Northern Ireland Assembly, 2 June 2015

504 contributions from 57 members. The official report.

Ministerial Statement

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, in compliance with section 52 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, I wish to make the following statement on the nineteenth meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC) in environment sectoral format, which was held in Armagh on Wednesday 13 May. The statement has been agreed with Minister Kennedy who, along with me, represented the Northern Ireland Executive. I chaired the meeting. The Irish Government were represented by Ann Phelan TD, Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government (DECLG).

Ministers had a discussion on the review of the agreed NSMC work programme for the environment sector and noted that an interim update will be provided to the 5 June 2015 NSMC plenary meeting. They also agreed that an update paper on the matter will be brought to the next NSMC environment meeting. Ministers also agreed that collaboration on the drawdown of EU funding for environmental projects and research will continue to be a high priority.

The Council noted that the first phase of the air quality research study has been completed and that the key findings have been noted by Ministers. The interim report was shared with a group of key stakeholders, and that will inform the next phase of the study. A copy of the interim report has been placed in the Assembly Library.

Ministers noted the establishment across both jurisdictions of a collaborative evidence programme known as ShARE, enabling stakeholders to deliver evidence to underpin their activities as regulators to derive maximum benefit from the funding and resources invested.

The Council noted that the all-island research project into the environmental impacts of unconventional gas exploration and extraction is ongoing.

Ministers noted that a joint €72 million INTERREG VA programme has been adopted by the EU Commission covering the terrestrial, freshwater and marine environments. The Council noted that the EU Commission announced the opening of the LIFE 2015 programme on 1 June 2015 and, in preparation for its launch, potential applicants to the programme from both jurisdictions attended the LIFE application training course in Dublin.

They also noted that the official launch of the Northern Ireland Horizon 2020 strategy took place on 31 March 2015 at the Commission's offices in Belfast and that the cross-border roadshow event on the Horizon 2020 societal challenge 5 programme was held at the end of May 2015.

The Council noted that the carrier bag levy, introduced on new single-use carrier bags by the Department of the Environment on 8 April 2013, was extended on 19 January 2015 to low-cost reusable carrier bags. Ministers welcomed the introduction of the Food Waste Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2015, which were made on 22 January 2015 and will restrict the amount of food waste being landfilled.

The Council noted that the DOE consultation on a quality action plan for recycling, which incorporates proposals for a material recovery facility code of practice, closed on 6 March 2015. Ministers noted the proposed reform of waste enforcement and the establishment of three lead authorities for waste enforcement in Ireland.

Ministers also noted the proposed regulatory changes to be introduced by the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government to provide for regulatory controls on type 8 plants and the successful coexistence of those and composting plants in the overall waste treatment infrastructure in Ireland. The Council noted the intention of the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government to introduce a full producer responsibility initiative for tyres and waste tyres. It also noted that DOE officials are working with DECLG officials and that that will assist the DOE in considering the desirability and feasibility of introducing similar proposals in the North.

The Council noted that two illegal waste landfill sites will be addressed in the repatriation programme during 2015. It also noted that both Environment Ministers and their Departments are continuing to target resources at joint enforcement action against illegal operators, which includes the exchanging of intelligence and information on problem areas and carrying out coordinated inspections.

Ministers expressed continuing concern at the impact of fuel laundering and stressed the importance of closer cooperation between agencies to tackle the issue. They agreed that relevant officials would provide an overview of the issues at the next environment NSMC meeting.

Ministers welcomed the publication in Northern Ireland of the consultation documents on new draft river basin management plans (RBMPs). The Council noted that the consultation on the timetable and work programme for the development of the second-cycle RBMPs in Ireland closed on 31 January 2015 and that the responses are being considered.

Ministers also welcomed the continued cross-border collaborative work on the development of the river trusts, including the provision of funding by Ireland to the Rivers Trust organisation in Northern Ireland to assist with the development of river trusts in Ireland, including the development of a new cross-border river trust in Inishowen in County Donegal.

The Council noted that DECLG has given its support, in principle, to a DOE proposal to seek INTERREG funding for a cross-border pilot initiative to provide electronic signs that give real-time data on bathing water quality in certain designated bathing areas. The Council also noted the initial engagement between DRD and DECLG to discuss areas in the water sector that offer opportunities for mutual cooperation.

Ministers welcomed the continued coordination on the Clean Coast and Coast Care schemes and noted the success of the symposium that was held in November and involved representatives from both jurisdictions. The Council noted that the 2015 awards for beaches in each jurisdiction were announced in May 2015.

It was agreed to hold the next environment meeting in autumn 2015.

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

I thank the Minister for his very comprehensive statement. I am very pleased to hear of the many issues that were discussed. Certainly, there are very good opportunities for cooperation and collaboration between the two jurisdictions. Will the Minister outline some of the key findings of the interim report on the air quality research study? Moreover, when will the final report come out? Does he anticipate any legislative changes coming from the recommendations?

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I thank Ms Lo, Chair of the Environment Committee, for her question. The research that the Member referred to is still under way, and the interim report marks the end of just the first phase of the research. The interim report, which is available in the Assembly Library, sets out the context of the study and presents information on air pollutant emissions, health impacts, the fuel market, fuel poverty and measures that have been used in other member states to address the problem of air pollution from households burning solid fuels. Much of this information is already available in the public domain, and it was indeed the subject of a debate here several months ago. I will be presenting the key findings of the study once the second phase has been completed and a final report produced. I very much expect that to be later this year. I do not want to pre-empt the outcome of the second phase by predicting whether legislation will be required, but, in her capacity as Chair of the Environment Committee, the Member will certainly be kept abreast of proceedings.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his full statement this morning on many issues, and I welcome the introduction of the food waste regulations. What is his Department doing by way of working with the 11 new super-councils to ensure that all the bio waste that can possibly be collected is collected for recycling across Northern Ireland?

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Deputy Chair of the Committee for her question. It is very important that the Department work in collaboration with the 11 councils. I addressed this issue in a previous Question Time to another Member. It is important that there is consistency across the new councils. I suppose that that has proven difficult where you have an amalgamation and a reduction from 26 to 11, where councils with different practices and policies are being stuck together.

Currently, there are three waste management partnerships in the North. We have Arc21, with which the Member is very familiar, the Southern Waste Management Plan (SWaMP2008) and the North West Region Waste Management Group. I have gone on public record to say that I believe that we should have one management group or one overseeing body dealing with waste management right across the North, and I believe that that would lead to greater consistency across all the councils.

Barry McElduff (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his statement. Is the Minister at liberty to pinpoint the location of the two illegal waste landfill sites, which are to be addressed in this calendar year? Can he also outline the scale of the problem at both locations?

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Member for that question. I am at liberty to disclose the locations of these sites; unfortunately, however, I do not have the detail right here. It is, as usual, along the border. I will certainly get the exact locations to the Member before the close of play today.

In total, 17 sites have been identified, with an estimated total of 273,000 tons of waste to be removed or repatriated from North to South. A total of 10 of those sites have been completed thus far, and, this year, we hope to do sites 11 and 12.

Due to budgetary constraints, I suppose, they have gone for the low-hanging fruit, so, of those 17 sites, it is safe to say that the 10 that have been cleared so far are those that present the least problem. However, it is important that those two sites be cleared this year, which will leave five sites remaining, and that we work together to ensure that they are repatriated on schedule by 2017.

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

I thank the Minister for his detailed and worthwhile report on the environment and environmental issues. I note in the report a reference to the drawdown of EU funding and a commitment to collaborate. Will the Minister enlarge on that and indicate whether there is match funding between North and South for European funding? Is there any further development that might be useful in dealing with a wide range of environmental issues that affect us both North and South?

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Member for that question. There is, indeed, a good degree of collaboration between North and South in the drawdown of European funding. There is a variety of reasons why there has been a lower overall drawdown of competitive EU funding here than in the South. That is why it is important that we work with them and learn from them.

First, as a member state, Ireland has direct access to more opportunities for engagement in Europe, and, while much of that is now offset by European task force structures, formally the Barroso task force, differences remain. I referred to the largest funding source, Horizon 2020, which totals about £80 billion across the EU. Some 70% of drawdown is by higher education or university establishments. Unfortunately, we do not have too many of those here — some might say that we do not have enough. In addition, here in the North, we have a limited number of companies that engage in R&D. There were only 535 here last year. For the majority of the other funding programmes, drawdown has to be match-funded, so a project proposer must be able to provide a percentage contribution — up to 45% — from its own resources.

