of the community food initiatives and a range of research projects and surveys completed in recent months.

The Council was advised that safefood had established a draft 2015 business plan and budget. These will be submitted to NSMC for approval once they have been approved by the sponsoring Departments and Finance Ministers. The Council noted that safefood has prepared its annual report and accounts for 2013, which have been certified by the Comptrollers and Auditors General. Once the annual report has been approved by both sponsor Departments, it will be laid before the Northern Ireland Assembly and both Houses of the Oireachtas.

Ministers noted the position with regard to Tourism Ireland’s annual report and accounts 2013, which have been laid before the Northern Ireland Assembly and will be laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas. Finally, we agreed that the next NSMC health and public safety meeting will be held in spring 2015.

I should say to Members that I had formally invited Minister Varadkar to Londonderry to visit the new radiotherapy unit, which his Department is partially funding. I am glad to say that the revenue from the Republic continues to flow for that scheme and that there has been good cooperation on the funding of it. I understand that the visit will take place in May. At that time, I will also be keen that he visit the new South West Acute Hospital in Enniskillen, where a significant number of patients from the Irish Republic are having various procedures.

I thought that it was a very good, positive meeting. I have had various contact with the Minister since, and I think that we can establish a very good, cooperative relationship on issues of mutual concern.

Paula Bradley (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Minister for his statement. It may have been brief but it was certainly packed with lots of positive information.

I wish to turn the Minister's attention back to the minimum unit pricing of alcohol. The Committee for Social Development has discussed the issue. As someone who worked in the health service and saw at first hand the effects that alcohol has on our hospital services, I ask how realistic it is that we work towards the introduction of minimum unit pricing at the same time as the Republic of Ireland.

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

I was greatly heartened by Minister Varadkar's view on the matter. I also met the Health Ministers for Wales and Scotland, and we are all singing off the same hymn sheet.

I welcome comments from the parties in the Assembly on their views on minimum unit pricing. We announced it just before Christmas and have not had an opportunity to consult. It is important that we work together as an Assembly on that vital issue.

I got the clear impression from my counterpart in the Irish Republic that he is as committed to its introduction as I am. He can see clearly the logic of us working together. If we did not, and we were to introduce, say, a minimum price of 50p a unit in Northern Ireland, and the Irish Republic refused to do that or was a long way behind us, it is obvious what would happen. There would be the mass importation of cheaper alcohol from the Republic into Northern Ireland.

The island of Ireland has history when it comes to this issue. There has been a long tradition of alcohol moving from one side of the border to the other, depending on price. Therefore, because we are dealing with two currencies, it is vital that we work together. As such, we are going to have to pitch our minimum price at a level that means that people buying alcohol in the supermarket are paying basically the same, North or South.

My clear view from the meeting was that exactly the same problems that we have, and the £900 million that they are costing us, are evident in the Republic. It also accepts the University of Sheffield study. I think therefore that we are moving forward in tandem, and I really do welcome that cooperation.

Rosaleen McCorley (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Cuirim fáilte roimh ráiteas an Aire ar maidin. I welcome the Minister's statement. I agree that it is packed with a lot of issues.

The Minister said that there has been development with suicide prevention strategies. Suicide is a scourge on Irish society across the island, so to see progress is welcome. Can the Minister elaborate on that progress and is there a timeline for the strategies?

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

As the Member knows, the issue has come up frequently at sectoral meetings. Indeed, there have been joint events between the two jurisdictions. We are hoping that our suicide prevention strategy will go out to consultation in early 2015, so that is only a few weeks away. I have not got a date from my colleagues in the Irish Republic, but there will be a read-across in the two strategies as to the most efficient way of dealing with the issue.

We have huge experience of dealing with this desperately difficult problem. Remember that, in 2013, we lost 303 lives to suicide in Northern Ireland. It is a growing and very difficult problem. Therefore, we will have to learn from each other. I suspect that the issue will be on the agenda for future sectoral meetings, and I want to work closely with our colleagues in the Irish Republic.

In Northern Ireland, however, different issues from those in the Irish Republic are causing the worrying trend. For instance, the Irish Republic does not have the legacy of the Troubles that we have or the sectarian interfaces. Therefore, it is important that we have our own distinct strategies but that they complement each other rather than conflict.

What slightly worries me about this statement is that, on every issue that we brought up, there seemed to be unanimity and agreement on the ways forward. There were no differences or difficulties expressed whatsoever. Again, they are very keen to let us have access to their research and study, and we are equally keen to make our research available to the authorities in the Republic in this instance.

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

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I congratulate you on your election.

I warmly welcome the Minister's positive comments in relation to the working relationship with the Minister in the Republic, Leo Varadkar, which I hope continues. The SDLP has always taken the view that North/South makes sense, so, as you can imagine, we are doubly excited when we hear talk of joint projects and considerable EU funding. Perhaps the Minister will take the opportunity to expand on the range of those projects available and the extent to which further funding might become available.

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

The honourable Member, from his huge experiences, will know that, for health, EU funding is not the pot of gold that it is perhaps for other Departments. If only we could access additional funding from Europe to cover pressures on A&E and domiciliary care etc, but we cannot. Therefore, we are really tied to INTERREG V and Horizon 2020.

In Northern Ireland, we have three health-care intervention networks established in cancer, public health and through the Northern Ireland Clinical Research Network, which cover 11 areas of health and social care. Within that existing portfolio, there are interventional trials running in Northern Ireland, of which 30% are commercial.

The overall goal of INTERREG V is to extend to those networks in Northern Ireland and build corresponding linked infrastructure of that kind in the Republic of Ireland. That is important, but it is on a very small scale in the overall scheme of things. We have a £5 billion budget and, in the Republic, the budget is something like €9 billion. Therefore, whilst it is important in areas of mutual concern to encourage joint provision and cooperation, it does not come anywhere near what we need to fund our own health service, for which we are short by about £70 million this year. Therefore, I welcome it and think it has potential, but it will not, in my opinion, provide a significant input to our future funding in the hundreds of millions that we require.

Jo-Anne Dobson (UUP, Upper Bann)

I thank the Minister for his statement. It is proposed that the Food Standards Agency will have its budget reduced from £8·5 million to £7·4 million. Given that food hygiene official controls constitute over 60% of the entire FSA budget, how is the Minister sure that such a reduction will not impact on food safety standards, especially with regard to clamping down on the blight of cross-border smuggling and illegal slaughtering?

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

I have had representations from the Food Standards Agency on that particular issue and I can understand its concerns about the reduction in funding. A very high proportion of its expenditure is on fees for vets to inspect meat plants. I am pleased to say that that work is generally showing that our standards are extremely high in Northern Ireland and, indeed, in the Irish Republic. Some of what is being undertaken at the moment is very routine and is not producing much in the way of new information.

The agency has asked us to have another look at the reduction in funding, and I have agreed to do that. It is like so many other issues in my budget and in the Northern Ireland block grant generally: we have to find savings somewhere. There is only a small area that we can target for budget reduction, and this is one of those bodies that is not seen as being front line. Therefore, we have asked all such groups to come up with options for a 5%, 10% and 15% reduction in funding. When all those come back, I will look very carefully at them and see what the impact will be.

I suspect that, with the FSA, we could reduce to some extent the amount of red tape and bureaucracy at meat plants to reduce the costs involved. Well done to the quality assurance scheme and our farmers for producing food to the highest standard. That is showing in the abattoirs, where it is quite unusual to find issues of concern, which means that all the tests that are being carried out are not producing much.

A range of different agencies have responsibility for food safety.

I would be surprised if it were not possible to continue to ensure, on a cross-border basis, the highest possible standards within a reduced budget, though it may not be as reduced as the early indications suggest.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

Mr Speaker, I take this opportunity to congratulate you on being elected Speaker and wish you every success in the future. I also take this opportunity to welcome our Health Minister back. He was lying very low over the last fortnight, so I am delighted to see that he is around and fighting well.

The report that we have has this morning is very comprehensive. It covers many important issues and the progress on them. I am delighted to hear and see the Minister's enthusiasm to see Ireland united on the introduction of minimum unit pricing at the same time. As the Minister has said himself, most of what is contained in the statement is about everybody cooperating very well to the benefit of all our people on the island.

Childhood obesity is very important and something that we all know is going to have to be tackled in the future. Can the Minister advise if there is any possibility, under the EU action plan on childhood obesity, for funding to be directed to ensure that our young people, particularly our schoolchildren, continue to get the education that is needed and the wholesome food that has been provided but that is under threat because of serious budget constraints in Northern Ireland? Is there any chance that the Minister could chase that up to ensure that youngsters at our schools continue to get good wholesome food, fruit etc?

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

First of all, I am glad that the honourable Member for Strangford missed me over Christmas. I cannot win. If I am constantly on the airwaves, he complains that he is fed up hearing my voice. Then, when I give him a bit of relief, he says that he has missed me greatly. However, I suspect that he will be pretty annoyed about the number of times that he will hear me in 2015.

As he knows, the overarching goal of the action plan on childhood obesity is to contribute to halting the rise in the number of overweight and obese children and young people, 0-18 years. We want to achieve that by 2020. To achieve this goal, the action plan specifies a set of operational objectives that have been designed to guide the actions of stakeholders across eight priority areas. Actions undertaken in these areas in Northern Ireland include supporting a healthy start to life and promoting healthier environments, especially in schools and preschools.

The former Minister wrote to the Secretary of State for Health at Westminster in support of a 9.00 pm watershed ban on the advertising of certain foods. However, this issue remains a reserved matter. Again, there might be a role for cooperation here between the two jurisdictions. I understand that some Members and some members of the public in Northern Ireland watch an overseas — sorry, another — TV station known as RTÉ. If RTÉ continues to advertise foods before the 9.00 pm watershed, it really would not make much sense for us to put a ban on that. However, that is not an issue that we, as an Assembly, can deal with.

Remember, of course, that this is much more than just a Department of Health issue. The Public Health Agency (PHA) jointly funds an active school travel programme for 180 schools. DCAL and Sport Northern Ireland continue to invest in the Active Communities programme, in which approximately 106,000 people participated approximately 1 million times in 2013-14.

He is absolutely right: if we do not solve this problem of childhood obesity, it will lead to a long-term rise in type 2 diabetes and other conditions that could swamp the health service in 20 or 30 years' time. Whilst we have concentrated today on many of the tangible issues such as the radiology centre in Altnagelvin and minimum unit prices, there is no doubt that this is one of the priorities that we have to tackle in the coming few years.

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

I am very keen to start a public debate on alcohol abuse in Northern Ireland. We know, for instance, that it costs the health service in Northern Ireland £240 million a year. If I had had that £240 million, my first three months in office would have been so much easier because we would not have had to have any contingency plans and cause the pain that occurred in various communities. We would have been able to roll out new and additional services. We would not have had, for instance, the 130 deaths that occurred in Northern Ireland as a result of alcohol abuse.

There are so many indicators that this is the right thing to do: alcohol is 60% cheaper than it was 30 years ago; we treat 3,100 individuals in hospitals as a result of alcohol abuse; and, at midnight on a Saturday or Sunday, the vast majority of those who report to A&E are under the influence of alcohol or are there because of alcohol. I am very keen that all the parties and all the elected representatives in the Chamber let me know what they feel about the concept of minimum unit pricing, because there is not much sense in all of us working hard on the issue to find that some parties have such huge difficulties with it that it gets no further.

We have found that 31% of our population are binge drinkers: 35% of males and 27% of females. This is a big problem, particularly when you remember that 27% of the population, including me, never touch it. Therefore, that indicates that the prevalence amongst the rest of the community is extremely high.

We will all be put under enormous pressure on this issue by the large drink companies. Be very aware that companies with a bigger budget than the Northern Ireland Executive will lobby you — be ready for that. It is important that, before that starts, we hear the initial views of all MLAs. If you have problems with it, let me know, because I am very keen to have that discussion. We have a hiatus caused by the fact that big distillers in Scotland have referred the Scottish Executive's decision to the European Court of Justice, and there can be no legislation until that case is reported upon. So, in the interim, let us have a debate and see what we think about making alcohol less readily available to all in our community.

Cathal Ó hOisín (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Déanaim comhgairdeas leat ar do phost nua mar Cheann Comhairle ar an Tionól. I wish you every success in your new post, a Cheann Comhairle. It is a well-known fact that Derrymen, be they from the county or city, are even-minded and fair-handed, and it is on Derry, particularly the radiotherapy unit at Altnagelvin, that I want to make my remarks. It does my heart good, and that of many cancer sufferers and their families, to see the rapid progression on the unit and know that it will open in the autumn next year. We are very glad of that. Further to that, will the Minister qualify what exactly the proposals are for sharing, on an all-island basis, vital information from the National Cancer Institute cancer consortium?

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

First, I welcome the progress of the new radiotherapy centre in Londonderry. I was up at it recently. I do not know not whether it was the topping-up or what particular stage it was, but it was certainly making excellent progress.

It is unfortunate that the Chair is not here because I think that she would be very interested in my next point, which I think I should raise as a result of this question. There is considerable capacity in the cath lab in Altnagelvin, which is brand new state-of-the-art provision for those who have had heart attacks or have heart conditions. There is a proposal, which I hope to pursue, that we make available that cath lab to patients from Donegal, where between 130 and 150 people a year have cardiac arrests. It does not seem to make much sense that they almost drive past the front door of Altnagelvin on their way to Dublin. When I asked the authorities up there recently what happens to those patients, they told me that some of them die. It is very sad that people are forced to drive for two hours when there is a brand new state-of-the-art facility in Altnagelvin that they could use and that the clinicians there are very keen to make available because we have sufficient spare capacity. I hope to talk to the Minister in the Republic when he comes up to Altnagelvin about the potential to use that spare capacity .

We have all heard of a chap called Christie O'Donnell, the famous taxi driver in the Bogside who had a heart attack and drove himself to Altnagelvin. His condition was quickly spotted, he was in the cath lab within 55 minutes, totally conscious throughout his procedure and out within three days. I am glad to say that he told the entire city of his very pleasant experience. Why should that not be made available on a full-cost-recovery basis to the residents of Donegal? That makes common sense to me. Maybe some people can see a problem with it, but I cannot.

We are still working very closely together on the cancer strategy and hope to use the joint research between the two jurisdictions to improve cancer care. Again, I think that there is a lot to be said for joint cooperation and sharing of information. Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic are quite good at cancer care, and the stats show that we are making huge progress. Therefore, as with all jurisdictions, we are very keen to share the knowledge and experiences of the two jurisdictions to better the treatment of all our communities.

George Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

I thank the Minister for his statement, and welcome that work has commenced at Altnagelvin Hospital on the much-needed radiotherapy unit for the north-west of the Province. Is all the funding now in place for that much-needed project?

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

I suppose that I am going to disappoint some Members, because all the news from the meeting was very positive. You always look for the complexities, difficulties and problems, but we came out of that meeting feeling that it had gone very well.

I am glad to say that the authority in the Irish Republic — the HSE — has come up to the mark and has been paying the capital bills that we have sent for the work on the new radiotherapy unit. There have been no difficulties whatsoever with that, and that is commendable given the fact that the Republic is coming through very difficult financial times. No; there have been absolutely no problems.

I am told that the discussions on the agreement to reimburse patients when they eventually arrive from the Republic are also going very well. From my experience with Daisy Hill Hospital, where a high percentage of the users of the renal unit are from Louth and north Monaghan, I know that there have been no difficulties whatsoever with that arrangement. The bill is sent, it is paid and the unit is used to its maximum capacity. That has to be a good thing.

I know that the honourable Member for East Londonderry is very concerned about his constituents in places like Limavady and Ballykelly. They can be absolutely certain that, as things stand, that unit will open on time and will be used to alleviate the problems that so many cancer patients face in the north-west.

Four years ago, we were told that it would never happen and that the money was not there to build that new facility. Indeed, it was very controversial at the time. The first decision that Edwin Poots made as Health Minister was that the radiotherapy centre in Londonderry would go ahead, and we have delivered on that promise.

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

I thank the Minister for his statement. I want to ask him about the tri-jurisdictional collaboration with the US-Ireland R&D Partnership. What is expected to come out of that and what sort of resourcing implications are there likely to be for the centre-to-centre collaboration?

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

As the Member knows, the US-Ireland R&D Partnership promotes innovative research projects to deliver major advances in healthcare and to the economy. The projects involve academic and clinical research collaborations from the USA, Ireland and Northern Ireland. Project proposals relevant to health care are submitted to the US National Institutes of Health, where they undergo rigorous evaluation. If they are deemed to be of sufficient scientific merit, they are recommended for funding. Funding is provided by each of the three jurisdictions to meet the research costs that they will incur.

I am very excited about that proposal, because the US is obviously a leading world authority on medical research. Not only does it provide opportunities for clients and patients in Northern Ireland to obtain better care, but Northern Ireland is quite good at taking those technologies and using them to promote employment. It has been quite remarkable that, during the last five years, all our major companies in that field have increased their employment and have not laid anybody off. Indeed, one of the major companies doubled its workforce between 2008 and 2014. So, that indicates that the outcomes of that tri-nation partnership could lead to significant employment opportunities throughout Northern Ireland, and not always in the greater Belfast area.

The concept that the world ends at Glengormley does not apply here, because the leading players are in places like Newry, Crumlin, Portadown and Craigavon. I was in Cuba two years ago with the then Health Committee Chair, Sue Ramsey, and it was very interesting to note that a lot of diagnostics in Cuba were being carried out by Randox in Crumlin. With great pleasure, I explained where Crumlin was. I remember that company starting with four men in a farm building at the lough shore near where my grandparents lived, and now it is a world leader. This has my full commitment, as well as that of the ETI Minister and the previous Minister, Edwin Poots, not only to benefit our patients but to develop our economy. I am totally committed to pursuing every possible way of maximising the returns from this partnership.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

The Minister advises that the memorandum of understanding for the radiotherapy unit in Londonderry has now been signed. Will he tell us something about the charging regime that will apply? Is he satisfied that it will be foolproof, and how does that compare with the experience of foreign use of Newry and Enniskillen hospitals?

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

It is quite a simple issue: the board and the trust decide what is full-cost recovery for each procedure carried out. The patient comes from the Irish Republic — from Donegal, Cavan or wherever — and the procedure is carried out. We are then very quick to send the bill to the Irish Republic, and my experience is that it pays quickly and does not haggle or negotiate. A reasonably solid income is produced for the Department. The Newry experience is that there have not been any difficulties. I am always very quick to check and double-check, because, if something is too good to be true, it sometimes is. However, I have spoken to the Southern Board about it and visited the renal unit to see how smoothly the system operates, and we do not seem to be experiencing any problems. I had suspected that, given the dreadful difficulties that the Health Department in the Irish Republic was under during the recession, there would have been problems getting the money out, but that has not occurred. I am confident that, if there are any problems with getting full-cost recovery, the problem is ours because we have not assessed the bill correctly; it is not that the Republic is not paying.

As to whether the Irish Republic has come up with the money for the capital aspect of the budget — absolutely, on the nail, no problem. Every time we asked for the money that was committed by the Irish Republic, we got it. I am confident that my officials will make certain that we will not be out of pocket for having treated patients not only from the Irish Republic but from anywhere else where we can have full-cost recovery, and that will add significantly to our income.

There is also another aspect. If you spend vast amounts of money, as we are doing in the Western Trust — woe betide anyone who comes to me in the next 18 months and says that Altnagelvin is being neglected, because that simply is not true — it is absolutely vital that you use those assets to the maximum. There really is no sense in spending millions of pounds on a new facility to have it lying empty for several hours a day or at weekends. It makes commercial sense to ensure that patients from Donegal — be it in the cath labs or the radiotherapy unit — are there, because they keep that capacity going more efficiently.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I also offer my comhghairdeas to you on your new appointment and wish you all the best for the future.

With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I wish to make a statement in compliance with section 52 of the 1998 Act regarding the twenty-sixth meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council in aquaculture and marine sectoral format. The meeting was held in Armagh on 5 December 2014. The Executive were represented by Minister Mervyn Storey and me. The Dublin Government were represented by the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Alex White TD, and Joe McHugh TD, Minister of State at the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources. Minister White chaired the meeting. The statement has been agreed with Minister Storey, and I make it on behalf of us both.

Given that it was the first time that three of those Ministers had attended a meeting in aquaculture and marine sectoral format, the chief executive of the Loughs Agency outlined the key objectives for the agency in 2014-2016. The Council noted the key objectives and benefits of the agency’s investment strategy for local and community initiatives in the Foyle and Carlingford areas. The Council received a progress report on the work of the Loughs Agency from the chief executive. Ministers welcomed progress on the activities of the Loughs Agency, including an update on the management agreement, the progress on the Loughs Agency’s financial statements for 2012 and the Foyle Ambassador Programme.

In relation to the management agreement, we were told that the interdepartmental group on jurisdictional issues met on 29 October 2014, with a further recent exchange of views between the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. In parallel, the Loughs Agency continues to engage with other relevant agencies in developing a management agreement. The agreement will address the practical and operational issues that will arise from the transfer of aquaculture licensing and development functions to the agency. As previously noted, any such operational agreement could not be implemented prior to the resolution of the jurisdictional issue. I have asked that Minister White works with Minister Coveney to progress the management agreement. I stressed that the agreement has been under discussion for quite a number of years and that it is important that it is advanced.

The Council noted the latest position on the survival of Atlantic salmon in the Foyle and Carlingford catchments and the ongoing conservation and protection efforts. It also noted the position on the survival of the native Lough Foyle flat oyster and the need to balance the conservation imperative with sufficient economic opportunity for stakeholders in the industry. During the NSMC meeting, Ministers called on the Loughs Agency to review its decision to close the six main oyster beds. I am pleased to say that on 11 December, the chief executive took the decision to reopen two of the six main oyster beds. Whilst I appreciate the importance of management interventions to conserve and maintain oyster stocks, I was mindful of the impact that closure of the oyster beds was having on the livelihood of local oystermen, particularly in the run-up to Christmas. The decision struck a balance between the socio-economic benefits for the Lough Foyle fishermen and the scientific evidence supporting the long-term sustainability of the native oyster fishery in Lough Foyle.

The Council received an update on the agency’s ongoing work commitments, such as its responsibilities under the water framework directive and the habitats directive. Water quality and biological monitoring programmes continue to provide valuable information for the management of the systems. A small streams survey of Carlingford to determine the potential for rehabilitation of trout-spawning areas and a survey of urban streams were undertaken. The agency has also developed a fisheries' habitat improvement assessment template for 2015. We heard about the upward trend in conservation limits. In 2005, the main rivers, on average, were only meeting 50% of their conservation limits, and in 2014 the average was approximately 97%. Ministers also noted the progress on the IBIS project and the ongoing partnership with the Queen’s University Belfast and Glasgow University.

The Council noted that the Loughs Agency has applied the required efficiency savings to the 2015 budget in accordance with agreed guidance issued by the Department of Finance and Personnel and the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform and that sponsor Department Ministers and Finance Ministers have approved the business plan and budget. I am pleased to report that the NSMC approved the Loughs Agency 2015 business plan and recommended the 2015 budget provision of just under £4 million. I want to pay tribute to the chief executive and his staff for delivering the draft business plan within very tight time constraints.

Ministers welcomed the report on the activities of the Loughs Agency in promoting and marketing Foyle and Carlingford loughs, in particular marine leisure infrastructure developments, outreach and community activities and promotion of local seafood products. The Council noted the report on the funding opportunities available to the Loughs Agency and future plans for funding applications that would benefit the Foyle and Carlingford catchments.

The Council considered and approved the Foyle area regulations 2014. These were scrutinised by the Agriculture and Rural Development Committee earlier last year.

Ministers approved the determinations made by the Loughs Agency and the parallel determinations of other North/South bodies that the North/South pension scheme should apply to all North/South bodies, including the Loughs Agency. The NSMC also approved the determination made by the Loughs Agency that the Foyle Fisheries Commission pension scheme 1979 be closed and that, simultaneously, its members transfer to the North/South pension scheme.

The Council agreed to meet again in aquaculture and marine sectoral format in March.

William Irwin (DUP, Newry and Armagh)

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister for her statement. I refer her to paragraphs 8 and 9, regarding the management agreement. As the Minister knows, this has been a recurring theme over many years, and it seems we are no nearer to getting it resolved. Reference was made to a recent exchange of views between the two Departments on this. Will the Minister indicate whether the views were favourably inclined to a management agreement?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Aquaculture licensing is one of the functions of the Loughs Agency. To date, as you have rightly said, the agency has not been able to assume that function due to jurisdictional, legal and policy issues. At its meeting on 29 October 2014, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade reported that the jurisdictional issue had recently been discussed. Remember that those negotiations are with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Those discussions were quite positive, and there were moves to progress things, but all issues have not been resolved. I understand that the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade is currently awaiting further communication from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office arising from that dialogue.

In parallel with ongoing discussions on the jurisdictional issue, the Loughs Agency continues to engage with other relevant agencies in developing a management agreement that will address the practical and operational issues that may arise. So, it is working to make sure that it has things in place that are ready to go as soon as we have the agreement. I confirm to the Member that I stressed at the meeting the need for this to be resolved. It has been going on for far too long; it has been going on for quite a number of years, certainly for the time that I have been attending NSMC meetings. I have asked Minister White to raise the issue again with Minister Coveney. I have also raised the issue with Minister Coveney, and I will continue to push for it to be resolved.

Oliver McMullan (Sinn Féin, East Antrim)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I congratulate you on your historic elevation.

Minister, I thank you for your presentation. Will the Minister tell us the current status of the proposed fisheries Bill?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Formal consultation on policy proposals for the new fisheries Bill, which, among other things, include proposals to amend the Foyle Fisheries Act, closed on 10 November 2014. Officials are analysing the outcome of the recent consultation on proposals for the new Bill. The final policy that will underpin the draft fisheries Bill will be finalised once a full analysis of the outcome of the consultation has been completed. My aim is to introduce the Bill to the Assembly before the 2015 summer recess. In order to make arrangements in relation to the Loughs Agency, parallel changes are required in the Twenty-six Counties, and discussions are under way with the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources as the co-sponsor.

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

I thank the Minister for her statement. In relation to the management agreement, might opportunities arise to increase the potential for funding to make sure that we have further development in the Foyle and Carlingford catchment areas?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The management agreement is a practical issue that we need to resolve, but there absolutely are other opportunities for funding. The Loughs Agency is working, particularly at European level, to see what funding it is able to draw down. Quite significant funding has been invested in aquaculture. We want to see that continuing. Given the financial climate that we are in, it is so important that the agency looks towards other funders. It is actively involved in quite a number of projects that it is chasing at a European level and even more internationally than that. To date, it has secured in excess of €15 million. That shows the potential of the Loughs Agency to seek additional funding. I know that it will continue to do that over the next wee while as part of its plans moving forward as it looks towards other partners that it can work with, particularly in research.

Jo-Anne Dobson (UUP, Upper Bann)

I also thank the Minister for her statement. Will she detail how the recommended 2015 budget grant provision of under £4 million compares with previous years? Is she absolutely confident that, as the crisis in public spending in key services such as health and education looks set to continue, no further savings can be made from the Loughs Agency?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

NSMC Ministers approved the Loughs Agency's business plan and recommended that it receive budget provision of £3·95 million. In accordance with the agreed guidance, the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission is required to make efficiency savings of 4% for every year between 2014 and 2016. It has lived up to that. It is a plan that will culminate in overall savings of 12% up to 2016. I am pleased that the Loughs Agency has been very proactive and has applied all the required efficiency savings in the 2015 budget in accordance with what was agreed with the sponsor Finance Departments. I appreciate the challenges that lie ahead for the Loughs Agency. They are as relevant to it as they are to other bodies. I am grateful to the chief executive for being proactive and looking for other sources of funding, which I referred to earlier. It has a very ambitious programme in terms of the research it wishes to do and the opportunities for funding that are there. I am happy to work with it in its pursuit of that.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

Following on from that question, I am concerned about paragraphs 19 and 20. Paragraph 19 states that there have been:

"the required efficiency savings to the 2015 budget in accordance with agreed guidance".

Can the Minister tell the Assembly what, if any, work will fall by the wayside as a result of the savings that are spoken about in paragraph 19?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The Loughs Agency has been aware of the requirement that was set to find 4% year on year, so, in setting out its programme for the year ahead, it has built in to its corporate plan and business plan the fact that it needs to find that 4% saving. It is not a matter of reducing; it knew that it had to find it. As I said, although I appreciate the work that it has done in finding the savings, I also appreciate the work that it has done in attracting additional EU funding to help it to deliver the fantastic service that it does.