On the positive side, my Department is funding the Northern Ireland contact point for Societal Challenge 5 in the Horizon 2020 programme, which includes climate action; environment; resource efficiency; and raw materials. My Department has also provided limited support to a small number of projects, but, given the current financial situation, I am unable to commit to any new funding. That again underlines the importance of working with companies and with other jurisdictions in order to maximise the funding that we can draw down from other sources; notably, in this instance, Europe.

Sandra Overend (UUP, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Minister for his statement. It was pleasing to see that the interim air quality report has been completed. Considering that 42% of households in Northern Ireland are in fuel poverty, does the Minister still agree with me that the banning of certain types of coal and other solid fuels may exacerbate the problem? Can the Minister inform us how he plans to engage with the industry?

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Member for the question. As I said, that was the subject of a debate here a few months ago during which many Members raised the issue of fuel poverty. The interim report, as well as being placed in the Assembly Library, has been shared with relevant stakeholders, including people working on fuel poverty and some representatives of the industry.

I share the Member's fears about the potential impact of a ban on certain household fuels; however, it is imperative that we see what the next phase of the study brings and that, should any change be required, it is managed in a sensitive and sensible manner.

Gary Middleton (DUP, Foyle)

I welcome the statement from the Minister. Can he give any indication of the long-term costs associated with illegal waste at the Mobuoy site in Campsie and what action he is taking to recover the costs from the perpetrators?

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Member for his question. There was an earlier question on waste that had been illegally disposed. The Member's question refers to a well-publicised site in our constituency. I am firmly of the opinion that the polluter should pay. Unfortunately, to date, the polluter has not paid. The taxpayer has paid, through my Department. Indeed, to date, in the region of £1 million has been spent on managing the waste deposited at that site. An eye-watering figure of over £50 million for the total clean-up was put out there, most notably in the Mills report, although that would involve removing all the waste from the site. A range of options is currently being looked at by the Department and the Northern Ireland Environment Agency, with the help of external experts, to manage the waste on the site in a way that will represent least risk to the environment and best value for the taxpayer.

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

I also thank the Minister for his statement and welcome the ongoing cooperation between North and South, particularly on the movement of waste and fuel laundering. What areas will be considered by the Department in the review of the North/South programme?

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Member for his question. It is important that we keep the work programme under almost constant review. DOE is considering, for example, extended scope for discussions and joint working in current NSMC work programme activities on important topics such as habitat and species protection, biodiversity and climate change. DRD, as I indicated in my statement, has also advised that opportunities do and will exist for collaboration in the area of water and sewerage services.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

Hopefully, the Minister will not have a marathon session to cover today, as I understand he successfully concluded one the other day. He will be aware of the number of fuel laundering plants that have been uncovered, and there is an emerging perception that fuel launderers simply wait until the fuel has got into the ground and then report it to the authorities. In other words, they get a clean-up done at no cost to them and a cost to the taxpayer. What is he doing to ensure that is clamped down on and ceases to be the standard procedure for fuel launderers?

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Member for his question. I, too, hope that we are not here for a marathon session. However, having had a brief look over the Justice Bill, I would not be surprised if we all are. It might be more painful than the marathon I completed on Sunday.

Fuel laundering is a huge issue. It causes not only great damage to our environment but to our economy, and it costs an awful lot of money to clean up. Over the past three years alone, my Department has spent over £900,000 cleaning up after fuel launderers and, while DOE and NIEA are not responsible for enforcement or legislating — the enforcement body is HMRC, along with the PSNI — we are charged with cleaning up after these criminals.

The point that Mr Campbell makes about these fuel launderers leaving out their rubbish in the way that you or I might leave out our milk bottles for the milkman to collect is a good one, and it is why my officers are working with their colleagues in HMRC and the PSNI to find these fuel laundering sites, clean up the waste left behind and, most importantly, ascertain where it has come from. The Environment Agency is helping to deter, disrupt and prosecute offenders where sufficient evidence can be found.

Unfortunately, to date, we have not been great, collectively, at finding that evidence and getting prosecutions. As well as work being done by the NIEA, the transport regulation unit in my Department continues to focus on taking action in cases involving hauliers who used illegal fuel or transported illegal waste.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for the update. He mentioned the research project that is being carried out between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland on fracking. Have any issues of concern been raised with the Minister in relation to the company involved in carrying out that research project?

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

There have indeed been some concerns raised about one of the companies involved in carrying out research in that project. I have to say, however, that they are not concerns that I share.

Ian McCrea (DUP, Mid Ulster)

Following on from my colleague's question about fuel laundering, the Minister may be aware that there has been an increase in the number of fuel laundering sites in my constituency, in Draperstown specifically. Whilst I welcome the fact that there has been one arrest in that respect, many people involved believe they are beyond the law and are free to carry out the activity without fear of arrest. Can the Minister ensure that the agencies involved are doing everything they can to ensure that they pick it up early, when the information is given to them, and that arrests are made, rather than waiting until, as my colleague said, the damage is done, people are away and someone else picks up the tab?

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Member for that question. Unfortunately, I am not in a position to ensure that arrests are made. That might be a question better placed with one of my ministerial colleagues. However, the fact that there have been so many questions on fuel laundering underlines its importance. It is an issue that I will raise on Friday at the NSMC plenary session in Dublin.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Speaker, South Antrim)

Thank you. I am sure that the Minister of Justice will be surprised that he has arrest powers.

Executive Committee Business

Mitchel McLaughlin (Speaker, South Antrim)

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

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

Mitchel McLaughlin (Speaker, South Antrim)

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

The first debate will be on amendment Nos 1 to 5, 20, 40, 43 to 46 and opposition to clauses 7, 8, 9 and schedule 2 stand part, all of which deal with committal and court process reform. The second debate will be on amendment Nos 6, to 11, 17, 19, 21 to 29 and 68, which deal with administrative schemes for protection, disclosure and information sharing relating to vulnerable groups. The third debate will be on amendment Nos 12, 16, 49, 51 to 67, 75 to 78 and opposition to clause 86 stand part, which deal with regulation-making powers, technical and miscellaneous amendments. The fourth debate will be on amendment Nos 13 to 15, 18, 30 to 33, 35 to 39, 47, 50, 69, 70 and 72, which deal with criminal records, evidence-gathering and evidence-handling. The fifth debate will be on amendment Nos 34, 41 and 42, 48, 71, 73 and 74, which deal with offences.

Valid petitions of concern have been tabled in relation to amendment Nos 34 and 50. Each will therefore require a cross-community vote. I remind Members who intend to speak that, during the debates on the five groups of amendments, they should address all the amendments in each group on which they wish to comment. Once the debate on each group has been completed, any further amendments in the group will be moved formally as we go through the Bill, and the Question on each will be put without further debate. The Questions on stand part will be taken at the appropriate points in the Bill. If all that is clear, we shall proceed.

Clauses 1 to 6 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

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

Clause 7 (Abolition of preliminary investigations)

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

We now come to the first group of amendments for debate. With amendment No 1, it will be convenient to debate amendment Nos 2 to 5, 20, 40, 43 to 46 and opposition to clauses 7, 8 and 9 and schedule 2 stand part. These amendments deal with committal and court process reform. Amendment No 1 is mutually exclusive with clause 7 stand part. Amendment No 2 is mutually exclusive with clause 8 stand part. Amendment No 4 is consequential to amendment No 3. Amendment No 44 is consequential to amendment No 43.

Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

The following amendments stood on the Marshalled List:

No 1: After clause 7 insert

"Preliminary investigations

7A. Article 30 of the Magistrates’ Courts (Northern Ireland) Order 1981 (which enables a magistrates’ court to conduct a preliminary investigation of an indictable offence) shall apply only when the court is satisfied that a preliminary investigation is required in the interests of justice; and accordingly in all other cases committal proceedings in a magistrates’ court shall be by way of preliminary inquiry under that Order.". — [Mr Allister.]

No 2: After clause 8 insert

"Mixed committals: evidence on oath at preliminary inquiry

8A. Article 34(2) of the Magistrates’ Courts (Northern Ireland) Order 1981 (which enables witnesses to give evidence on oath at a preliminary inquiry) shall apply only when the court is satisfied that such is required in the interests of justice.". — [Mr Allister.]