Sydney Anderson (DUP, Upper Bann)

I thank the Minister for her statement. I, too, wish to follow on with paragraph 19 and the budgets. Minister, that paragraph refers to "efficiency savings", as you mentioned. Can you elaborate on that? Are you satisfied that the agency represents value for money?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Yes, I am. I read its business plan and its budget proposals, and I look through all its plans. I said in the previous answers that I commend the Loughs Agency for the work that it has been doing. When you see for yourself the projects that it does on the ground to promote tourism and the fact that it has been able to bring part of the Clipper Round the World Yacht Race to Derry, you see that fantastic tourism potential has been opened up. It is showcasing fishing in Ireland right across the world and is attending a lot of events. I think that its track record speaks for itself, and the value for money speaks for itself through what it does. All that, as well as the fact that it is so proactive in finding other EU funding, is to be commended.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I, too, congratulate you on your position. Can the Minister please elaborate on why the decision was taken to reopen the oyster beds in the run-up to Christmas 2014?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

During the NSMC meeting in December, we asked Loughs Agency to review its original decision to close the main six oyster beds in Lough Foyle. The main reason for that was that, following a meeting of the Lough Foyle fishermen in Redcastle on Friday 28 November, which my officials attended with their counterparts from the 26 counties, along with Minister McHugh, we were made aware that the vast majority of the fishermen were calling for the beds to be opened in the run-up to Christmas. The fishermen made the point that they saw themselves very much as the custodians of Lough Foyle and would do all in their power to protect the stocks. However, they made a plea to be allowed to fish in the run-up to Christmas. It was therefore incumbent on Ministers to ask the agency to look at that decision again. One of the things that I highlighted to the Loughs Agency was that there was perhaps a need for improved communication with the fishermen to communicate the message on why beds need to be closed. Also, in this instance, the decision was purely down to the Loughs Agency. We asked it to take a look at it again, and I was delighted that it made a decision that I believe was balanced on the socioeconomic needs of the fishermen and with the conservation imperative in mind. I know that it is something that the fishermen welcome, and I look forward to improved communication with the Loughs Agency and fishermen.

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

Mr Speaker, in keeping with the other Members who already congratulated you, in case someone might make mischief, I need to put it on record that, earlier today, I too offered my warmest congratulations and full cooperation in ensuring that this place remains a model of democracy.

I am delighted — almost ecstatic — to see that paragraph 21 mentions the idea of promoting and marketing Foyle and Carlingford loughs and that that is now on the discussion sheet. Can I trawl that idea to new depths and propose that, at a future meeting, the Minister will perhaps suggest that we develop a comprehensive strategy involving not just Carlingford and Lough Foyle but maybe the River Bann, which, although flowing out into the same sea a few metres away, is controlled by Waterways Ireland? In other words, in a nutshell, can we at least have a discussion on a comprehensive plan for all the waterways that are under different controls at the moment?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Like you, I am also delighted that the Loughs Agency continues to be very proactive in the promotion of tourism, and the events that I referred to earlier are testimony to the work that it has done. Through engagement with stakeholders and other statutory organisations, working with councils and other bodies, the agency is always striving to find new ways to accelerate growth and potential. Your point about a comprehensive strategy is well made. I am happy to explore the remit for the River Bann and whether it comes under the NSMC or Waterways Ireland and to pass that on to the relevant body for discussion.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

In paragraph 9 the Minister referred to the "jurisdictional issue". What is that jurisdictional issue and what is the view of the Northern Ireland Executive on it?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

In paragraph 9 I did refer to the jurisdictional issue, and the Member is very aware of what that is; we have discussed it, and he asks me questions on it every time I make a statement on the NSMC. Given that the issue has been discussed for quite some time, I am acutely aware that he is aware of the issues. My core concern is that we get the issue resolved to allow the Loughs Agency to do its job and to make sure that it provides regulations where regulations are necessary. That is the priority for the Loughs Agency and for me. I have asked Minister White to raise the issue with Minister Simon Coveney and for him to chase the issue up again with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

What are the Executive doing?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I will let you know what the Executive are doing. Minister Storey and I attended on behalf of the Executive, and I make this statement on behalf of the Executive, so the Executive are very aware of the jurisdictional issues in Lough Foyle that need to be resolved.

Executive Committee Business

Mitchel McLaughlin (Speaker, South Antrim)

I call the Minister for Regional Development, Mr Danny Kennedy, to move the Consideration stage of the Off-street Parking (Functions of District Councils) Bill.

Moved. — [Mr Kennedy (The Minister for Regional Development).]

Mitchel McLaughlin (Speaker, South Antrim)

No amendments have been tabled to the Bill. I will now proceed to put the question on the clause, the schedule and the long title.

Clause 1 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Schedule agreed to.

Long title agreed to.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Speaker, South Antrim)

That concludes the Consideration Stage of the Off-street Parking (Functions of District Councils) Bill. The Bill stands referred to the Speaker.

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

I beg to move

That this Assembly endorses the principle of the extension to Northern Ireland of the provisions of the Pension Schemes Bill dealing with restrictions on transfers out of public-service defined benefits schemes and reduction of cash equivalents in relation to funded public-service defined benefits schemes, as contained in clauses 69, 70 and 71 of the Bill, as brought from the House of Commons to the Lords.

As part of his Budget statement 2014, the Chancellor announced that, from April 2015, there is to be greater flexibility in the way that members of defined contribution pension schemes can access their pension pot. In essence, members of such schemes will be less constrained to purchase an annuity than is currently the case and will have more freedom to choose, in light of their personal circumstances, whether to purchase an annuity, draw down their savings as a lump sum or keep their pension invested.

Under the current rules, it is already possible for a member of a public-service defined benefit scheme to transfer their pension rights to a defined contribution scheme. However, after the introduction of the flexibilities in April, members exercising that choice would then be in a position to access their pension pots as a lump sum under the new rules. Whilst those new flexibilities are progressive and increase individual choice in how members of schemes control their own pension arrangements, they must also be proportionate and managed effectively, especially where there may be impacts for public-service pension schemes, their members and the taxpayer.

As Members will be aware, funded public-service pension schemes have a fund of assets that can support the payment of transfer values out of the scheme. However, unfunded public-service pension schemes have no such fund of assets set aside, and the transfer values payable for members in those schemes represent an up-front, direct cost to the Exchequer. The main unfunded schemes in Northern Ireland include those for the Civil Service, police, the Fire and Rescue Service, teachers and health workers. The local government pension scheme is the main funded scheme in Northern Ireland.

Permitting such transfers from unfunded public-service schemes from April would risk destabilising those schemes and put pressure on public finances if significant numbers of members were to avail themselves of the new flexibility to transfer to one of the defined contribution arrangements in order to draw down as a lump sum the pension benefits attributable to their career in public service.

It could also be to the detriment of members who remain in the scheme by causing an extraordinary pressure on the scheme's employer cost cap mechanism, which is a requirement for public-service pensions established under the Public Service Pensions Act (Northern Ireland) 2014. As a consequence, a significant volume of transfers out of the schemes from April could ultimately mean employee contributions being increased and/or benefits reduced for those members who choose to retain their public-service pension rights in the schemes.

I will now deal with the provisions covered by the motion. Clause 69 of the Bill will have the effect of amending relevant primary legislation — namely, the Pension Schemes (Northern Ireland) Act 1993 — to prevent transfers from unfunded schemes. However, clause 69 also provides scope for regulations to be made by my Department to disapply the restriction in the case of any of the unfunded schemes, should that be a consideration in future.

The outright restriction of transfers will protect the unfunded schemes in Northern Ireland. As I pointed out, the assets held by funded schemes mean that the costs to the public purse of transfers to one of the defined contribution arrangements are less direct than from unfunded schemes. However, in some circumstances, where a significant number of withdrawals from the scheme impact on the short-term cash flow, and therefore the stability of the fund, there could still be implications for members of funded schemes and the taxpayer. As I already advised, that risk affects the local government pension scheme in Northern Ireland.

Although the scheme has a fund of assets that can sustain the payment of transfer values from the scheme under normal conditions, the potential for a significant increase in transfer traffic associated with the introduction of the flexibilities represents a potential risk to the integrity of the scheme and its remaining members, should sufficient members elect to apply to transfer their accrued benefits out of the scheme and into a defined contribution arrangement after April. I firmly believe that there should be a backstop protection to manage that risk.

Clause 70 provides for, in specified circumstances, powers to switch on reduced cash-equivalent transfer values if, as a direct result of increased transfer volumes, there is an increased risk of taxpayer intervention to support the scheme or a risk that the necessary intervention is significantly greater than it would otherwise have been.

The provisions for funded schemes operate as a safeguard rather than as an outright ban. The policy to allow the transfers to continue, subject to the safeguards in clause 70, reflects the inherent capacity of the funded scheme design to absorb an increase in transfer traffic under normal conditions.

The funded defined benefit scheme design is also operated in the private sector. Transfers from funded schemes will continue to be allowed in that sector also. The concern over scheme stability also arises for private sector defined benefit schemes, where it is already addressed by existing powers allowing for the reduction of transfer values to reflect scheme funding. Clause 70 extends an equivalent safeguard for a funded scheme in the public sector.

Minister Durkan is the Minister responsible for the local government unfunded pension scheme. In his response on 23 October 2014 to the Executive paper, which I circulated and which proposed the use of a legislative consent motion (LCM), he confirmed that he was content with the proposed approach.

Clause 71 makes consequential amendments to the Pension Schemes (Northern Ireland) Act 1993 and the Pensions (Northern Ireland) Order 1995. Those areas of pension policy are devolved to Northern Ireland. However, given that the flexibilities are scheduled to be introduced in April, securing Assembly agreement to legislate for the policy via an LCM is the most prudent and timely approach to secure the financial safeguarding of unfunded and funded public-service pension schemes in Northern Ireland.

The policy rationale for introducing a restriction on transfers out of unfunded public-service defined benefit pension schemes and a power to switch on reduced cash-equivalent transfer values for the funded public-service scheme in Northern Ireland is a legitimate one that the Assembly must today endorse.

The measures will avoid contributing to an already very difficult and challenging financial year for public-service spending. As Members will all be too well aware, the Executive have had, and continue, to address significant financial pressures.

The reality is that we cannot afford not to regulate transfers out of public-service pension schemes in prescribed circumstances where there would be risks for scheme members and taxpayers. The scope of this legislation is very limited. It targets a specific risk. It would be simply negligent on our part if Members did not agree to the LCM for the purposes which I have outlined.

Having explained the rationale for bringing the motion to the Assembly, I commend the Committee for Finance and Personnel for the timely manner in which it considered and reported on the motion. I thank the Committee for its general support for the motion. I hope that I have addressed any outstanding concerns that the Committee has raised in its report on this issue, particularly in the area of the rationale for the safeguards that are applied for the funded local government scheme rather than an outright ban.

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

Go raibh míle maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Tá áthas orm labhairt ar an rún seo ar son an Choiste Airgeadais agus Pearsanra. I am pleased to speak on the motion on behalf of the Committee for Finance and Personnel.

The Minister wrote to the Committee on 21 October 2014 to advise it that he had sought approval from the Executive to have the applicable provisions of the Westminster Pension Schemes Bill extended to Northern Ireland.

As the Minister indicated, as part of the Budget 2014, the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced the introduction of flexibility in the way that members of defined contribution pension schemes can access their pension pot, which essentially will permit members to draw down their savings as a lump sum as opposed to the current practice, which requires the purchase of an annuity.

Under current rules, it is possible for a member of a public-service defined benefit scheme to transfer their rights to a defined contribution scheme. After the introduction of the flexibilities in April 2015, members exercising this choice would then be permitted to access their pension pots flexibly under the new rules.

Unfunded public-service pension schemes, which include the Civil Service, police officers, firefighters, teachers and health workers, have no such fund of assets.

At its meeting of 5 November 2014, the Committee was briefed by DFP on the proposed legislative consent motion. Given that the LCM will restrict the flexibilities being extended to affected scheme members, the Committee questioned DFP officials to establish the implications of not progressing the LCM, the level of engagement with trade unions and any potential equality implications. In response, DFP advised that, in overall terms across the jurisdictions, there would be a cost to the public purse of some £200 million in the event that 1% of those who are reaching the retirement age in the public-service pension schemes elected to transfer their rights in order to take advantage of the new flexibilities. Also, whilst forecasting of costs had yet to be undertaken at a local level, the Department's understanding was that the trade unions agreed in principle to safeguard the existing schemes, since without these safeguards the cost-control mechanisms could be impacted, which could thereby have a detrimental impact on members in the event of a run on these schemes.

Departmental officials also advised that DFP had been liaising with Treasury on its findings on the equality implications, which will supplement the equality considerations that will be undertaken by the Department. On this point, I would be grateful if the Minister could, upon the completion of this work, provide the findings for the Committee's consideration.

To further inform its consideration of the issues, the Committee wrote to the Irish Congress of Trade Unions (ICTU) for its views on the proposals. In response, ICTU confirmed that it was supportive of the provisions and the use of the LCM mechanism in this instance, explaining that the:

"most important reason to support the legislative consent proposal is to protect the individual scheme member".

A further point highlighted by the Northern Ireland Committee, Irish Congress of Trade Unions was that the Westminster legislation should cover all public-service pension schemes, including funded schemes such as the local government pension schemes. At its meeting on 19 November 2014, the Committee sought clarification from the Department on this issue. In response, the officials advised that whilst the legislative provisions apply to all unfunded schemes, they do not extend to funded schemes, since those operate on a separate basis. The Committee did not have the opportunity to explore the rationale for the provisions not covering all public-service pension schemes here, including the LGPS, so it would be helpful if the Minister could further clarify that point today. Aside from such points of clarification, and after considering the evidence, the Committee for Finance and Personnel agreed its report supporting the proposal for the legislative consent motion. This was circulated to all MLAs in advance of the debate.

Ar an ábhar sin, ar son an Choiste Airgeadais agus Pearsanra, tacaím leis an rún seo. On behalf of the Committee, I support the motion.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

The difficulty in following the Deputy Chair is that he does not really leave much to go on. However, the changes in the pension schemes that have been made recently mean that, from April next year, members of defined contribution schemes will be allowed to access their pensions and exercise choice in how they wish to handle their investment. Public-service defined benefit schemes can also be transferred to defined contribution schemes under current rules, but again, as the Minister said, most of the public-service schemes are unfunded and therefore have no fund of assets.

The Pension Schemes Bill currently going through Westminster seeks to prevent transfers from unfunded public-service pension schemes to defined contribution schemes. The legislative consent motion before the House, if approved, will extend those provisions to Northern Ireland. The Department of Finance and Personnel considers this legislation necessary to protect both the integrity of the unfunded schemes and the interests of scheme members here. As the Deputy Chair said, the unions have indicated their support. Indeed, the Committee for Finance and Personnel has agreed that the motion should be agreed today.

On behalf of the Ulster Unionist Party, I support the motion.

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

I am pleased that we have had a brief but useful debate on the provisions in the Pension Schemes Bill dealing with the restrictions on transfers out of public-service defined benefit schemes and the reduction of cash equivalents in relation to funded public-service defined benefit schemes. I thank the Deputy Chair of the Committee for his contribution on behalf of the Committee. I thank not just him but the other members of the Committee for their support for the provisions covered by the LCM.

The Deputy Chair himself said that this is about protecting public-sector pension scheme members, whether they be in funded or unfunded schemes. I hope that I have clarified some of the points for him in my opening remarks. This is particularly about those in unfunded schemes, which the majority of schemes operating in Northern Ireland are. It is about protecting those members should significant numbers seek to avail themselves of this flexibility, and I think that it is right and sensible and prudent that we close that down so that pension scheme members left behind in the scheme are not put in a very difficult position. The changes that we put through in our own recent Public Service Pensions Act (Northern Ireland) 2014 mean that, if that was the case and the scheme did not have sufficient funds in it, we could have the perverse situation where members would have to pay more in contributions or take less in their benefits, which, I am sure the House would agree, is not something that we want to see happen.

In respect of funded pension schemes, there is a risk. Whilst it is not an outright ban, a safety valve of sorts is being put in place in the event of, as the Deputy Chair said, a run — that is a very good term to use in the circumstances, if maybe not one that we are used to applying to pension schemes.

I hope that what has been said, certainly in my opening remarks, and the support that has been offered today by the Committee via the Deputy Chair's contribution is enough to secure support across the House for the legislative consent motion.

Question put and agreed to. Resolved:

That this Assembly endorses the principle of the extension to Northern Ireland of the provisions of the Pension Schemes Bill dealing with restrictions on transfers out of public-service defined benefits schemes and reduction of cash equivalents in relation to funded public-service defined benefits schemes, as contained in clauses 69, 70 and 71 of the Bill, as brought from the House of Commons to the Lords.

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

I beg to move

That this Assembly endorses the principle of the extension to Northern Ireland of the provisions dealing with public-sector exit payments contained in clauses 149 to 151 of the Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Bill, as brought from the House of Commons to the Lords on 20 November 2014.

The Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Bill was introduced to the House of Commons in June 2014. The Bill contains provisions on a wide range of policies aimed at improving access to finance for businesses and helping them to innovate and compete. Specifically, it contains measures that will facilitate a requirement for the repayment of some or all qualifying public-sector exit payments from individuals in prescribed circumstances. The policy intent is that this will apply to individuals earning more than £100,000 who exit a role in the public sector and then return to the same part of the public sector within 12 months.

Clauses 149 and 150 contain the provision by which HM Treasury may make regulations dealing with the repayment of specified types of exit payments. Clause 151 contains a power for the Department of Finance and Personnel to make a waiver for any particular type of exit payee where this is considered appropriate.

It is proposed that the exit payments will include voluntary and compulsory redundancy, voluntary exit payments and discretionary payments made by employers to buy out actuarial reductions for early pensions.

The amount that individuals will be required to repay will decrease gradually over time, proportional to the time between an individual leaving and returning to work. Those who rejoin within a month will have to repay the whole of the payment. Those who rejoin after a month but less than a year will be required to repay less, proportionate to the time they have spent outside public-sector employment.

Where the minority of these staff leave and shortly rejoin, these measures will ensure greater fairness for other public-sector workers and the taxpayer, and flexibility regarding re-employment that avoids an unnecessary discouragement to return to work.

Redundancy pay has played a vital role in supporting the reform of public administration here in Northern Ireland. For employees who have voluntarily or otherwise left public service, it has helped to support them while they find new work. In that context, however, it is entirely unacceptable that highly paid public-sector workers receive a generous redundancy package and then, within 12 months, return to work in the same part of the public sector. In such circumstances, the justification of financial support to bridge the gap to new employment is undermined. This represents poor value for money.

Of course, it would be within the scope of the Assembly to legislate for this provision through its own Bill. However, there would not be sufficient time to enable such legislation to receive Royal Assent by April 2015. Therefore, to guarantee consistency of approach, avoid barriers to labour mobility and ensure that high-earning public servants in the devolved Administration are not treated more favourably than their counterparts in the rest of the United Kingdom, I consider that securing the Assembly's agreement to legislate for this policy via a legislative consent motion (LCM) is the most effective approach by which to secure the timely protection of public funding.

The clauses are scheduled to take effect from April 2015. The regulations will merely set the baseline requirement and will not impinge on existing provisions for the recovery of redundancy payment operated by some employers. These proposals seek not to replace but, rather, to underpin current exit payment arrangements. Indeed, in some areas of the public sector, employers will choose to go further in recovery. These measures will not affect an individual's entitlement to statutory redundancy.

Legislative consent for these provisions will also ensure that the same protections for public finances are applied consistently in Northern Ireland at a time when finances are already stretched.

The principal intent of the Bill is to safeguard public finances. The Bill will ensure that public-service funds are not diverted to compensate high-earning individuals for loss of office in cases where that loss is transitory due to the individual re-entering paid employment in the sector.

I acknowledge and thank the Committee for Finance and Personnel for its timely consideration of the memorandum. Furthermore, I welcome the support of the Committee for the legislative consent motion.

I note that the Committee has drawn attention to the threshold of earnings being set at £100,000. Specifically, the Committee's report states that the provisions

"may not go far enough and that arrangements may need to be tailored to the Northern Ireland context."

I acknowledge and accept that that is a valid point. Certainly, the LCM does not preclude the adoption of a more radical approach in the future; indeed, it will be for my Department to evaluate and review the impact of this legislation to determine whether, going forward, a more targeted, Northern Ireland approach should be adopted. For example, should the threshold be reduced to more accurately reflect public sector salaries here in Northern Ireland, or should the legislation come into effect for re-employment to any of the public sector, rather than just to those who return to the same part of the public sector? Those are valid points and, whilst I believe that consideration should be given to those issues, I am mindful that, for the present, we should seek to implement what we can now, in order to establish a baseline to safeguard public finances.

The detail of the earnings thresholds, employees and bodies that will fall within the remit of the legislation and the mechanism for how it will work in practice will be specified in secondary legislation. Employers, of course, seek to offer alternative employment before making an individual redundant. For example, the Northern Ireland Civil Service has a clear policy of using redeployment to avoid having to reduce staff through such measures as exit or redundancy schemes. As Members know all too well, given the financial pressures that we face, it is only when measures such as redeployment fail to deliver the required reduction in the pay bill and staffing levels that such schemes are implemented.

In its report, the Committee also requested clarification of the rationale for the inclusion of compulsory redundancy payments within the scope of this recovery policy. The purpose of exit payments made for loss of employment is to provide adequate financial support to bridge the gap to new employment. In terms of the overall rationale, to ensure fairness and value for money, it is entirely appropriate that compulsory redundancy payments made to compensate those who meet the high-earner threshold of £100,000 for loss of expected earnings should be within the scope of the policy where earnings are restored within a short period. I also point out that the policy will apply in the case of voluntary exit payments, where a high earner decides to apply for a voluntary exit scheme offered by a public service employer. In the case of those voluntary exits, there is absolutely no compulsion to apply. In those circumstances, it is wholly reasonable to expect that entitlement to retain a cash payment for giving up a high-earning position should be wholly or partially forfeited if they return to a similar position within a 12-month period. It is already a feature of the Civil Service compensation arrangements that payments for each of the categories "voluntary exit", "voluntary redundancy" and "compulsory redundancy" must be returned in full, where an individual returns within 28 days, and repaid pro rata, where an individual chooses to return to the Civil Service within six months.

In short, the motion is a measured and a crucial vehicle that will prevent the wasteful use of vital public funds in lining the pockets of high-earning public servants who, as a consequence of re-employment to the sector following receipt of an exit payment, will, of course, no longer require that financial support.

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

Go raibh míle maith agat arís, a Cheann Comhairle. Ar son an Choiste Airgeadais agus Pearsanra, ba mhaith liom tacaíocht ghinearálta a thabhairt don rún seo atá faoinár mbráid anois.

On behalf of the Committee for Finance and Personnel, I express general support for the motion. The details of the Committee’s deliberations on the legislative consent motion were set out in a short report that was circulated to all MLAs and published online on 18 December 2014. I shall, however, summarise the key points now for Members’ convenience and for the record.

As has been outlined, the Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Bill contains measures primarily aimed at supporting small businesses by improving access to finance. However, the Bill also contains measures to recover redundancy and compensation payments from individuals who exit a role in the public service and then return to the same part of the public service in a short space of time. The Minister advised the Committee that he intended to extend those measures to Northern Ireland to safeguard public finances through the use of the legislative consent motion that is before us today.

After being first informed of the potential need for such an LCM on 12 November 2014, the Committee sought an urgent briefing from departmental officials as soon as possible thereafter. That took place on 19 November 2014. During the session, members heard that the proposed provisions would allow for the recovery of redundancy and compensation payments made to those earning £100,000 or more in certain circumstances; the amount requiring payback would be on a graduated basis; and the provisions would not apply to redundancy payments where individuals have a right to full, unreduced, employer-funded early retirement pension.

In addition, members raised issues and queries with officials. They asked why the threshold of earnings was set at £100,000 and not at a lower sum; why the provisions were being limited to those being re-employed in the same part of the public sector as opposed to all parts of the public sector; and how the condition of not being re-employed within a short space of time will be defined. I note that, during the debate, the Minister has referred to 12 months. Perhaps he will clarify whether that is the short space of time that he has in mind. Finally, members also asked for the basis for the exclusion relating to a person’s contractual entitlement. In responding to the Committee's queries, DFP officials assured members that guidance would be provided on how a "short space of time" will be defined. However, the session raised other issues that I will elaborate on in a moment.

Legislative consent motions, by their nature, are time-limited, so the opportunity for the Committee to engage meaningfully with interested stakeholders has been restricted. Nonetheless, the Committee obtained an informal response from representatives of the Northern Ireland Public Sector Alliance (NIPSA) and correspondence from the First Division Association (FDA). NIPSA highlighted the fact that the proposed legislation would most likely impact most on the health and social care sector, which has more employees earning over the £100,000 threshold. Furthermore, the Committee understands that exit payments for voluntary and compulsory redundancies are included in the scope of the legislation and that NIPSA has raised concerns with the inclusion of compulsory redundancy situations. Perhaps the Minister will wish to place on record during today's debate the rationale for the inclusion of compulsory redundancy payments in the provisions. The Minister could also take the opportunity to address points raised by the FDA, which provided the Committee with a copy of its previous submission on the Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Bill, specifically the section relating to the recovery of public sector exit payments.

As will be evident from a reading of the Committee’s report on the LCM, members acknowledge the need for legislative reform in this area during a time of constraint on the public purse. However, the Committee has also highlighted other pertinent issues. It stated that the LCM might be only a necessary first step and that the arrangements being put in place might not go far enough in this regard. DFP officials assured the Committee that, by agreeing to the LCM, the Assembly would not constrain itself and could tailor arrangements to local circumstances and, indeed, take a more radical approach in the future, if necessary. The Minister referred to that in his initial remarks. I regard this as an important and necessary assurance in informing today’s decisions.

Members were also concerned about the implementation of the legislative provisions and what compliance monitoring, if any, would take place. Departmental officials assured members that there would be a post-implementation review examining the impact of the legislation. However, as part of this exercise, the Committee urges the Department to also examine the appropriateness of the £100,000 salary level in the local context; in particular, whether a lower threshold would be more applicable here and as regards how the legislation impacts on different parts of the public sector here.

Clearly, the Committee was able to undertake only a cursory consideration of the issues given the time constraints associated with legislative consent motions and that process. Nonetheless, the Committee identified several pertinent issues such as the need for local guidance, the need for a thorough post-implementation review and what that review should examine, as well as the case for tailoring future arrangements to the particular public sector context in Northern Ireland. As on previous occasions, the Committee has endeavoured to complete its scrutiny of the LCM within an extremely tight time frame. That time frame is inadequate, and, once again, there is a need to highlight the case for a refinement of the LCM process, with early warning of possible LCMs and more time built into the process of legislating for devolved matters.

As the Committee has pointed out previously, earlier notification of the potential need for LCMs is required on two fronts: firstly, from the responsible Whitehall Department to the responsible devolved Department and, secondly, from the Department here to the respective Assembly Committee. This is especially necessary when the legislative provisions covered by the LCM are significant or substantive in nature. When such early notification has been provided by DFP on previous occasions — the LCM on the devolution of long-haul air passenger duty (APD) being a case in point — it has enabled the Committee to begin gathering comprehensive evidence and undertaking the necessary engagement with relevant stakeholders at an early stage and prior to the commencement of the very limited 15-day timetable provided for in Standing Orders.

This concern with how the LCM process can constrain scrutiny is all the more pertinent in the wider context of moves to strengthen the devolved arrangements. I consider that, if sufficient notification is not provided in cases involving substantive legislative provisions, closer consideration will need to be given to whether an Assembly Bill would be the more appropriate vehicle for legislating in the devolved context. I therefore ask the Minister to ensure that all the relevant senior officials in his Department remain mindful of this requirement and endeavour to keep the Committee abreast of developments in respect of any further potential LCMs as they emerge in future. That said, the motion before us today, notwithstanding the issues I have raised, including those to be addressed by the Minister and Department, the Committee agrees that the LCM is a necessary first step to address a legal loophole, especially in the current financial climate.

Ar an ábhar sin, a Cheann Comhairle, ar son an Choiste Airgeadais agus Pearsanra, tacaím leis an Aire Airgeadais agus Pearsanra agus é ar lorg tacaíocht an Tionóil don rún áirithe seo atá os ár gcomhair inniu. On behalf of the Committee for Finance and Personnel, I support the Minister of Finance and Personnel in seeking the Assembly’s agreement to the LCM that is before us today. Go raibh míle maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle.

Paul Girvan (DUP, South Antrim)

I wish to speak on the legislative consent motion on the Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Bill. I appreciate that, when you see small business mentioned in the Bill, you think it is something to do with the private sector, but there is very little reference to it. It is necessary to close what has been an opportunity for many people in the wider public sector. We have a very narrow view of what the public sector is, and public employees seem to filter right down to arm's-length bodies that are still being funded totally from the public purse.

There needs to be more of a workforce planning approach, not just in Departments but throughout the Civil Service and the public sector as a whole, to reduce the opportunity for people to take up voluntary redundancy payments and then re-emerge in the public sector. An earnings limit of £100,000 has been set, although I appreciate that might only reflect on a very small number of people in Northern Ireland. That has to be looked at. It may be that some change will need to be made at a later date, but in order to close the loophole we need to go down this route.

One area that I had concerns about is to do with a culture that has existed and probably relates to pension schemes as well. Some of this will relate to buying pension annuities for individuals who are, maybe, coming close to pension age and, as a consequence, might be buying added years. That will be included as part of the clawback if they return within 12 months. I am somewhat sceptical about the clause spectifying that it must be in the same area because we should look at it overall. After all, many people who have been trained in the Civil Service believe, for example, that they are quite capable of working in the Department of Agriculture and, once they find that they might have to move position or move to Ballykelly and decide that that is not necessarily where they want to be, they will quickly develop the skills to re-emerge in another Department. That is an area that we need to look at.