No 3: After clause 12 insert

"Direct committal for trial: offences related to specified offences

Direct committal: offences related to specified offences

12A.—(1) Where?—

(a) this Chapter applies in relation to an accused (“A”) who?—

(i) is charged with an offence (“offence A”) which is not a specified offence, and

(ii) is not also charged with a specified offence,

(b) A appears or is brought before the court on the same occasion as another person (“B”) charged with a specified offence,

(c) the court commits B for trial for the specified offence under section 12, and

(d) offence A appears to the court to be related to the specified offence for which the court commits B for trial,

the court shall forthwith commit A to the Crown Court for trial for offence A.

(2) Where?—

(a) this Chapter applies in relation to an accused (“A”) who?—

(i) is charged with an offence (“offence A”) which is not a specified offence, and

(ii) is not also charged with a specified offence,

(b) on a previous occasion another person (“B”) has appeared or been brought before the court charged with a specified offence,

(c) the court has on that occasion committed B for trial for the specified offence under section 12, and

(d) offence A appears to the court to be related to the specified offence for which the court committed B for trial,

the court may forthwith commit A to the Crown Court for trial for offence A if the court considers that it is necessary or appropriate in the interests of justice to do so.

(3) Where the court commits the accused for trial for an offence under this section?—

(a) it shall accordingly not conduct committal proceedings in relation to that offence; and

(b) the functions of the court then cease in relation to that offence, except as provided by?—

(i) section 13; or

(ii) Article 29(2)(a)of the Legal Aid, Advice and Assistance (Northern Ireland) Order 1981 or any regulations under Article 26(3) of the Access to Justice (Northern Ireland) Order 2003.

(4) For the purposes of this section an offence is related to a specified offence if a count charging the offence could be included in the same indictment as a count charging the specified offence.". — [Mr Ford (The Minister of Justice).]

No 4: In page 8, line 31, after "section 12" insert "or 12A". — [Mr Ford (The Minister of Justice).]

No 5: In page 9, line 14, leave out "(e) or (f)" and insert "or (e)". — [Mr Ford (The Minister of Justice).]

No 20: in page 36, line 7, at end insert

"(9A) If where the offender is attending proceedings through a live link it appears to the court?—

(a) that the offender is not able to see and hear the court and to be seen and heard by it, and

(b) that this cannot be immediately corrected,

the court must adjourn the proceedings.". — [Mr Ford (The Minister of Justice).]

No 40: In page 55, line 21, leave out subsection (3). — [Mr Ford (The Minister of Justice).]

No 43: In page 55, line 31, leave out

"The Department may by regulations impose a general duty on"

and insert "It is the duty of all".

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

No 44: In page 55, line 34, leave out subsection (2). — [Mr Ford (The Minister of Justice).]

No 45: In page 56, line 23, at end insert

"(5) The regulations must in particular take account of the need to identify and respect the needs of?—

(a) victims,

(b) witnesses, particularly those to whom Article 4(2) of the Criminal Evidence (Northern Ireland) Order 1999 may apply; and

(c) persons under the age of 18.". — [Mr Ford (The Minister of Justice).]

No 46: In page 56, line 23, at end insert

"(6) Before making any regulations under this section the Department must consult?—

(a) the Lord Chief Justice;

(b) the Director of Public Prosecutions;

(c) the General Council of the Bar of Northern Ireland; and

(d) the Law Society of Northern Ireland.". — [Mr Ford (The Minister of Justice).]

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I will speak to amendment No 1 and the other amendment in my name and some of the others in the Minister's name.

My amendments and opposition to certain clauses focus on the important issue of committal in criminal proceedings; that is to say the process by which someone is returned for trial in the Crown Court, a process that is conducted within the Magistrates' Court but which, nonetheless, is an inherent component part of the trial process and therefore is as entitled to the application of the provisions of article 6 towards a fair trial as any other part of the trial process. Yesterday, we had a debate in the House on the whole subject of human rights and the application of the European Convention on Human Rights, and one of those key rights is the article 6 right to a fair trial. That, of necessity, also extends to ensuring that the committal process is equally fair.

I will just take a moment to outline the current provisions of the law, which have stood for some decades. They provide that before anyone is committed for trial before their peers in the Crown Court, this committal process has to be gone through whereby the essence of the evidence against someone is presented in written form in a set of committal papers. A magistrate then reviews those papers, and there is an opportunity at that time for the defence and indeed, in some circumstances, for the prosecution, rather than simply proceeding on the papers of the case, to have selected parts or all of the evidence called to be heard in the Magistrates' Court. The purpose of that, of course, is to test the validity of the evidence if that is the desired tactic being deployed, because one can only be returned for trial in this jurisdiction if the court is satisfied that there is a prima facie case against the person. The House will recognise that that is distinctly different from the ultimate test in the Crown Court: before one can be convicted, there has to be proof beyond all reasonable doubt.

Of course, in the committal process the threshold is substantially lower; it is that there is a prima facie case against that person.

In our current system, we have the option of what is called a preliminary investigation (PI), whereby evidence can be called before a magistrate to assist him or her in deciding whether there is a prima facie case. The system more prevalently, almost overwhelmingly, used is what is called a PE. It is a quirk of language. We call it a PE, but, in fact, it stands for preliminary inquiry and, in the legislation, it is spelt with an i as you might expect. Quite why it is called a PE might be a matter of some speculation, but it is deployed to distinguish it from a PI, which is a preliminary investigation at which evidence is actually called. With a PE, the evidence is simply assessed on the papers.

In most cases, overwhelmingly, the accused and the prosecution are satisfied with the process proceeding on the papers by the PE route. There might be a number of reasons for that from the defence perspective, including the fact that the threshold that I have mentioned is low: you have only to show a prima facie case; it is not the business of showing beyond all reasonable doubt. Secondly, more often than not, the defence would wish to keep their powder dry on the evidence that is coming down the tracks at them and not cross-examine witnesses at the first opportunity in the Magistrates' Court, because to do so would flag up the defence's detail, tactics and approach. Therefore, in the terms that I have used, more often than not, the defence would want to keep their powder dry for the Crown Court trial. In consequence, under article 34 of the Magistrates' Court Order, there is the capacity to have a little bit of both, PIs or mixed committals, where you do not have all the evidence called, as in a preliminary investigation, but selected portions of the evidence are called on request in what is called a mixed committal. It is a right that exists but which is very sparingly used. Answers from the Minister demonstrate that, in the last year, there were but 56 occasions on which there was either a PI or a mixed committal. The Minister will tell us what percentage that is of the many hundreds of cases. I do not have the figure to hand, but there will be hundreds, if not thousands, of returns for trial in that same year and, out of that, a minuscule number — 56 — were held by way of PI or mixed committal.

Of those 56, 18, approximately one third, were not returned for trial. That is to say that the magistrate, on hearing the evidence, decided that there was not even a prima facie case. The consequence is that the public purse was saved the cost of 18 full-blown trials. The Minister is much exercised, understandably, about the cost of the criminal justice system, but here is a system through the committal proceedings that, as one of its knock-on effects, has the consequence of potentially saving the system money. On last year's figures, a third of those cases were knocked out at that stage and we were saved the cost of a major trial. I would have thought that that was no mean consideration for the Minister. Of course, the greater consideration is the quality and availability of justice: the availability of a fair trial.

Let us just pause and realise that in this jurisdiction, according to what this Bill wants to do, a citizen can and would, in every case, end up on trial in the Crown Court without a single statement against him ever being sworn or a single witness against him ever being heard, and would be committed simply on the committal papers. Let us consider further how committal papers are accumulated and how they come about. They come about very simply by that arm of the prosecution investigative service, the police, interviewing the witnesses, writing down the statement of the witness, presenting it in as cogent and persuasive a way as possible, one might think, and the witness signing the statement. The witness never takes an oath to say, "this is the truth" and is never at all tested to see if it is the truth, but the papers presented in that fashion are then compiled and, on that basis, that individual is returned for trial.

At the beginning, I mentioned article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and the right to a fair trial. Of course, in most of continental Europe there is a very different system, where committal takes place in front of an investigating magistrate who actually probes, asks questions and interrogates the witness. The product of that is a committal where evidence has been tested. In our system, such as the Bill wishes to impose in every case, there is no facility for that. I have already indicated that in the vast majority of cases, everyone — prosecution and defence — is content with that. The defence are content because, usually, they want to keep their powder dry on these issues because they recognise that you only have to show a prima facie case.