There is an opportunity coming forward for many people to avail themselves of the exit scheme in the Civil Service, and there might well be opportunities for some people, with the skills that they have acquired in whatever area they are involved, to say that they can work, for example, in the Court Service. They may have worked in a local government department and been made redundant, but they have many skills as a chief executive, for argument's sake, in local government and feel that they could do something else in the courts end. As a consequence, they will not have to hand back any of the very large payout that they might have received as well as the contribution that has been made to a pension pot for them. There are areas that need to be looked at later. However, to allow us to move ahead with this opportunity to close a loophole and safeguard the public purse and public finances, it is vital that we deal with the issue.

Where compulsory redundancy has been dealt with, it is vital that some consideration is made in cases where people have had no alternative but to be made redundant. One area that I was quite interested in is to do with payments made to facilitate dismissal on the grounds of efficiency. In the private sector, that might be called the sack; the public sector has other ways of dealing with it. That, seemingly, does not preclude people from getting payments, and that is something that I would like further investigation of. As it stands, we support moving ahead with the legislative consent motion, which will allow us to close what has been a loophole.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

I have little to say, apart from adding some points. I acknowledge that the Bill was introduced in the House of Commons last June. It contains provisions on a range of initiatives intended to support small businesses by improving access to finance. I notice that the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment has tabled a motion for debate on it for 20 January.

The Bill also contains measures to facilitate the effective recovery of redundancy and compensation payments from individuals who exit a role in the public sector and then return to the same part of the public sector in a short space of time. In that regard, there is concern that compulsory redundancy situations could fall under the legislation, and clarification has been requested.

The Deputy Chair of the Committee said virtually everything that needs to be said. He highlighted that, because of the time constraints on the Committee, it was able to undertake only cursory consideration of the proposed LCM. However, he identified issues for careful consideration by the Department, and I acknowledge that the Minister addressed some of those points this morning.

The provisions of the LCM are a necessary first step in addressing a loophole in the law, and they deserve the support of the House.

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

I am very pleased to note various Members' contributions to this debate on the Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Bill, which deals with public-sector exit payments.

The Deputy Chair was very clear, and whilst I understand and accept his point about whether the Committee had sufficient time to consider this in appropriate depth, I think there is no disagreement across the House that the principle behind this LCM is right and that this is the right thing to do. As Mr Girvan pointed out, whilst it is the right thing to do, it is for a small number of people in the Northern Ireland context.

As I outlined in my opening contribution, and to respond to several points that the Deputy Chair made, there may be an argument to amend these provisions in the future to suit the Northern Ireland set of circumstances, especially in the light of our upcoming voluntary exit scheme and the experience that that will provide.

There were three broad areas not of concern — that may be too strong a word — but of interest. One was on the £100,000 threshold. I will point out that this is an LCM that will be attached to the Bill going through Westminster, and £100,000 is a salary level that is probably more appropriate over there and that probably covers a lot more people than those in the Northern Ireland public sector. However, I still think that it is right thing for us to do this now. We would not have had the time to do and get our own piece of primary legislation through. As I said, we can, of course, amend it to suit Northern Ireland's circumstances if that becomes an issue.

The issue of whether it should be restricted to the same sector and not cover a range of sectors or all sectors was also raised. That is a relevant point that is worth examining on the basis of experience. The origins of this at Westminster are more to do with people leapfrogging and jumping from part of one sector, where they take a payment to get out of that sector, and moving to another high-paying job elsewhere within that sector. I think that that problem manifested itself most primarily within the health sector in GB, and that is perhaps why it is restricted to the one sector.

The Deputy Chair raised the specific issue of what a short period of time will be. That will be set out in regulations. I anticipate that that will be 12 months. There is a more general point about whether it should be restricted to a period of time or should be almost for ever and a day.

Whilst that is worth considering, as is the point about the same sector, I think that it has to be borne in mind whether we want to have a disincentive for people to come back in to the public sector at a particular time. There may be individuals who exit for whatever reason, and it might be useful to bring them back because of the skills and experience that they have and could bring to an area of the public sector in the future.

So, if we are looking to go beyond what is in the Bill and restrict it a little bit more, we need to bear in mind that we do not want to restrict it so much that we cannot bring talented or useful individuals back into the public sector at a later date into a different type of post or even into a post in the same sector, where they may be very useful to the public.

I thank all Members for their comments. On balance, despite the issues raised, I remain of the view that the Assembly should support these measures now for the reasons that I have set out. Over time, as I have already made clear, the efficacy of those measures can be evaluated and further changes considered.

In conclusion, the motion addresses a targeted provision in the Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Bill. Legislative consent on this matter will ensure uniformity in the application of the baseline requirement for the recovery of exit payments to those in the high-earning category and provide an assurance to the taxpayer that exit payment arrangements across the sector must be fair and demonstrate value for money.

I invite Members to support the motion, and I commend it to the House.

Question put and agreed to. Resolved:

That this Assembly endorses the principle of the extension to Northern Ireland of the provisions dealing with public-sector exit payments contained in clauses 149 to 151 of the Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Bill, as brought from the House of Commons to the Lords on 20 November 2014.

Private Members' Business

Mitchel McLaughlin (Speaker, South Antrim)

The Business Committee has agreed to allow up to one hour and 30 minutes for this debate. As two amendments have been selected and published on the Marshalled List, an additional 15 minutes has been added to the total time. The proposer of the motion will have 10 minutes to propose and 10 minutes to wind. The proposer of each amendment will have 10 minutes to propose and five minutes to wind. All other Members who speak will have five minutes. Before we begin, the House should note that the amendments are mutually exclusive. So, if amendment No 1 is made, the Question will not be put on amendment No 2.

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

I beg to move

That this Assembly acknowledges the challenging financial environment in which education will operate in 2015-16 and the widespread concern amongst schools regarding the implications for the classroom of the Department of Education's draft budget; recognises that, from 1 April 2015, there will be a single Education Authority in place of the five education and library boards to oversee the allocation of the majority of the education budget; and calls on the Minister of Education to ensure that protecting the classroom is his first priority, that he uses the new administrative arrangements to achieve greater efficiencies within support services and, in so doing, devolves the maximum amount of the available budget to school level.

There has been widespread concern and dismay felt by many in the education community, particularly our schools, at the Minister's draft budget. We face a challenging financial environment, and that will continue over the next few years. That was clearly articulated by my party colleague the Finance Minister on 3 November 2014, when he presented the Executive's draft Budget to the Assembly.

I do not propose to rehearse that debate, but, suffice it to say, the Assembly faces significant financial challenges. This debate is about asking the Education Minister to think innovatively about his budget to ensure that the classroom is the primary beneficiary of those moneys.

Of course, parties were involved in detailed discussions prior to Christmas, and, as the Finance Minister said in the take-note debate yesterday, the Stormont House Agreement, together with additional moneys from the Chancellor's autumn statement and whatever other flexibilities can be found, will create some flexibility in funding available to the Executive in the discussions about the final Budget.

As Chair of the Education Committee, of course I would like to see more money going towards the education budget, but I am also mindful of the competing interests from other Departments, particularly DEL. It is important to acknowledge today that, irrespective of the shape of the final settlement that education receives, responsibility for the allocation of that budget remains with the Minister. The Sinn Féin amendment appears to abrogate that responsibility and place it within the remit of the Executive. That does not appear to be a ringing endorsement of its Minister, but perhaps it has a point. The draft budget for education has demonstrated that the Minister has failed to discharge his responsibilities, because he has broken a number of fundamental rules in its construction. He has produced a draft budget that has caused maximum concern in the school system.

Like most Members, over the last month I have been inundated with letters from schools regarding the implications for them of the current proposals. Over the past number of weeks, I have met principals throughout Northern Ireland. The group of 50 principals that I met in Ballymena last week and principals in my own constituency of Strangford and right across the Province are all saying the same thing. Many schools have contacted me to express their concern about the chaos that would result for them if the draft budget were implemented in its current form. The draft budget is an attack on the education service because it is an attack on the classroom.

Some have suggested to me that this is the Minister simply playing politics and creating mayhem and uproar in the system so that he has the possibility of getting more money in the final settlement. It is only the draft budget, and if other Members and Ministers are playing politics with street lighting and other public services, he would perhaps be doing a disservice to his Department if he did not play the game. If that is the case — and I am not saying that it is — it is a damning indictment of our departmental system that, in a time of austerity, we are playing on the vulnerabilities and fears of the population to score points against one another. Perhaps that is just politics, but surely there is a better way to manage difficult financial settlements than by playing on people's fears.

My major problem with the current draft budget and its proposals is that it has broken two golden rules that have always governed the budgetary process in education. First, it has departed from the basic rule of education budgets of protecting the classroom at all costs. The draft budget proposes to remove £78 million from the aggregated schools budget, which all departmental officials know will create chaos in the system. Furthermore, for the director of finance to come to the Education Committee and talk in a cavalier fashion about 2,500 redundancies — 1,500 non-teaching and 1,000 teaching — thereby ignoring collective agreements, periods of redundancy notices and the reality of the school year, which crosses two financial years, is theatrics of the worst type, and it really was not an Oscar-winning performance.

Let us stop this play-acting and agree that, whatever happens, we will protect the classroom as our first priority. That should be the Minister's first priority, and it is clearly something that he has failed to do in this draft budget. The basic building block for any school to function is that there are a sufficient number of teachers available to teach our children. If you produce a budget that will result in primary schools whose numbers are static losing five teachers, thereby destroying the ability of the school to function, that is incompetence of the worst kind. It is not the amount of money that is the problem but the manner in which the Budget allocation is being managed.

That brings me to the second golden rule and the final part of the motion. A well-planned education budget needs to not only protect the classroom but drive efficiencies in the system. Most of the concern being expressed by schools about the current draft budget has been generated by the impact on teaching staff. When you talk to governors and principals — and, as I said, I have already done that over the last few weeks — they can give examples of efficiencies in the current system. There are always ways in which you can drive efficiencies within any bureaucratic system. I know that no one in the Assembly is suggesting otherwise, and that is why we should be cautious about ring-fencing any service in its totality.

Over the last number of years, Sinn Féin Ministers have been guilty of wasting lots of money on ill-thought-out, half-baked schemes such as the Education and Skills Authority (ESA), computer-based assessments, levels of progression, and taking various decisions that could be seen as pet projects across the Department and, of course, the school estate and that have not brought about an efficient use of public funds. However, I do not want to dwell too much on the Minister's past misdemeanours, as they have been well documented.

As Chair of the Committee, I have sought to encourage the current Minister onto paths of righteousness to put the service on a more positive and cost-effective footing. That is why I and my party worked with the Minister to smooth the passage of the new Education Authority through the Assembly.

We know that, from 1 April, it will be important to streamline the current administration of education if we are to achieve efficiencies that will help protect the classroom. One body, instead of five, will allocate the vast majority of the education budget resources, and that provides the Minister with a tremendous opportunity to reap efficiencies. Think of the cuts that he can now make in his Department: four fewer bodies for his officials to micromanage; only one letter to send instead of five; and no need to play divide-and-rule games between boards. Think of the reduction in the number of meetings with board officials. As Chair, I expect to see the plans to reduce staffing numbers in the Department in the coming months. There is also an opportunity to streamline support services in the reorganisation of the new authority, and all that will ensure that the classroom can be protected. There is much talk about the new authority needing to appoint lots of staff because of the wind down of the boards over the past number of years. That is not my party's view, and I hope that the assurances that a previous deputy secretary gave to the Education Committee, that the current level of staffing of the five boards would be a ceiling for the new authority and not a baseline, will be honoured and improved upon. We have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to reshape the support structures in favour of schools and pupils, and we must not waste that opportunity.

At present, only 59% of the budget finds its way to schools. In England, it is over 80%, and surely we have an opportunity to seriously review that situation. Principals with whom I have discussed the draft budget wish to have greater delegation to school level of services provided by the boards, and they continually mention to me aspects of the work of the Curriculum Advisory and Support Service and CCEA. The recent report by the Education Committee on the Education and Training Inspectorate and its role in school improvement has received widespread support in the system, yet the Minister and the Department appear unwilling to countenance any meaningful change. The new administrative arrangements provide us with an opportunity to develop a more cost-effective service in the interests of children, and we must grasp it.

My party wishes to see the freedom of management enjoyed by some schools rolled out to all schools. Most research on education budgets shows that the more that decision-making on funding is placed in the hands of schools, the more effective and efficient the spend. Our goal should be a system whereby local communities, groups and schools are charged with the responsibility of managing the majority of the education budget in the interests of children. Let us acknowledge that we live in challenging financial times, but let us agree to protect our classrooms and use the opportunity of the new authority to shape a service that supports and protects the classroom. Finally, let us empower schools, individually or through sharing, with the responsibility of managing that expenditure in the interests of our children and young people.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Speaker, South Antrim)

Order, Members. The Business Committee has arranged to meet immediately after the lunchtime suspension, and I propose, therefore, by leave of the Assembly, to suspend the sitting until 2.00 pm. The first item of business when we return will be Question Time. When we resume the debate after Question Time, the first Member to speak will be Mr Seán Rogers.

The debate stood suspended. The sitting was suspended at 12.28 pm.

On resuming (Mr Deputy Speaker [Mr Dallat] in the Chair) —

Oral Answers to Questions — Culture, Arts and Leisure

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

We will start with listed questions.

Judith Cochrane (Alliance, Belfast East)

1. Mrs Cochrane asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure what measures she will take to protect the visual arts given the current context of financial austerity. (AQO 7304/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Member for her question. Before I begin, I want to wish everybody a happy new year.

I have consistently recognised the value of the arts, including the visual arts, and their role as a driver for the achievement of broader social and economic goals, such as social inclusion and cohesion, as well as urban regeneration, tourism, inward investment and employment, and the impact that the development of high added-value creative industries has on education and health. Therefore, I am deeply aware of the impact of the financial constraints that are being felt by the entire sector. However, I will continue to work closely with all our arm's-length bodies (ALBs) to seek to reduce the impact of the budget reductions as far as possible. Throughout the process, I will also continue to ensure that the available funding remains aligned to the Department's priorities of promoting equality, tackling poverty and enhancing social inclusion.

Judith Cochrane (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the Minister for her answer. Given the constraints, what proactive measures has her Department taken to assist the visual arts organisations with developing resilient business models so that they can demonstrate civic value and ensure future sustainability?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I understand that there is a debate under way in the sector, particularly on the issue of sustainable business models. However, I also accept the premise that it is all very well and good arguing about sustainable business models when you start with an even playing field; but not everyone in the arts is starting from that position. In fairness to the Arts Council, it has employed a dedicated member of staff to look at the available opportunities in Europe through the Creative Europe programme. Arts and Business has also been very proactive in terms of businesses.

Notwithstanding all that, we deeply appreciate the situation that some, if not most, of the groups in the arts sector face, and, when the discussions on budgets have concluded, we hope to minimise the worst impacts. I am happy enough that, even at this stage, some of the arts groups are looking at ways of providing their programmes and services collectively.

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

Go raibh míle maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas fosta leis an Aire as ucht a freagra agus as ucht a beannachta, agus, mar an gcéadna, guím athbhliain faoi mhaise uirthi agus tá súil agam go n-éiríonn go geal léi sa bhliain atá romhainn. I thank the Minister for her good wishes and wish her a happy new year and all the best for the year that lies ahead.

Tá ceist agam a ba mhaith liom a chur ar an Aire faoi thionchar na ngearrthacha ar na grúpaí éagsúla ealaíne anseo sa Tuaisceart. What assessment has the Minister made of the impact of the cuts to the arts sector on the various groupings within that sector? Does she feel that it is necessary to use an equality impact assessment (EQIA)?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his supplementary question. Gabhaim buíochas leis as na beannachtaí. I also thank him for his good wishes. We conducted a high-level screening exercise and, on the basis of that, I have asked my senior officials — I am meeting them again tomorrow — to look at an equality impact assessment as well. I am sure that all the groups would argue that they will be impacted in some way or another, but some will be more marginalised than others as the result of any potential reductions in their budgets. I am taking that work forward and, hopefully, will have it concluded.

As the Member will be aware, the consultation on the draft Budget ended on 29 December. After going through those findings, using the screening exercise and conducting the full EQIA, I hope to be in a position to have a final budget settlement. We will then need to look at where we invest the money, which will also be a political decision.

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

Members, please note that questions 3 and 14 have been withdrawn.

Michael McGimpsey (UUP, Belfast South)

2. Mr McGimpsey asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure to outline the total investment by her Department and Belfast City Council in the redevelopment of Windsor Park and the adjacent Olympia leisure centre site. (AQO 7305/11-15)

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

11. Mr Humphrey asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure for an update on the redevelopment of Windsor Park. (AQO 7314/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

With the Deputy Speaker's permission, I will take questions 2 and 11 together. I thank the Member for his question.

The Windsor Park project is under construction, and work is progressing very well. Reconstruction of the pitch, which commenced in May 2014, was completed in August 2014. The demolition of the south stand is now complete, and construction of the new stand has started. Construction of the east stand started in September last year, and it is also progressing well. Provided significant delays with any unforeseen circumstances are avoided, the Windsor Park development can remain on programme, with completion of construction works planned for November this year.

Michael McGimpsey (UUP, Belfast South)

I thank the Minister for that answer. What progress has been made on the adjacent development on the Olympia leisure centre? I realise that that is in partnership with Belfast City Council, but does she have any indication now of a start date, a timeline and a completion date, and what sort of project costs we are looking at?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The construction notice for the Olympia leisure centre programme has been secured, so that project will be launched in partnership with Belfast City Council later this month. I anticipate that the Member will receive an invitation to that, if he has not already had one.

As he knows, the project is a very exciting partnership between DCAL and Belfast City Council, in partnership with the IFA. The Olympia leisure centre project includes an investment of £2,750,000 — hundreds of thousands of pounds — from the IFA budget to this partnership with Belfast City Council. It should be completed around autumn 2016, but I do not yet have a definitive date.

This is the first of the partnerships that I anticipate with Belfast City Council on the stadia to be brought forward. When Belfast City Council is developing its leisure facilities, we are using the opportunity of capital development in my Department to make sure that not only are there seamless links but there is minimal disruption to local residents and enhanced opportunities for people living around the environment of the stadia.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Minister for her answers so far. I welcome this project and the collaboration and joined-up approach between Belfast City Council and DCAL in terms of economies of scale. Indeed, I welcome the approach that Linfield and the Irish Football Association have taken in the development of Windsor Park as a national stadium. In welcoming those announcements, what progress has been made with Linfield Football Club and Midgley Park in the overall context of the development of Windsor Park?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I do not have any details on Linfield Football Club. I anticipate that not only Linfield but many other clubs in the Irish League will present facilities strategies to the IFA for subregional development. However, the development of Windsor Park is in relation to Olympia. I do not have any details on any other developments, but I am happy to write to the Member about those.

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

I thank the Minister for her answers, and I look forward to seeing the completion of the project. Will she clarify the circumstances around stadia money and whether any of it gets handed back for distribution in the monitoring rounds?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Unfortunately, due to the fact that we could not secure permission to build and develop Casement Park as a result of the judicial review in December, we have had to return some money in the monitoring rounds. I anticipate that the Ulster Council of the GAA will submit a new planning application, and, if it is successful, the remainder of the money will be spent on developing Casement Park.

Phil Flanagan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

4. Mr Flanagan asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure to outline the progress made on all-Ireland fishing licences. (AQO 7307/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his question. A scoping study funded by the Special European Union Programmes Body (SEUPB) was commissioned by the Loughs Agency, Inland Fisheries Ireland and DCAL to explore the possibility of implementing an e-licensing project to meet the needs of anglers. The scoping study made recommendations for an all-Ireland e-licensing system and an online marketing platform to increase the efficiency of current sales, the efficiency of management and the processing of licensing.

A potential product arising from this work could be an all-Ireland e-licence for salmon and sea trout angling. The report provides a detailed analysis of the issues in setting out proposals for an all-Ireland licensing regime with the potential to purchase licences online. A business case has been commissioned to assess the most appropriate business and technical solution that is viable and aims to address issues of cost, benefits, risks, funding, affordability and other factors. It will also take into account the opportunity to integrate the inland fisheries group's current NI Direct IT project with a proposed all-Ireland solution.

Phil Flanagan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a freagra. I thank the Minister for her answer. Perhaps she would keep us updated on any progress. Given the cross-border nature of the issue, could the Minister advise us of the current position on the investigation of the death of several hundred thousand elvers at the Electricity Supply Board (ESB) dam near Ballyshannon in the Erne system?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The fish kill in the ESB dam at Cathleen's Falls and Cliff in Ballyshannon last April was substantial. DCAL officials have been liaising with the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources and Inland Fisheries Ireland (IFI) on the fish kill in view of its magnitude and in line with existing IFI policies. The IFI has referred the matter to its legal advisers. I am sure that the Member will appreciate that, in light of that, it would be inappropriate for me to comment further on the ongoing investigation other that to state the facts of the fish kill. I would be happy to keep the Member updated on that.

George Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

Will the Minister outline how costs and income from any such scheme would be divided between the two jurisdictions?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I certainly will. At the minute, there are three bodies involved in the commissioning exercise. My Department will be one of the bodies responsible, and, although it has yet to be fully tested and depends on the final outcome, I think it is the case that the three Departments and their associated bodies and agencies will have to work out a regime that makes it easier for people. The difficulty here is that we have 17 regimes for applying for a fishing licence, as opposed to one or two in the South. That is not fair on anglers, who want to fish in the waters and do not want to be caught out. We want to make sure that it is as simple and cheap as possible to get a licence.

Basil McCrea (NI21, Lagan Valley)

The Minister in her original answer talked about this as a marketing programme. Does she anticipate increasing the income from licences to make the fishing industry more sustainable? In other words, we would take the marketing income so that we could spread it more widely.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his question. I know in my Department and from colleagues in other Departments that money accrued from angling is reinvested in stock, in the habitat for fishing and in fishing methods and conditions. That helps not only to sustain the environment but to provide a better outcome for anglers. We have been working with colleagues in DETI, Tourism Ireland, DARD and the inland fisheries group in Ireland to ensure not only that we have a good, sustainable product for anglers but that money accrued is put back not only to help our fishing product but to sustain the environment, particularly for anglers.

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

I call Mr Jim Allister.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

On this question? My apologies. Does the Minister accept that any proposal to introduce an all-Ireland licence would require Executive approval?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Thus far, that has not been the case, as far as the findings in the business case are concerned. As with the many other pieces of work we conduct on an all-Ireland basis, all parties have agreed to look at ways to provide our goods and services in a much more efficient way. Since we are all bought into the all-Ireland institutions, this would be a matter, in the first instance, for an all-Ireland institution. I am surprised that the Member has asked the question, given that he has absolutely no interest.

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

The Minister, in her previous answer, referred to a kill of elvers.

The Minister will know that I have written to her in regard to a fish kill in Portna. She promised me that the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute report would be published in December, but it still has not been issued. Will she give me an update as to when I can expect it?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I have not received the findings of that report, either. I reiterate the commitment: as soon as I receive those findings, I am happy to forward that correspondence to the Member. When I receive that, it will be forwarded to him soon after.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

5. Mr McCarthy asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure how her Department is increasing access to Strangford lough for leisure activities. (AQO 7308/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his question. Access to Strangford lough, including for leisure activities, is primarily the responsibility, as the Member will know, of DOE. That said, however, Sport NI has actively engaged with the Strangford Lough and Lecale Partnership, the local councils and sporting organisations that make use of the lough and its beautiful coastline. I am pleased that the coastline and marine environment around Strangford is being used extensively for a range of sporting and leisure activities, including sailing, fishing and canoeing. DCAL and Sport NI will continue to develop sport and leisure activity, including access around the lough, in a sustainable and responsible manner. My Department and Sport NI are working closely with the Department of the Environment and the NIEA, which are key partners in the implementation of the Sport Matters strategy for the Department.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

I am very grateful to the Minister for her response. I noted that she described the coastline as "beautiful". I hope that, in that regard, she thinks about the residents who live along the coastline. Will she put out any initiative to ensure that our precious asset of Strangford lough can be used by all sporting organisations so that we can carry on with a good, healthy, outdoor lifestyle?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his question. He is right to make sure that we are all responsible. That is why I made use of the word "responsibility". The responsible use of the lough must be built in, because there are residents around our coastlines. The Member will be aware that, even through the work of the Lecale partnership and others, residents are heavily involved in that. That is the way it should be. DOE, NIEA and I have to ensure that, where local partnerships exist, they are part of any product in terms of services or goods in Strangford lough. It is important to be respectful of not only the environment but the residents who live around it.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I am sure that the Minister is aware of an entrepreneurial proposal for a trout fishery in Strangford lough, with Lough Cowey as a feeder site. Has the Minister formed an opinion of that? Is she in discussion with other Departments with regard to the feasibility of that project?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The Member needs to be aware that that is a question for his colleague Minister Kennedy, who has responsibility for reservoirs. We lease the fishing and angling rights from there, but reservoirs are within the gift of DRD —

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

It is not a reservoir.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

It absolutely is. It is not within the remit of DCAL. If the Member did a bit more research, perhaps he would find that out.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

At the risk of being scolded, I return to sea trout. The CAL Committee visited Strangford lough a number of months ago, and it met groups lobbying for the development of sea trout fishing in the area for leisure pursuits. Will the Minister advise the House whether she has been in liaison with DETI, DARD and DRD about the development of sea trout fishing in Strangford lough to market Northern Ireland internationally and attract tourists to Northern Ireland?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The Member, as a member of the CAL Committee, will be aware that angling on the sea is the responsibility of DARD. It is not the responsibility of DCAL. He is also aware that salmon are described in legislation as sea trout and that, at the minute, there is a mandatory catch-and-release policy in relation to salmon and sea trout. I have not had any detailed discussions with my colleagues Arlene Foster or Michelle O'Neill on this, but I am happy to do so. Mr Nesbitt and you both asked about an update. I will furnish both Members with any details.

Trevor Lunn (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

6. Mr Lunn asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure to outline any plans she has to assist arts organisations in being more financially sustainable. (AQO 7309/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Go raibh maith agat as an cheist. I thank the Member very much for the question. I have consistently highlighted the benefits that arts bring to individuals, communities, society and the economy, and I have continually made the case in funding rounds that arts should be properly supported and funded. I recognise that the current financial climate presents significant difficulties for organisations across my Department and I am aware of the potential impact of budget reductions on the future sustainability of arts organisations in the context of their ability to generate additional income. Decisions on how budget reductions are managed is a matter for the relevant board and its senior management. However, following the draft Budget consultation, which closed at the end of December, DCAL will work closely with, in this case the Arts Council, to minimise the impacts on jobs and front-line services where possible.

Trevor Lunn (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Minister for her answer. Will she examine how three-year budgeting and, perhaps, endowment programmes could be used to make the funding regime more sustainable in the longer term?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I will, absolutely. The Arts Council did this with the annually funded programmes. Each year, the programmes had to apply and go through the different sets, which really meant that they had nine months of the year to get on with the work that they wanted to do. When the three-year budgeting process happened, it came with a lot of difficulties, but, now that it has been instituted and established, it makes it easier, particularly for the Arts Council. Where there are gaps in the budget that it receives from DCAL, it can, if it is minded and in a position to make bids, apply to me as a result of any monitoring rounds. So, I am looking at the way in which the Arts Council has organised the annually funded programmes, but this really affects only arts and sports councils that are grant-giving bodies. I am happy to look at it to see whether there is something else that we can do. At the end of the day, this is about making it easier for people to access funds in order to make it easier for them to deliver goods and services on our behalf.

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

Will the Minister ensure, then, that the issue of financial sustainability is incorporated into the new arts and culture strategy that her Department is about to develop? Since the issue affects those across the arts and cultural sector, will she ensure that the process of developing that strategy is inclusive of all cultural traditions in Northern Ireland?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

That is one of the key factors that we need to look at because we do not want a situation in which groups that are encouraged to apply for funding on the basis of need do not have the wherewithal or the technical support to comply with very strict guidelines and, sometimes, a very technical process. Some arts groups, for example, just want to get on with delivering arts. They are not accountants but they do their best in difficult circumstances. It certainly will be key to that. Arts funding for arts groups and cultural awareness groups is open to everyone, regardless of how they identify themselves. That will always be the case when we are running this Department.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a freagra. I thank the Minister for her answers so far. Will she expand on what help is in place to assist arts organisations in the current financial climate?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I think that, in answer to an earlier question, I mentioned to Judith Cochrane that the Arts Council, in fairness to it, secured an additional dedicated member of staff in November last year, purely to manage the Creative Europe funding stream, and this is really helpful for groups that, in the past, in very difficult circumstances, have not had a great experience even when trying to access information on support from Europe. This member of staff will work on a one-to-one basis with some of the arts and cultural awareness groups, helping them to complete applications and giving advice and guidance on procedures and eligibility. I think that this is really important. The groups have been asking for this for years, and the Arts Council delivered on that promise in November. Hopefully, not only this dedicated member of staff but other members of staff in different councils will help to give groups a better opportunity to apply for much-needed funds.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

I am really touching on a similar subject. As the cuts come through in the future, is the Minister putting in place training for those arm's-length bodies, including how to do better fiscal management, how to better business plan, how to fundraise and how to make the whole thing more efficient from a financial point of view?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

We have asked the ALBs, and we will continue to scrutinise the way in which they help groups to do that. In fairness to the ALBs, over a period of years now, not only do they review the groups and look at their accountability and governance, but they have been very proactive in trying to help groups not only to do their returns in a better way but to do them in such a way that, at the same time, they gather up information that will help them with future funding applications. That is where you see the real tangible outcome. It is not all a process of putting in your forms and getting your returns done; there is actually an outcome that will help the groups in the long term.