There are a minority of cases, however, which are of themselves inherently weak, very often because they rely on a flawed witness — a broken reed. You will never read in a set of committal papers anything that indicates to you that this is a flawed witness. The statement will always read persuasively. I do not think I have never read a set of committal papers where it jumps out of the page that this is a witness that you could not believe. The defence might well know matters about that witness which, if they were before the magistrate, would cast that evidence in a very different light. The only way they can ever get that before the court in committal proceedings is to ask for that witness to be called and cross-examined to demonstrate that that witness is not a witness of truth. There are cases where that is the only evidence — of course, in most cases it is more than one — and if that is the only evidence then the magistrate, as in these 18 cases out of 56, will quite properly say that he cannot return the accused for trial because it does not reach the standard even of a prima facie case, and that the proceedings need to end. In doing that, the public purse makes a saving.

It is to preserve that facility for that tiny number of cases that I move these amendments.

I move them in the context of accepting the general premise of what the Bill wants to do on committal proceedings. The general mode of progress should be PE — no evidence, just the written committal papers. I accept that premise, but why would you want to exclude something that is not exploited, as we have seen from the numbers, and can save money in the longer term? More importantly, it can deliver justice at the earliest possible stage. Why would you want to deny that to those we represent: our citizens? If they are charged with a criminal offence, surely they are entitled to expect that we will have protected that facility.

The purpose and purport of my amendments are to say, "Yes, let the general norm be preliminary enquiry, where you simply do it on the papers, but let there be the safeguard — the failsafe — that the defence can seek to persuade the magistrate that, in the interests of justice, he should hear a particular witness. If he hears that witness, justice might be better served."

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Will the Member give way?

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

In a moment.

Let us embrace the norm that the Minister wants to embrace, but let us keep open the exception, which is on the basis that the magistrate would have to be persuaded that it is in the interests of justice for a PI or a mixed committal to take place. That is the right and sensible way to go on the matter.

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

The Member's first amendment mentions the interests of justice, and he has just spoken about it. It was said at Committee on a number of occasions that there should not be investigation at that stage in sexual cases. Does the Member agree that, in the particular case of sexual offences, it may not be in the interests of justice to call a witness, particularly the victim?

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I see the point that is being made, but I have to try to relate it to the principle that there are cases of all types and descriptions. I do not think that sexual cases necessarily are any different, although they are much more sensitive. There are cases where the evidence is shallow and comes from a flawed source, and where the probability is that, upon trial, the case will collapse. The real question is this: in those circumstances, why wait for that? Why put everyone through that? Why not take the opportunity of testing the matter at the first opportunity, where it might well fail even the prima facie test? That could happen in a sex case as well as a non-sex case. It is not a very straightforward or easy issue, but, if the amendment passes, there would be a facility to the House at Further Consideration Stage to consider that matter further. I might take a view on it and the greater number in the House might take a different view, but you will never get to take that view if you simply accept the Bill as it is. Therefore, by accepting these amendments, you leave open the door to consider that possibility.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Member for giving way. I am interested in the first amendment that has been referred to. I am looking for the Member's assessment of:

"shall apply only when the court is satisfied that a preliminary investigation is required in the interests of justice".

Is there any definition around that? How is it defined? Are there any criteria around it?

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

The phraseology "the interests of justice" is not at all foreign to our criminal law, and I think that the magistrate will be well able to apply it. Yes, there is a certain generality to that, but the essence of how I would see this evolving is this: the norm is your preliminary enquiry and committal on the papers, but if, for example, the defence knows that the primary witness is an utterly flawed witness and expects that witness to crumble on cross-examination, the representatives of that defendant, if this was the tactic that they decided to take, would open before the magistrate a submission to the effect that, "Because of facts a, b and c, which we believe must be put to this witness, you might well find that this witness is unbelievable and unreliable, and, therefore, in the interests of justice, you should allow that exercise to proceed so that you, the magistrate, can be satisfied that there is in fact a prima facie case." It would be for the defence to demonstrate and satisfy the presiding magistrate that it was in the interests of justice for evidence to be called.

I think that we can trust the district judges, given their experience, enough to know when a proper case of what is in the interests of justice has been made out before them and to decide on that course of action. Otherwise, everyone, no matter how flawed the witness might be though looking good on paper, will forever be returned for trial. In the past year we have seen, in the minuscule number of cases where evidence has been tested — 56 — that the case fell apart in 18. There did not need to be a trial, and the state was saved the cost. That would more than cover the cost of the corresponding PI.

In fact, I think that PIs are unlikely to be used very much at all. In my own experience, the mixed committal was far more readily used because no one really had an interest in a full-blown PI where every witness, the police mapper and everyone else was called to give evidence. One wanted to get to the core of the issue and go for the witnesses that really mattered. Therefore, mixed committal is far more likely to be the mechanism deployed. It is a very measured approach to this issue. It accepts that the norm should be a return on paper, but it keeps the door open in the interests of justice so that the process might not be burdened with cases that, in other circumstances, would not be proceeding and that, in the interests of justice, should be tested.

That is the essence of the thinking and the logic behind these amendments. I trust that that recommends itself to the House. As I say, it is very modest and very measured in its approach. The House would be doing the right thing, and not doing any great violence to the integrity of the Bill, if it was to accept it. It is taking the best of the present system and stitching it into this Bill so as to give that added layer of protection in circumstances where it is justified, but putting the hurdle, essentially for the defence to cross, to get to that point. At the moment, one, as of right, can say, "I want a mixed committal. I want a PI." That would be removed by these amendments, You would have to cross the hurdle of demonstrating that it is in the interests of justice. Who in the House should be opposed to doing something in the interests of justice? I would have thought no one, and therefore I fail to see the difficulty in that regard.

I should explain that amendment No 1 deals with preserving the exceptional right to a PI, and amendment No 2 deals with preserving the exceptional right to a mixed committal. Since schedule 2 removes from our legislation all references to preliminary investigations, you have the amendment to oppose clause 9 and to oppose schedule 2 so that, of necessity, those references remain in our legislation.

I will say a few words about a couple of the Minister's amendments. Amendment Nos 43 and 44 deal with clause 79. The Minister wants to amend that clause so that it will read:

"It is the duty of all persons exercising functions in relation to criminal proceedings in the Crown Court or the magistrates' court to reach a just outcome as swiftly as possible."

I suggest to the House that, wittingly or unwittingly, that now embraces the work of juries in the Crown Court, because juries are persons exercising functions in relation to criminal proceedings in the Crown Court. Are we really saying in this House that we want to have a statutory obligation on a jury to reach a just outcome as swiftly as possible? I do not know how many jury charges when I have not heard the judge, at the end of his charge, say to the jury, "Now, ladies and gentlemen, the case is over to you. You take as long as you need to reach a just decision." Are we now going to say that the jury is going to have to be told, "You reach a just decision, but do it as quick as you can"? I think that would be a very foolish road to head down. Therefore, I think that the Minister needs to look at what he is seeking to do in clause 79. Certainly, to my reading, persons exercising functions in relation to criminal proceedings will include the jury.

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

Will the Member give way?

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Yes.

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

It is on another point, but I sense that the Member is about to conclude. Has the Member any comment to make on clause 11, "Direct committal: indication of intention to plead guilty", or, further to that, clause 12, "Direct committal: specified offences"? Is the Member content with those clauses? Are they affected directly or indirectly by your amendments?

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I am grateful to the Member. I do not think that either is affected by my amendments because, where the accused has an intention to plead guilty, it is hard to imagine circumstances in which he would have an interest in the calling of evidence and the hearing of the accusations against him, so I do not think that that is likely to apply. Likewise, the clause relating to specific offences is probably something that I am content with. I am sure that if this were a justice Bill I was writing, it would not be written like this, but I recognise that I am only one voice in the House and that I have to tread warily in trying to encourage the House towards a view that I might take on some matters. I think I have attempted to be measured in the approach I have taken to committals in the hope of bettering the Bill, as I would see it. So, I have not ventured further than that with regard to other clauses.

If I may, I will finish on the point that I was putting to the Minister about the juries. I might have my own issues with clause 79, but if it is intended to be directed at professional persons exercising functions in relation to criminal proceedings, that would exclude the juries, but that is not what it says. Maybe that is the answer for the Minister, if he thinks there is a problem there. I raise that and trust that the Minister will respond. I trust that he will also respond, in a considered way, to the genuine concerns that I have raised in the House about the committal process and that, rather than rush headlong into throwing out everything on committals and going on a paper exercise solely, he will recognise that there are advantages to retaining, in a very restrained form, the facility to have the mixed committal, or, indeed, the PI, in the interests of justice.

Alastair Ross (DUP, East Antrim)

With your indulgence, Mr Deputy Speaker, before addressing the amendments, I wish to make some general remarks about the Bill.

The Committee welcomes the Bill, particularly as it seeks to improve services and facilities for victims and witnesses. A number of its provisions and a number of the amendments brought forward by the Minister are as a direct result of the findings and recommendations of the Committee's inquiry into the criminal justice services available to victims and witnesses of crime, which was completed back in 2012.

The Committee also supports the Bill's other main aims, which are to speed up the justice system and to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of key aspects of it. As well as the main clauses, the Committee also considered a wide range of amendments provided by the Department of Justice, both at the start of the Bill's Committee Stage and during it, some of which relate to provisions in the Bill, while others are on unrelated matters. The Committee also considered two proposals for amendments from the Attorney General for Northern Ireland and a proposed amendment from Mr Jim Wells, which he had provided when he was a member of the Justice Committee.

Given the wide range of policy areas covered by the provisions and the proposed amendments, the Committee spent a considerable amount of time undertaking detailed scrutiny, and it sought a wide range of views to assist in its deliberations. Written evidence was sought from interested organisations and individuals, as well as from the Department of Justice and the Department of Health. The Committee received 52 submissions and a significant number of petitions and responses from individuals on the amendment that would restrict lawful abortions to National Health Service premises. The Committee took oral evidence from a wide range of organisations and officials from both Departments. The Attorney General and the Director of Public Prosecutions also attended to assist the Committee's consideration of specific issues.

I put on record my thanks to the members of the Committee for their contributions to the discussion on, and consideration of, the Bill at Committee Stage. The detail in the Committee's report demonstrates that we considered all aspects of the Bill and the range of proposed amendments in a full and thorough manner. I also thank all the organisations and individuals that provided very useful written and oral evidence and the Department of Justice officials, who provided additional information and clarification throughout the process. Of course, I also put on record my thanks to the Committee staff, who ensured that members were in a position to fulfil their obligations to scrutinise the Bill.

I turn now to clauses 7, 8 and 9, which would abolish preliminary investigations and mixed committals, and the amendments by Mr Allister to introduce new clauses 7A and 8A, which, as he outlined, are intended to retain preliminary investigations in some limited circumstances, in what he described as the "interests of justice". There was a divergence of views in the evidence received by the Committee, with the PPS and Victim Support Northern Ireland both supporting the Department's proposed changes but ultimately wanting to see committal proceedings abolished altogether, while the Law Society is of the view that the proposals are flawed.

The Law Society does not support the assertion that committal proceedings slow down the process, and, whilst it indicated that it understood the concerns expressed about vulnerable witnesses, it highlighted the point that special rules already exist to ensure that they are not unduly subjected to the stress of having to give evidence. It expressed the view to the Committee that a more measured approach would be for district judges to have limited discretion to allow the calling of key witnesses where they believe that it would be in the interests of justice to do so, and that appears to be what Mr Allister is seeking to achieve with his amendments.

In contrast, however, Victim Support told the Committee that the experience of being cross-examined on one occasion is highly stressful for victims and witnesses and that to be required to give evidence more than once compounds the anxiety and is contrary to the interests of justice. That is a point that the Deputy Chair made in an intervention to Mr Allister. It has long been a firmly held opinion that the abolition of preliminary investigations and mixed committals would represent a significant step in addressing some of the considerable trauma and distress experienced by victims and witnesses of crime during the court process.

The PPS also welcomed the proposed changes, believing that they could result in an eight- to 10-week saving in the trial process.

The PPS views the committal process as a luxury and a historical anomaly that no longer exists in other parts of Great Britain, and which is expensive to the public purse not only in the extra cost to legal aid but also in the burden it places on the PPS. The director highlighted that defendants will retain the right to challenge the sufficiency of the prosecution’s evidence through the Crown Court’s no bill procedure pre-trial, or through the trial process itself, and viewed the proposals as rebalancing the process and providing greater protection for victims and witnesses. He also provided examples of cases where committal had added considerable delay to the progress of the proceedings or impacted negatively on witnesses.

Mr Allister argues that PI can save the public purse, but we also heard arguments that were the opposite of that. When the Committee considered this part of the Bill it noted that, whilst the proposals aim to streamline the procedure for moving business from the Magistrates’ Court to the Crown Court, and are expected to result in some improvement in efficiency, the Department’s stated primary driver for abolishing preliminary investigations and mixed committals is to reduce the impact on vulnerable victims and witnesses.

From its inquiry into the criminal justice services available to victims and witnesses, the Committee is fully aware of the concerns raised by, and the experiences of, victims and witnesses in relation to having to give evidence twice. Members also appreciate the excessive length of time it takes for many cases to be completed and the need for reasonable measures to be taken to streamline the system.

The Committee noted that figures provided by the PPS indicated that very few defendants who were the subject of committal proceedings were not committed for trial. In 2013, out of a total of 2,289 defendants, only six were not committed for trial by a district judge. This represents approximately 0·3% of defendants who were the subject of committal proceedings. In 2014, four of the 1,938 defendants who were the subject of committal proceedings were not committed for trial.

Given the benefits to victims and witnesses, the evidence, which indicates that very few defendants who are the subject of committal proceedings are not committed for trial, and the fact that under clause 7 district judges will retain their existing power to decide whether a prima facie case against the defendant is disclosed by the evidence and can discharge the defendant on the basis that no such case exists, the Committee agreed that it is content with clauses 7 to 16. One Member, Mr Maginness, indicated that he had some concerns, and I am sure he will outline them during his contribution this morning.

The Committee also supports amendment No 3, which will allow for the direct committal of any co-defendants who are charged with an offence that is not a specified offence so that, in the interests of justice, all defendants can be tried at the same time.

I move on to Part 6 of the Bill, which will expand provision for the use of live video link facilities in courts, prisons and psychiatric units, and to amendment No 20, which the Minister is bringing forward. The main issues raised in the evidence received by the Committee focused on wider issues relating to the use of live links generally, particularly with regard to children and young people and their ability to understand and participate in proceedings and give informed consent, and the ability of a defendant to access legal representation and communicate with their legal representative. Indeed, it is an issue that formed part of a discussion at a recent justice seminar that the Committee held in this building.

Committee members are aware of the current use that is made of video links with little or no evidence of problems arising and, when considering the proposals to expand their use, noted that there are statutory requirements that the person must be able to see and hear and to be seen and be heard for a live link to take place, otherwise the hearing must be adjourned. It is the responsibility of the courts and the judiciary to ensure and monitor compliance with those requirements.

In relation to the impact of live links and the ability of children to understand and participate in proceedings, the Committee noted that consultation with the judiciary in the past indicated that, from their perspective, a live link facility whereby the child can speak directly and more visibly with the bench can assist the contribution they make, and an on-screen, face-to-face exchange can be more effective than when the child is sitting more remotely in a busy and possibly intimidating courtroom.

The Committee sought further information on any consultation that had been undertaken with young people on their experience of live links and their views on the proposed changes. The Department advised that staff and six children in the juvenile justice centre, all of whom had experience of using live links, had been interviewed and were very supportive of the system. There was a generally high level of satisfaction, and reasons given for preferring live links included that it is less intimidating, more convenient and private, does not require the child to speak or stand in front of everyone and that care workers can be there to help. The Department also confirmed that, in conjunction with the Courts and Tribunals Service and the Office of the Lord Chief Justice, it will produce guidance for the courts, legal representatives and defendants on their new arrangements for the use of live links for certain hearings at weekends and public holidays, before the provisions are commenced.

The Committee also explored the estimated savings to be made by extending the use of live links and noted that the use of live links for first remand at weekends and public holidays would reduce 330 judicial days to around 52 days.