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

7. Mr Rogers asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure how many temporary staff in Libraries NI will lose their jobs as a result of budget cuts. (AQO 7310/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Libraries employs nine temporary members of staff, all of whom are expected to remain in post for the duration of their contract. Libraries NI does not, therefore, anticipate that any will lose their job as a result of budget reductions. Indeed, Libraries will continue to work proactively and seek additional funding to extend the term of employment for some of those posts. That would allow work, for example, on the delivery of important health and well-being initiatives in the community to continue.

Despite the challenging financial environment, I remain committed to protecting the public library service as far as possible from the impact of budget reductions. I regard public libraries as a key front-line community service that needs to be maintained and sustained. I am delighted that the responses that my Department received on the draft Budget were strongly supportive and endorsed that position.

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

I thank the Minister for that detailed answer and welcome what she has said. Is there any change in staffing planned in the libraries that got the self-service kiosks?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Absolutely not, as far as I am aware. Any additional services and support that went into libraries are about helping the customers, the clients, the people who use the libraries to access a better service. Those facilities have not been brought in to reduce staff. I know that there was some cynicism about it, but that has not been the case. If anything, it frees staff to do better one-to-one work with groups and people who come in for health and well-being, education and support. My colleague John O'Dowd and I visited a library in Lurgan where we saw some of the after-school work that is done with schools, library staff, parents and community groups. That is a good result.

Ian McCrea (DUP, Mid Ulster)

When the draft Budget process was announced, Libraries NI started a process of reducing the opening hours of libraries. As part of the bilaterals that the Minister has had with the Finance Minister, has she bid for additional funding for libraries to try to give them additional money to at least re-look at opening hours and try to sustain the libraries, especially in rural areas?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

It will come as no surprise to the Member that I am not going to give him details of the discussions that I have had with my ministerial colleague, particularly when I am asking for money for a lot of services across the DCAL family. However — as an example, because he raised it — I pointed out the good work that libraries have done and explained why I protected Libraries more than the other ALBs in the draft Budget because of the service that they provide.

It is important that we try to ensure that opening hours are not reduced, particularly in rural areas. I am acutely aware that, in many rural communities, libraries are probably the only community service that they have. We need to make sure that those libraries are used not just for borrowing books and accessing the internet but, like the example I gave Seán Rogers, for after-school and community use and for health, well-being and education initiatives. It is important that we keep them open as long as possible.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

The Minister will remember that she initiated a review of the permanent staff timetables in September in order to minimise any adverse service impact from the Budget cuts. Minister, have you completed that work yet, and will it be brought to the Committee for consideration?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I have completed the majority of the work; there are still bits and pieces left to do. The work on the libraries is really about making sure that the staff we have, we can hold. In answer to Seán Rogers, that even includes temporary staff because they have already proved their worth and they are needed. When the draft Budget discussions have been concluded, we will focus on minimising any potential reduction in opening hours as much as possible to ensure that we have a full service and access to our libraries across the board.

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

That ends the period for listed questions. We will now move on to topical questions.

Oliver McMullan (Sinn Féin, East Antrim)

T1. Mr McMullan asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure what the next steps are for the Irish language and Ulster-Scots strategies. (AQT 1921/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his question. I aim to publish the strategies for the Irish language and Ulster Scots on the website by 30 January.

Oliver McMullan (Sinn Féin, East Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her response. Can the Minister further advise what her plans are for bringing forward an Irish language Act?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his question. He will know that I have stated on previous occasions that I intend to bring forward a draft Irish language Act for consultation at the beginning of February, so people can see for themselves exactly what is involved in an Acht na Gaeilge — an Irish language Act. They can feed into the consultation and make their own mind up.

Bronwyn McGahan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

T2. Ms McGahan asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure for an update on developments from Sport NI on facilities for the Eoghan Ruadh hurling club, Dungannon. (AQT 1922/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for her question. I am aware of the Member's continued support for Eoghan Ruadh hurling club. She was there at at least one of the meetings that I had with the club, and I have responded to substantial correspondence from her on its behalf. Sport NI's small grants programme will close at the end of this month. I am not sure if Eoghan Ruadh has applied to that. At this stage, I can only ask if it has or not. The Member will appreciate that we need to wait until the conclusion of that grants process.

Bronwyn McGahan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat. I thank the Minister for her response and for all the assistance that she has provided. Will the Minister agree to a meeting between the hurling club and Sport NI?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Certainly. I have met many MLAs across all the parties on a range of issues, along with representatives of DCAL's ALBs, and I am happy to facilitate that meeting when it is appropriate.

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

T3. Mr McKinney asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure whether she will agree to meet the Health Minister to discuss setting up automatic referral programmes for parents, carers and family members to learn sign language and other methods to improve engagement and interaction, given that it is to be welcomed that she has agreed to meet the Rogers family from Newtownabbey who, while noting their child’s specific difficulties, have highlighted the lack of governmental services for the parents of children who are deaf. (AQT 1923/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his question. I met the Rogers family yesterday. I just learnt of their situation on Friday when I watched the news at supper time, and I made contact with my officials and organised a meeting as quickly as possible. I was delighted to meet Emma Rogers and her baby son yesterday as a result of that. While I have a responsibility for providing money for sign language development, there is no framework or protocol for families. So I am happy to meet the Minister of Health, but rather than pass it from one Department to another, I will step up and take responsibility for it. I will pass it on to Health when appropriate and pass it on to Education thereafter.

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

In that context, can the Minister address how her Department is addressing inequality of arts provision for children who are deaf or have severe hearing difficulties?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I have not received any representation from anyone regarding the fact that children who are deaf or have hearing impairments have not accessed arts because of their disability. I am happy to try and get the Member details, but he will be aware that providing support for the arts, libraries and sports for people with disabilities has been one of my key priorities, and it will continue to be. If the Member has any specific details that he wants to bring to my attention, I will be happy to receive those.

Michael McGimpsey (UUP, Belfast South)

T4. Mr McGimpsey asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure whether she has any funding stream priorities for arts and creativity, given the new financial regime under which she will have to manage her Department. (AQT 1924/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his question. He will know from his experience in this Department and certainly in the Health Department that, after each Budget and consultation process, you have decisions to make. Some are based on, for example, a technical process such as an equality impact assessment; others are based on where the gaps are. That is what I intend to do, and I have done that since coming into the Department. Most Members can see the direction of travel, but not everybody agrees with it. We will certainly prioritise those who have been furthest removed from services and people who have not had or enjoyed as much access to the Department's support as they should have.

Michael McGimpsey (UUP, Belfast South)

I thank the Minister for that answer. Does she agree that it is also important to attach priority to creative projects of major significance, such as film, the Lyric Theatre and the Ulster Orchestra?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Absolutely. Certainly, the arts, culture and the digital creative industries have helped to contribute to the economy and to regeneration. There have been opportunities from the very big to the very small. It is really important that we harness those opportunities, not only to sustain what we have but to try to get them additional money to ensure that they are economically viable for the future.

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

T5. Mr McCartney asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure for an update on the funding stream for the Foyle Valley gateway master plan in Derry, given that she will be well aware that it is one of the catalyst projects under the One Plan. (AQT 1925/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I am aware of the Member's ongoing interest in the project — in fact, he comes up with it up every time that I am on my feet. I anticipate discussions being progressed with Derry City Council. As the Member will be aware, the council has indicated that it intends to put in an application for the Brandywell stadium to the subregional stadium programme when it commences. I expect that as soon as the subregional money has been secured, which I anticipate will happen very soon, the Member will, along with members from Brandywell, Derry City Football Club and Derry City Council, be part of that delegation

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as an fhreagra sin. I thank the Minister for her answer and her ongoing interest in the project. She mentioned the Brandywell football stadium. Has she had any indication of when that application process will commence?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The Member will be aware that there was an agreement in March 2011 to provide the three stadia, notwithstanding the fact that we are not there yet with Casement Park. Bear it in mind that the mandate was not extended, and it was anticipated that the money for the subregional stadia would become available in the next mandate. I have started the process by bringing together a team of experts in my Department to look at the subregional stadia. That will take place over the next couple of months. The process for application and how that can be accessed will be revealed soon after that. I will keep the Member updated.

Gordon Dunne (DUP, North Down)

T6. Mr Dunne asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure whether she agrees that the management of the planning application for the redevelopment of Casement Park was handled in an incompetent manner. (AQT 1926/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

No, I do not agree.

Gordon Dunne (DUP, North Down)

That was a rather brief answer. I wonder whether you will treat the constituents of West Belfast in the same manner. Does the Minister agree that the GAA was just too demanding in trying to cram such a high-volume stadium into a high-density residential area?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

No, I do not agree.

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

I remind Members to confine themselves to asking questions rather than offering opinions, please. I call Mr Pat Sheehan.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat. Ceist uimhir a naoi.

[Interruption.]

Is it the supplementary? Gabh mo leithscéal. I beg your pardon, Mr Deputy Speaker. I was not prepared for the question, so I think it better that I just sit down again.

Jimmy Spratt (DUP, Belfast South)

T8. Mr Spratt asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure for an update on the buy-in from community groups to the three stadia. (AQT 1928/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The Member will be aware that there has been good engagement, albeit at different levels and at different stages, with residents and community groups on the development of facilities on the Cregagh estate and at Windsor Park for rugby and soccer respectively. I hope that that will continue. The redevelopment of Casement Park has gone beyond the current residents group. I have received a substantial number of requests to meet a number of residents and community groups in the vicinity in west Belfast and, indeed, the greater west Belfast area. I will be doing that in the near future. However, notwithstanding that, I appreciate that big developments cannot happen without the inclusion and the support of the local communities that they surround.

Jimmy Spratt (DUP, Belfast South)

I thank the Minister for her answer. She mentioned the Cregagh area, particularly the Ravenhill Kingspan stadium. I promised the residents that I would do this, so let me say to her that they have had considerable cooperation from officials of her Department, and they appreciate that. However, can she give me an assurance that any final matters that need to be tied up will be tied up as soon as possible?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Absolutely, and I will continue to give the commitment to Mr Spratt that not only will that relationship, with accountability and transparency, continue, but I hope that, even well after the completion of the education centre at Ravenhill/Kingspan, the relationship will not end there and that it will be a long-term relationship. They are neighbours, and they need to be good neighbours, and I will ensure that that happens well after I leave this Department and with anyone else who comes into it.

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

Mr David McIlveen is not in his place.

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

T10. Mrs D Kelly asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure what communication she has had with those people heading up the campaign against the budget cuts to the film industry and what her views are of the cuts and their impact on the Northern Ireland economy. (AQT 1930/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The Member will be aware that the response time for the draft Budget closed on 29 December. It should be no surprise to her to learn that, of the almost 10,000 responses that I got, almost 3,000 were about arts, and the majority of those were on NI Screen and any potential cuts to or impacts on delivery for those groups. I am looking at those, but just to give the Member some reassurance, I appreciate the work that groups like Cinemegic and many others do. I want to try to ensure that the worst impacts of the Budget are reduced for groups like that.

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

I appreciate the Minister's concerns. Have you had any communication with the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment on the economic boost that the creative industries bring to Northern Ireland? Is there a recognition of that in the Programme for Government commitment for the year ahead?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I have ongoing discussions with the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, and we have a very good relationship, particularly when it comes to looking at NI Screen and the whole creative industries sector. We are all waiting to see what the outcome of the draft Budget and the settlement will be, and as soon as that Budget settlement has occurred, I anticipate further discussions about the impacts not only with Minister Foster but other Ministers.

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

As the next period for Question Time does not begin until 2.45 pm, I suggest that the House takes its ease until then. In a moment of reflection, could I appeal to those Members who are talking from a sedentary position to stop doing so?

Oral Answers to Questions — Education

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

We now move to questions to the Minister of Education. I inform Members that questions 4 and 11 have been withdrawn.

Sandra Overend (UUP, Mid Ulster)

1. Mrs Overend asked the Minister of Education for his assessment of the impact of the reductions to the aggregated schools budget on schools in mid-Ulster. (AQO 7319/11-15)

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

2. Mr McAleer asked the Minister of Education to outline the impact the draft education budget will have on the ability of schools to continue to deliver high-quality education. (AQO 7320/11-15)

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

3. Mr A Maginness asked the Minister of Education how he proposes to protect the quality of educational provision in the classroom while making cuts to the aggregated schools budget. (AQO 7321/11-15)

Jonathan Craig (DUP, Lagan Valley)

6. Mr Craig asked the Minister of Education to outline the efforts he has made to defend front-line services in light of the proposed budget cuts. (AQO 7324/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Mr Deputy Speaker, with your permission, I will answer questions 1, 2, 3 and 6 together.

My Department's draft 2015-16 resource budget outcome has resulted in a funding gap of £162·5 million, which represents an 8·4% reduction from the 2014-15 baseline. Clearly, achieving reductions of that scale within one year is extremely challenging, and maintaining all core services at current levels is simply not deliverable.

In reaching my decisions on the proposed budget reductions and the inescapable pressures to be funded, I have focused on protecting front-line services as far as possible. Hence, the reduction to the aggregated schools budget (ASB) is 7%, not 8·4%, and that reduces further to 6% when the additional £10 million of funding for targeting social need, which I propose to allocate next year, is included. Unfortunately, as the aggregated schools budget represents 59% of the total education budget, it has simply not been possible to protect it fully from reductions. I recognised that early communication was vital, which is why letters were issued to all schools on 2 December providing the indicative aggregated schools budget and illustrative per pupil funding values for next year.

Our focus — my focus — remains on raising standards and improving outcomes. However, the situation is clearly very difficult. That is why I will endeavour to do all that I can to make the case for increased investment in education as part of the final 2015-16 Budget negotiations.