Given the benefits of extending the use of live links, the assurances provided by the Department regarding the various legal requirements set out in statutory frameworks for the use of them, which operate under the authority and supervision of the courts and judiciary, and the fact that the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety had requested the provisions in respect of persons detained in hospital under mental health legislation, the Committee agreed that it was content with clauses 44 to 49. The Committee did, however, question whether clause 46 required amendment to provide the same safeguard as is provided in clauses 44 and 45, which places a responsibility on the court to adjourn proceedings where it appears to it that the accused is not able to see and hear the court and be seen and heard by it and where that cannot be immediately corrected. As a result of that, the Minister has brought forward amendment No 20 today.

I now want to briefly comment on amendment No 40, which relates to clause 78. Together with clause 77, it provides legislative support to a non-legislative scheme being developed to provide a structured early guilty plea scheme in the Magistrates' Courts and the Crown Court. The Department informed the Committee that, on the advice of the Attorney General, it intended to bring forward that amendment to remove a regulatory-making power in subsection 3 of clause 78 that has been identified as being of no practical benefit. The Committee agreed that it was content with that approach.

Noting the purpose of clauses 77 and 78 and having sought reassurances regarding the protections available for children and vulnerable adults and the assistance provided to people with communication difficulties, the Committee also agreed that it was content with clauses 78 and 79, although several members outlined concerns and reservations regarding the duty to be placed on solicitors, with views expressed that it is unnecessary as, in practice, a solicitor would inform a client of the position anyway; it could potentially create problems and conflicts between solicitors and clients; and would not deliver efficiencies.

I will move on to clauses 79 and 80 and amendment Nos 43, 44, 45 and 46. Those clauses introduce a statutory framework for the management of criminal cases, and, through regulation, the Department of Justice will be able to impose duties on the prosecution, defence and the court that will set out what must be completed prior to the commencement of court stages. The Department can also impose a general duty to reach a just outcome as swiftly as possible on anyone exercising a function in relation to criminal proceedings. I listened to the contribution from Mr Allister. I am speaking on behalf of the Committee. I do not think that the Committee's understanding of what "swift" meant was that it should be rushed through the system. We just meant that we did not want to have unnecessary delay. That is certainly my understanding of where the Committee was coming from on that issue. The Department has included those provisions in the Bill in response to the Justice Committee's recommendation in its inquiry into the criminal justice services available for victims and witnesses that case management should be placed on a statutory footing as a means of tackling delays in the system. All the evidence received by the Committee on those provisions recognised the serious problem of delay in criminal proceedings and the negative impact that it has on victims, witnesses and defendants, especially children and young people, and support was clear for measures to address avoidable delay, including statutory case management.

Having sought the advice of the Assembly Examiner of Statutory Rules regarding the range of powers in the Bill to make subordinate legislation, the Examiner drew the attention of the Committee to the regulation-making powers in clause 79(2) and clause 80 on the grounds that both clauses are at the core of the Bill's main purposes and are therefore significant for that reason and as they are likely to and intended to have a major impact on the conduct of criminal proceedings. The Examiner considered whether the regulation-making powers in clauses 79 and 80 should be subject to the draft affirmative procedure but was satisfied that they could be left subject to negative resolution if there was a built-in statutory requirement to consult the Lord Chief Justice, the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Bar Council and the Law Society given that, if the regulations are to be workable in any proper and meaningful way, they will need to have a major input from those involved. The Committee referred the matter to the Department for consideration, and the amendments today address that issue and a proposal by the Attorney General that the general duty to progress cases should be placed in the Bill rather than providing a power to make regulations to do so.

One issue that was consistently raised during the Committee's inquiry was the adverse impact that the length of time it takes for cases to go through the criminal justice system has on victims and witnesses, many of whom are unable to move on while they wait for the process to be completed. Whilst recognising the complexity of the issue, the Committee noted that avoidable delay in the criminal justice system was not new and, in its view, has been going on for far too long. Given the detrimental effect that it has on victims and witnesses, as clearly demonstrated by the evidence received in the inquiry, the Committee believed that substantive action was required.

While delay is a common complaint with regard to the entire criminal justice process, one of the key frustrations for victims and witnesses is the length of time that court cases take and the number of postponements and adjournments that frequently occur. The Committee was of the view that a statutory case management scheme would be beneficial and have an overall positive effect in addressing delay and, ultimately, the experiences of victims and witnesses and, therefore, recommended to the Minister that that should be taken forward in the next available piece of justice legislation. The Committee, therefore, welcomes and supports clauses 79 and 80 and the proposed amendments that aim to address avoidable delay in criminal proceedings.

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. In the wider concept of the Bill at Second Stage and Committee Stage, we were very supportive of the main principles of the Bill because it is designed to improve the operation of the justice system by improving services to victims and witnesses who find themselves in the court system. Part of that was speeding up the efficiency and effectiveness of justice. In that particular context, we are very supportive of the idea of a single jurisdiction, although the Committee said that, in the operation of that, it did not want to see any disadvantage given to people in terms of travel, particularly for witnesses and victims. The Committee made its views known and wrote to the Lord Chief Justice to see how that operation and consultation process will be carried out.

Similarly, we were supportive of the idea of prosecutorial fines for low-level offenders, up to a maximum of £200, as an alternative to taking people into the court system. In all the evidence that we have heard, it appears that sometimes the longer people are in the system, the harder it is for them to get out of it. We were mindful that, in the past, there were issues around the collection of fines, and we said that we did not want the impact that more fines were being imposed. That creates problems further down the line, but that is something that the Committee will look at when the fines and enforcement Bill comes forward.

Another major part of the Bill as it goes through its various stages is about how we treat victims and witnesses. The victims' charter and many steps such as the care unit are all very significant steps forward in doing that properly. Indeed, many of the things in the Bill were part of the Committee's inquiry into victims and witnesses. Speaking on behalf of my party colleagues, we got a good insight from that inquiry and from meeting many of the groups that work with victims and witnesses and the whole system. Indeed, we saw many of the gaps in the system, and the Bill goes some way now to begin to fill some of those gaps. I know that it is an ongoing process, and that is to be welcomed. Indeed, we will turn to that when we talk about the amendments tabled by Jim Allister.

I will turn to that part of the Bill now. At Committee Stage and throughout, we have always been broadly supportive of, if you like, refining or reforming committal proceedings to help speed up the process of making trials take place quickly and within a reasonable time frame. Mr Allister outlined that. Over a long time, committal proceedings have evolved to a situation where the overwhelming majority of cases now proceed straight to trial, with an agreement of what will be contained in a trial process.

It was brought to the Committee's attention that a small number went between PI and mixed committals. I think that there were 56, but 18 did not return for trial. That gave us some cause for concern. We heard that when we were conducting our inquiry into victims and witnesses; indeed, when representative groups and the Prosecution Service came before the Committee, they outlined the situation. That is why I asked for the intervention to define the interests of justice. There was a feeling among groups that putting a person, particularly a rape victim, through the process of cross-examination twice was unfair. Sometimes, even though the person who went through the process was a very credible witness and would have come through the first run, so to speak, of the cross-examining process, the Public Prosecution Service and victims' groups said that their resolve was weakened by the process, and that they found the second attempt or second run at a trial very daunting.

Jim Allister talked about the best of the current system being kept but then, obviously, to put in some protections. In some way, I think that that goes a long way to ensure that you do not have a system where, when a person is charged, it is a trial and there is no testing for prima facie status anywhere in the process. In that situation, it is worth considering those amendments. I think that the offer was held out that if "the interests of justice" becomes the framework in which the magistrate, from a defence or a prosecution point of view, can put forward a proposition that it is not in the interests of justice to proceed, then the magistrate could take that into consideration. I accept the point that it is sometimes difficult to say that in all rape cases or all particular cases, but the experience of the groups is something that will assist us if this goes through this stage. I do not want to make that assumption either way. However, it would be helpful if what is meant by "in the interests of justice" could be defined at Further Consideration Stage.

It is worth noting that, in the small number of cases among the thousands of prosecutions in any given year, only 56 went to that stage, but 18 did not proceed, and that is over 30%. That, in itself —

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

I will.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

First of all, can I correct the figure? I did the maths wrong. There were 74 recourse to committal; 56 were returned and 18 were not. Sorry; I misled the House, and I apologise for that. That is according to an answer from the Minister to Lord Morrow a few weeks ago.

On the issue of the rape victim and the undesirability of putting the rape victim through giving evidence twice, I would have thought that that itself would be a consideration that the magistrate would apply when applying the test of "in the interests of justice". I would have thought that that was something that went into the scales in deciding what is in the interests of justice. Yes, I am more than open to further refinement of that at Further Consideration Stage but, already, it is probably something that would go into the scales of deciding what is in the interests of justice.

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

I accept the figures, but the rejigging is still a high enough number to be worried about.

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I appreciate the Member giving way, because there seems to be a little confusion about the figures. I have the figures for the number of cases not committed, which were sent to the Justice Committee by the PPS in March. It had originally been suggested that 51 cases out of 1,743 were not committed in 2013; in fact, as Mr Ross said, only six out of 2,289 were not committed in 2013, and only four out of 1,938 were not committed in 2014. It seems that there was a bit of confusion, because there were other reasons — for example, when cases were withdrawn or a caution was accepted. Those kinds of issues have made the difference. However, we are talking about minuscule numbers that proceeded to full hearing and that were not committed.

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

I thank the Minister for that. I want to take up on the point, particularly in the case of rape. I accept that any magistrate, when he is considering the threshold around the interests of justice, will have that in mind. Again — this came out very clearly in our inquiry and in evidence given to the Committee — that often puts off a person from even coming forward as a witness when they know that there is the possibility that they will be cross-examined twice.

That is why I am looking for some sense that exemption is there. Perhaps then, in the interests of justice, if the defence felt that the witness was not a good one, it could be examined in that context. What we are looking to see, particularly to protect a person who has made the allegation of rape, is the magistrate going in with the threshold and it being up to someone to convince the magistrate that it was in the interests of justice for them to be called, rather than the reverse. That is the important caveat that we would put in. It is with that in mind in particular that we are supportive of these amendments, so that at Further Consideration Stage, there can be a second run at trying to get this right.

Most of us accept, and the Minister has given the figures, that it is a small number, but it is an important part of a trial process, and we have to be very, very careful that we do not just wipe it out without giving some consideration to the fact that there are many cases in which a person has not gone through the unnecessary procedure of going to trial. We also have to ensure that the right to a fair trial is not simply legislated away.

The Chair covered amendment No 43. The Bill talks about coming to:

"a just outcome as swiftly as possible."

Perhaps the Minister will address that, because if there was any sense that a jury should do something swiftly rather than justly, it just needs to be cleared up procedurally. Go raibh míle maith agat.

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

I listened with considerable interest to all the contributions, particularly that from Mr Allister in relation to preliminary investigations. I also take the point that we are trying to modernise our system and make it better and that we want to be innovative. That is all very well and good, and, in general terms, I support that, but I have to remind colleagues that we are making law, and we are making changes that are substantive and fundamental to the whole trial process. Obviously we are talking about pre-trial, but it ultimately affects the trial process nonetheless.

Once you make changes, they are permanent: you do not go back. The history of the criminal process in Northern Ireland, in Ireland generally and in Britain shows that it has stood the test of time in many respects. It is of great value, and it is something that we should not forget about. Once we interfere with the process, we could do irreparable damage to it. I say that as a health warning more than anything else, but when we are considering changes that are quite fundamental, we should bear that in mind.

During the course of discussion in relation to committal proceedings, I expressed misgivings to officials and colleagues on the Justice Committee in relation to the changes that were being proposed. The committal proceedings are an important filtering process that allow the defence, the prosecution and the court at large to test appropriately the strengths or weaknesses of the charges that people are faced with. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that that is an important process. I know that the notion now is that you can get rid of something that was described by the PPS as a historical anomaly. You can get rid of that, and you can describe it as that, but there is a contemporary value to a historical legal development.

Alastair Ross (DUP, East Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

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

Yes.

Alastair Ross (DUP, East Antrim)

You mentioned how it was an effective filtering mechanism. Will the Member accept, given that the numbers are so low for the last two years that figures are available for, that there is an argument that, if it is a filtering mechanism, it is not perhaps a very good filtering system?

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

It is an interesting point that you raise, and it is a point that was raised by the PPS and, indeed, the Department of Justice. People did talk about minuscule numbers. In a way, you can turn that argument around and say that the amendments that Mr Allister is putting forward to retain, at least vestigially, the committal proceedings in the interests of justice does not really affect the situation as greatly as the Department or the PPS have suggested. If it is so small and so minuscule, why interfere with the process to the point of extinction? I am not against, as it were, reforming the committal process, but it is the extinction of the process that worries me. At least, there should be some residual power given to the court to test the evidence if it is truly in the interests of justice.

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I appreciate the Member giving way. He talks about not extinguishing the process. In fact, that is exactly what happened over a decade ago in the Irish jurisdiction and in the England and Wales jurisdiction. That is not what is being proposed here, although there was a strong body of evidence that we should have moved to complete extinction. We will be maintaining PEs and, therefore, we will be maintaining the bulk of the process that has been abolished in the two most equivalent jurisdictions already.

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

I do accept the point that the Minister has made. It is a valid point and a point of some strength, but I do say to colleagues in the Chamber that, whilst we can reflect on the experience of other jurisdictions, we have to make up our own minds ultimately in this jurisdiction, doing the best that we can to preserve what I think is valuable in the system. The Minister —

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

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

Yes.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

Following on from the point that the Minister has made regarding reform and ultimate removal of that, particularly in England and Wales, the first stage came in 2001 and the removal came in 2013. There is no body of evidence of the detriment that perhaps you and Mr Allister are proclaiming may happen here. Therefore, there is a substantive body of evidence — likewise in the Republic of Ireland — that is demonstrating to us, in this particular case, about cautious reform. You are right to say that the law should be reformed cautiously, but, on the basis of 2001 and 2013, this seems to be a caution that we should be prepared to take today.

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

Again, I understand the strength of Mr Dickson's point, but I think that we have to balance our own experience with the experience of others.

I believe that we have to be cautious in relation to something as sensitive as a criminal trial. I err towards being cautious and I remain to be convinced that the English experience is as smooth as the Member suggests; and I am not saying that facetiously.

The Minister made a point about committal proceedings, and I accept that this would not see the end of those proceedings. There will still be preliminary enquiries, but the preliminary investigation and mixed committals will be abolished, or repealed, as a result of this legislation if it is passed. That is the stated aim of the Department, and the departmental officials were quite forthright in saying so. I am not so certain that this is the destination to which we should be going. This is being seen as an intermediate stage on the way to achieving that.

I think there is still value in having a form of committal proceeding. In the circumstances and context of what Mr Allister is proposing, the Minister's aim would be achieved to some extent, insofar that the committal proceedings would be reformed. There will be very few preliminary investigations, but they will be looked at rigorously by the court in the interests of justice. I think it is important, in those circumstances, that the House takes that into consideration and believes there is value in keeping that failsafe mechanism in our current legislation. Therefore, I think that Mr Allister's proposals are to be preferred to those that the Minister has suggested, and we will be supporting Mr Allister's amendments.

Having said that, I recognise, as the Committee Chair said, that arising from the Committee's investigation into victims and witnesses, there is an important need to be protective of witnesses, particularly those who are vulnerable. Further provisions may have to be made for those vulnerable witnesses; but I do not think that it is beyond our capacity to create a situation whereby vulnerable witnesses in particular are further protected during the course of preliminary investigations, on the rare occasions on which those investigations would take place.

If there are various pre-trial issues that would normally be dealt with at a committal level that are not dealt with, there may be a greater preponderance, when something comes to trial, of no bills or applications to the Crown Court judge to deal with matters that should properly have been dealt with at committal level. You cannot call witnesses to examine those issues at that stage, nonetheless there could be further hold-ups in the smooth running of a Crown Court trial. That would be disagreeable and not intentional, but it could happen as a result of the changes proposed by the Minister. I ask the House to take that into consideration, because the aim of this legislation is to speed up the process, not delay it further, and that is a very laudable aim.

Mr Deputy Speaker, I welcome the single jurisdiction, although we have had county court divisions in Northern Ireland for many years, and it is a pity to lose them. We are losing a bit of our history but, nonetheless, given the efficiencies arising out of a single jurisdiction, perhaps we can overlook that little bit of history. Mr Allister is, of course, the Traditional Unionist Voice, but I was minded when he was speaking that he might well now be called the "Traditional Legal Voice" in this House. It is important that we look at changes to our system. The proposal in relation to prosecutorial fines is worthy, and it is important that we move in that direction and be innovative and imaginative in what we do; I welcome that.