Sandra Overend (UUP, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Minister for that response. Since the proposals were announced, I have been inundated with contact from schools in mid-Ulster, explaining how these cuts will have such a dramatic effect on education in the area. The Minister needs to recognise that this cut means mass redundancies, larger class numbers, less special needs provision and a poorer quality environment for education. As he said, the ASB amounts to 59% of the Department's budget. Does he not recognise that he must look for efficiencies in the other 41% of his budget?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I thank the Member for that supplementary question. However, if I were to look for £162 million in the remaining 41% of the budget, the Member would be asking me questions about why the boards were facing such a dramatic reduction in their services. Those services include transport, special educational needs provision, free school meals entitlement, school meals, youth services, Sure Start, which would face a greater reduction than it currently does — the list goes on.

There is no easy answer to the difficulties facing the education budget. I have endeavoured to maintain the schools budget to the best level that I can. I am working and engaging with the Finance Minister on the final Budget outcome. I hope to be able to secure additional funds for education, and, if I do, the majority of that will go into schools.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat. Does the Minister agree that, for education to succeed in the classroom, it is also important to invest outside the classroom in areas such as extended schools and youth services?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Without a doubt. Before the lunch break and after Question Time, we began and will continue the debate supported by some Members on education funding. I think that the mistake and the flaw in the motion is that it simply concentrates on schools. Eighty per cent of a child's learning takes place outside school. The socio-economic background of a child impacts on educational outcomes in school, so we have to deal with all aspects of a child's life and all aspects of how a child or young person engages in education. Simply focusing on funding for schools will not make for a successful education system, and we are an education system rather than simply a schools-based education system.

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

I thank the Minister for his detailed reply. I hear what he says, but, if he looks at the situation in most schools, he will see that 90% of their money goes on staffing, and 10% is left for other things. Given the severity of the cuts, how can schools reasonably avoid cuts in their staffing levels? It is absolutely impossible, Minister. I ask you to respond to that.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I have never suggested that schools will not face reductions in numbers of staff, whether teachers or support staff. My officials have been open and frank about that from day one, and one of them was referred to at the Education Committee as being cavalier, which I think was unfair. My officials and I have been up front from day one, saying that the education budget will result in a significant number of losses of teachers, support staff and other staff from the boards and other support organisations as well.

As I said, the only solution — or rather, the long-term solution to our problem — is a change of Government in Westminster to one that has an economic policy that meets the needs of all citizens rather than those of the corporate businesses that operate out of the south of England. However, the short-term solution to our problem in education is that it receives an uplift as a result of the final Budget outcome. I can assure Members that the majority of any uplift that I receive will go into schools.

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

Further to that, can we have some detail on the projects that the Minister intends to deliver in the constituency, particularly the capital projects?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I am not sure how that relates to this question. Mr McGlone may be referring to a later question and I will be happy to respond at that stage.

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

Right, OK.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

Will the Minister confirm that he is proposing a 100% reduction to the budget for community relations, equality and diversity (CRED) in education for 2015? What impact does he think that will have on schools' ability to contribute to improved community relations in Northern Ireland?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

As the result of an extremely difficult Budget, I am having to look at alternative ways in which services might be delivered. We are looking at a significant investment in shared education programmes over the next number of years. Up to £25 million will be delivered across shared education programmes. I hope that the CRED policy could be delivered through the shared education programme. However, as a result of the equality screening of the Budget, one of the areas that has been flagged up for full equality screening has been my proposal to fully remove the CRED funding. I am taking a particularly detailed look at that proposal and will make a final judgement on it, based on all the evidence, including the equality screening, when I announce the Department's final budget.

Mickey Brady (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

5. Mr Brady asked the Minister of Education when he plans to introduce anti-bullying legislation. (AQO 7323/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

In 2013, at my request, the NI Anti-Bullying Forum undertook a review of anti-bullying legislation, guidance and practice. The review made a number of recommendations that are being taken forward as part of an agreed joint work programme for DE and the forum. It highlighted the need for greater consistency in how all schools are tackling the issue. We know that some schools are making considerable efforts in that regard, but the review noted wide variations in the anti-bullying policies and procedures of individual schools and a lack of detailed information on the true scale and nature of the problem across all schools.

A key recommendation was, therefore, to bring forward legislation to address those weaknesses and help ensure that all schools understand and are using best practice to tackle bullying and support pupils. For that reason, on 23 June 2014, I announced my intention to introduce new anti-bullying legislation in the current Assembly mandate. A public consultation was launched on 5 January 2015 and will run until 27 February. Following that, it is my intention to introduce a Bill to the Assembly in May 2015.

This is a challenging timescale but one that I and my officials are working hard to meet.

Mickey Brady (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Minister for his answer. Will he please outline the scope of the proposed legislation in schools? Go raibh maith agat.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The proposed legislation will provide a common definition of bullying; require all schools to centrally record incidents of bullying, their motivation and their outcome; and require boards of governors to identify and designate one or more members to be responsible for anti-bullying policies and processes in the school.

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

How can the Minister ensure consistency of application across different schools? I am sure that you are aware that, in your constituency, different boards of governors apply the current policies and procedures on a much different basis than you and I would understand. Will there be supplementary guidance notes to the legislation to explain how it should be applied?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

One of the reasons why I asked for the review of our current policies was that, as a constituency MLA and, indeed, as a Minister, I have regular reports of concerns by parents and pupils about how bullying cases are dealt with in schools. We hear some harrowing stories. There are also many, many fine examples of where schools have acted appropriately and in the best interests of all involved in the bullying cases, sought resolution and helped all the young people involved. However, I think it is important that we bring forward the legislation. The legislation will define what incidents should be recorded, how they should be recorded and how policies should be outlined. Supplementary guidance etc will be provided to schools to ensure that everyone is familiar with and trained in how anti-bullying legislation should be implemented in schools.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

I welcome the consultation on anti-bullying legislation to protect our children and young people. However, does the Minister not find it rather ironic that he as Sinn Féin Minister is leading this, given that, of recent times, his party supporters and, indeed, some of its elected representatives have been involved in the cyberbullying of Ann Travers and Maíria Cahill, not to mention his party's history of actual physical violence?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I think the Member belittles himself by making that comment. The Member is steeped in education; he knows education as well as I or many other Members in the Chamber do. He could come forward in this debate with a much more informed question or intervention than he just has. I do not know if it was your party management or who it was who put that question in front of you, but you should have had more sense than to read it out.

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

Cyberbullying has been highlighted quite a lot in the press in recent days. Will the Minister tell us what ideas are being considered in order to give schools some guidance in dealing with that?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The definition of bullying will include reference to cyberbullying. However, we also work with the Health Department, which is preparing more detailed information on it. The Department has also endorsed proposals by the Health Department for the Safeguarding Board here to develop an e-safety strategy. We expect that work to include consideration of cyberbullying in all forms and settings. We will want to work with it to ensure that our work and that of the forum is informed by and aligned with the safety board. So, we are working with other Departments in relation to the matter. The definition, which I hope to bring forward in legislation, will also cover the use of cyberbullying.

Ian McCrea (DUP, Mid Ulster)

7. Mr I McCrea asked the Minister of Education for an update on the capital projects being considered for schools in Mid Ulster. (AQO 7325/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

In my January 2013 capital programme, three schools in Mid Ulster were announced to advance in planning. They are Holy Trinity College, Cookstown; Gaelscoil Ui Neill, Coalisland; and Edendork Primary School, Dungannon.

A development proposal (DP) to increase the approved enrolment at Holy Trinity College, Cookstown has been submitted to my Department for consideration. The economic appraisal (EA) for the new school cannot be completed until a decision on the DP has been made. Work on that project is progressing in parallel with the DP process, with regular project meetings taking place to ensure momentum is maintained.

The EA for Gaelscoil Ui Neill has recently been submitted to my Department for consideration. The project will progress to the design stage when the EA has been approved.

Work is ongoing to appoint a design team to Edendork Primary School. When that has been completed, work will commence on the feasibility study and the business case for the new school build.

In February 2014, four schools in Mid Ulster were included in the school enhancement programme. They were Rainey Endowed, Magherafelt; Anahorish Primary School, Toomebridge; St Mary’s Grammar School, Magherafelt; and St Joseph’s Grammar School, Donaghmore. Site work on the Rainey project commenced in September 2014, with the project estimated to be completed in January 2016. Design work for the other three projects is at an advanced stage.

Ian McCrea (DUP, Mid Ulster)

The Minister will not be surprised to hear that I will ask him a question in respect of the Rainey Endowed. As the Minister will know, not only from his visit but, no doubt, from discussions in his Department, the Rainey Endowed has been in the system for quite some time. I accept that the schools enhancement programme funding will help the school at least to address some of the difficulties, but will the Minister give an assurance that he will do what he can to find the funding to try to ensure that a new build is given to the school?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

All applications for new builds will be considered and the merits of each measured against the process at that time. Rainey Endowed has been successful in the schools enhancement programme. Work has commenced. I had a brief conversation about the works on the fringes of another meeting with the principal. He has invited me to the school to take a look at how work has advanced and, no doubt, to lobby me about other investment as well, as is his right. I look forward to undertaking that visit. I will listen to your concerns and those of the school about the fabric of the school, and we will do everything in our power to advance capital builds in that school and many others across the North that are deserving of new builds.

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

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Mo bhuíochas leis an Aire as an fhreagra chuimsitheach sin. Thanks very much to the Minister for his comprehensive statement. I also place on record my thanks to his officials for their help, particularly with St Joseph's in Donaghmore and the Rainey Endowed in Magherafelt. I have to put on record that they have been very efficient.

He mentioned Edendork earlier, but can the Minister give us some indication as to progress being made with Holy Family Primary School in Magherafelt?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I am aware that Holy Family Primary School has been seeking a new build for a considerable number of years. However, I cannot match the number of schools that are deserving of a new build with the capital project that I have. I have had to bring in a scoring matrix to try to provide fairness throughout the system. I have put all the proposals for new builds through that scoring matrix, and I have provided for new builds for those that score highest and against which I can match money. That does not mean that other schools are not deserving of a new build. It simply means that I do not have the required capital at this stage to build them, but I continue to seek further funds from all quarters for building programmes for our schools. Hopefully, through time, that school will be successful as well.

Sandra Overend (UUP, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Minister for the detail. He mentioned the capital project for Holy Trinity in Cookstown. Can he provide updates on the development plan in the area and on how the growth of that school might impact on other schools in the area? Will the Minister acknowledge any area-planning difficulties there as a result of the changes to the area covered by the board?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I thank the Member for her question. As with any development proposal, particularly one involving a significant change in school character or enrolment numbers, there will be different views among key stakeholders in the area. I have received representations from both sides of the argument about the DP. I will make my decision in due course, taking on board all the relevant information that has been provided to me in the meetings in which I have engaged on the matter. I assure the Member that, when I reach a decision, it will be based on all information that has been brought to my attention.

David Hilditch (DUP, East Antrim)

8. Mr Hilditch asked the Minister of Education for an update on funding cuts within education. (AQO 7326/11-15)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Following an intensive process, I published a detailed draft budget for 2015-16 consultation document on Wednesday 26 November 2014. In reaching my decisions on the inescapable pressures to be funded and my proposed reductions, I focused on protecting front-line services as far as possible, promoting equality and raising education standards. I secured the contribution of specific programmes that reflect the Department’s statutory responsibilities. I continue to tackle social disadvantage and ensured that support for children with special educational needs is prioritised as much as possible. I have no further update to give other than to say that I will endeavour to do all that I can to make the case for increased investment in education as part of the 2015-16 final Budget negotiations.

David Hilditch (DUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his answer. Clearly, and as other MLAs have said, there have been strong representations from local schools about concerns and fears. How is the situation being communicated to educationalists, unions etc?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I met the unions early in the process and outlined to them in stark terms the possible implications of the education budget. They responded in a very robust manner in defence of education and their members. As you will be aware, they have been holding a number of well-attended public meetings across the North, outlining to teachers, parents, politicians and communities what the implications of the draft budget will be if there is no significant change to it.

As I said in an earlier answer, we have corresponded with all schools and set out indicative budgets for them. Schools have been responding, as have the education and library boards in relation to how they feel the budget will impact upon them. To date, the education budget consultation has received 21,000 responses, so there has been quite a healthy and robust exchange of views in relation to the draft education budget.

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

Previously, Minister, small schools had some budgetary protection, but, in this draft budget, smaller rural schools will be adversely affected. How do you intend to address this issue?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The draft budget I have published has not made any comment in relation to the small schools element of the aggregated schools budget. That small schools budget continues into the future unless there is a consultation to change it.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

In pursuit of his austerity cuts, has the Minister given any thought to the dramatic impact on a school that has made a two-year commitment to deliver a course to parents and pupils but is suddenly told that, on foot of cuts as savage as this, it has to make huge savings that could result in the withdrawal of that course offer or the withdrawal of the staff to teach it? Has he thought through the long-term consequences of these severe cuts that he is proposing?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I am glad that comrade Jim has now joined the fight against austerity measures.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

You are the Minister of austerity.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

You are very welcome, if not very, very, very, very late to the cause.

[Interruption.]

It is always good to have a new comrade on board.

[Laughter.]

In relation to your question, I am acutely aware of the pressures being placed on our education system by the Budget we now face. Our education system in its totality, whether it be schools, youth services, extended schools, breakfast clubs, free school meals entitlement — all those things that go to make an education system — is under pressure.

I am engaging with my Executive colleagues and the Finance Minister on a way forward. No doubt, like every other Minister, I have scrutinised all the changes that have happened since the draft Budget was announced, including the autumn statement, which was made by the Westminster Government and which saw around £70 million in Barnett consequentials come this way. We are looking at other areas, including the £30 million change fund which was in the draft Budget; I made applications to that as well. We are also looking at other areas as a consequence of the Stormont House Agreement, which the Member was opposed to before the ink dried on the page. I am looking at all areas for additional funding for education, and I hope that the Member, comrade Jim, supports me in that.

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

Order, please. I caution Members to address people by their proper names. I would also suggest that the Minister should make his remarks through the Chair. Finally, I ask Mr Allister not to make remarks from a sedentary position.

Christopher Hazzard (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his answers thus far. He has said that there have been tens of thousands of responses to the consultation. Perhaps he would outline what types of responses these were.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Many have been reflected in the Chamber this afternoon, during Question Time and in the ongoing debate on education funding. Members of the public, teachers, parents and pupils are significantly concerned about the impact on schools. I have had representations from Youth Service, youth workers and people who use youth services. I have had contacts and representations from Sure Start projects that are concerned, and I have had representations in relation to the CRED policy, which was mentioned earlier. Across the whole gamut of educational services, members of the public and users of those services have responded, and we are now going through those in detail.

As I said, I will take into account the comments of MLAs in today's debate before I make any final decision in relation to my budget. I hope that, with fingers crossed, there is an uplift for the education budget. I recognise the pressure on schools; a significant amount of money will go to schools but there are other services that require an uplift as well.