I refer the House to clause 78. Amendment No 40 relates to 78(3). I am unhappy with clause 78. I think that it is unnecessary. It imposes a duty on solicitors to advise clients about early guilty pleas, and this will be a statutory duty imposed on solicitors. I do not think that it is necessary. Any solicitor worth his salt will advise his client on an early guilty plea. It is unnecessary for this House to impose a further statutory duty on the solicitor. It could also complicate the relationship between the solicitor and the client. Clause 78(5) says:

"If a solicitor contravenes this section, any person may make a complaint in respect of the contravention to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal."

I do not know how such a tribunal would deal with this matter. It seems to me that there are certain matters between a solicitor and client that are indeed privileged, and it could well be that, where there is a dispute over whether the solicitor gave this advice, there would be breaches of privilege. Whether or not that happens, it complicates the relationship between the solicitor and the client. This clause could have unintended adverse consequences. I ask the Minister to look seriously at withdrawing the clause, which does not in any way add usefully to the role of a solicitor in a criminal trial. It really is ill thought out. I quote:

"The solicitor must notify the court by or before which the client is tried, in such manner and before such time as magistrates’ court rules or (as the case may be) Crown Court rules may require, that the solicitor has complied with subsection (2)."

I am not certain, Mr Deputy Speaker, that it is really necessary. It just overcomplicates things. It is almost a bureaucratic response to the courtroom situation that will not help resolve matters.

I know what it is intended to do, but I am not certain that it is the right thing to do in all circumstances. I am tempted to oppose clause 78 standing part of the Bill, but I would like the Minister to look at it seriously, because I do not believe that there is any great value in it.

I have nothing further to say about any of the other amendments or about this section.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

We have got to a stage with the Bill at which the Committee has looked at it in some detail and a number of other, almost unexpected, amendments are coming forward. That is what democracy is about and what this place is about. It is about listening to those issues and to people's concerns.

On this particular group of amendments, I entirely understand where the Department is coming from in its attempt to streamline the court system at an early stage. I respect and understand that. Mr Allister proposes interesting amendments. The Department's proposal is to take that opportunity for the defence to bring forward its case at an early stage completely out of it, whereas Mr Allister's proposal appears, from what I hear, to be a halfway house between the two. It still gives that opportunity for defendants —

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I am grateful to the Member for giving way. The Department's proposals do not remove the opportunity for the defence to put the case; what they remove is the opportunity for the defence to cross-examine witnesses. The key point, as I understand it, both in the Committee's first report on victims and witnesses and in its consideration of the Bill, was the pressure that can be put on vulnerable victims and witnesses.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for that intervention and information. I accept that point, Minister; I have no argument with it. I listened to Mr Ross, who, quite rightly, put over the view that the witnesses appeared to support the Department's proposals and felt that it was quite difficult in the sense of maybe having to give evidence on two occasions. Obviously, it would be overly burdensome. However, if I remember rightly, the Law Society did not feel that the proposals were right and was opposed to them. We cannot take everything that the Law Society says in general terms as gospel, but I am just putting the point down that, in fact, there was opposition to the proposals as well.

It has been an interesting debate, and I have to say that I have a lot of sympathy for Mr Allister's proposals in that respect, as I feel that they have merit. I will listen intently to what the Minister says about them and to what Mr Allister says in his winding-up speech — just to keep them on their toes — to convince my colleagues and me of the proper route to go down.

I want to move on to clause 78, which Mr Maginness interestingly touched on. It is an aspect that I raised several times during Committee Stage. Mr Maginness and I have slightly different points, in that he spoke about the early guilty plea and the onus on solicitors to inform their clients of that. I understand that, but my point was that someone has to give that advice. I felt that, if it has to be the solicitors, I do not have a major issue with it.

My main concern with clause 78 is the pressure that there will sometimes be on the client and defendant from an early guilty plea. Indeed, I raised it on several occasions. Some defendants may feel under huge pressure to say, "OK; I'm going to get away with a much more lenient sentence if I put in an early guilty plea", and that is the advice that may be given. The solicitor will be under no obligation to say — and should not say, I assume — that if you are definitely not guilty you do not put in an early guilty plea. However, I know from speaking to many defendants in the past that they have even felt under pressure as it is to put in an early guilty plea when they are adamant that they are not guilty.

It is quite easy for people who are standing on the side to say, "Well, look, you should not plead guilty if you are definitely not guilty." If a defendant is looking at the difference between a four-year custodial sentence and maybe a much more lenient sentence, they do feel under that pressure. I know that from speaking to defendants in the past. Maybe I differ slightly on the reasoning around it, but I have always had those concerns about clause 78.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I am happy to give way.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I suggest to the Member that there is another consideration to which this clause gives no regard, in practical terms. More often than not in the course of a trial and the criminal process, a key component can be the eventual delivery of disclosure in a case, which can be quite truncated and delayed. The eventual delivery of disclosure in a case can cast an entirely new light on certain pertinent issues which touch upon the relevant sentence, yet this compulsion under clause 78 to herd people towards the earliest possible plea may be something that, in fact, does not do justice to the situation. If and when there is disclosure, which despite all the promises does not often meet the time frames, it can cast the matter in an entirely new light and leave someone very much wrong-footed in terms of what they did or should have done.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Member for that intervention. It was not an aspect that I had particularly looked at, but it obviously brings a new angle to the entire debate around clause 78.

I will listen to the debate on Mr Allister's amendments as it moves on. I just want to put on record that I am minded at this stage to favour them because they bring balance to the law itself. However, we did go through the entire Committee Stage in discussion on this. I think that we need to return to clause 78. Like Mr Maginness, I am of a mind to oppose it here today. I will listen to the debate further.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

Perhaps I will make a few opening remarks first of all. The Bill marks the third Justice Bill that has been brought forward by the Department and the Minister as part of reforming our justice system and, indeed, making it fit for the 21st century. In those circumstances, I would like to commend the Minister for this and express my support for the process of reform and my opposition to those who wish to derail that.

Like the Chair of the Committee, I place on record my thanks to staff in the Department of Justice, to those who came to give evidence to the Committee, and to the Committee staff for the incredible amount of work that they put into assisting us to prepare the report.

Group one refers mostly to the reform of the committal and court process. We have heard arguments in respect of this. Mr Allister's amendment will oppose the reform of the committal system and seek to retain some form of mixed committal. We must recognise that the origin of this clause was, in fact, the consultation with those who have profound experience of the justice system, as the Committee Chair pointed out, as victims.

In the current system, victims and vulnerable people are often compelled to experience the trauma of giving evidence twice; once at PI or mixed committal and again at the trial itself. I do understand that Mr Allister may have concerns, perhaps suggesting that these are important in the interests of justice. I fully understand that position, but as I am very sure he is aware, it is the trial that determines the innocence or guilt, not the committal proceedings.

As the Minister has indicated in a number of interventions, and as I hope others will take into account when coming to their view in supporting this today, a preliminary inquiry will still be undertaken by a magistrate, with the inbuilt safeguards to ensure that the defendant is sufficiently represented. In fact, defendants may even be able to make a submission to the court personally. If it is found that there is insufficient evidence for a trial, the defendant can be discharged at that stage. I am satisfied that the Minister's plans are sufficient to safeguard the rights of victims and defendants in that area. Therefore, I will not be supporting Mr Allister's amendments.

I welcome amendment No 20, which relates to the provision to enhance live-link facilities in our courts. That will help ensure that offenders are able to see and hear the court during the trial, and vice versa; otherwise, the trial will be adjourned. Other departmental amendments will ensure that the Bill works more efficiently regarding early guilty pleas, and that will avoid delay in criminal proceedings. I intend to support those amendments.

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

The Business Committee has arranged to meet immediately after the lunchtime suspension. 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.

The debate stood suspended. The sitting was suspended at 12.25 pm.

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

Oral Answers to Questions — Employment and Learning

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

Question 6 has been withdrawn.

Brenda Hale (DUP, Lagan Valley)

1. Mrs Hale asked the Minister for Employment and Learning to outline any initiatives designed to encourage a career in childcare. (AQO 8292/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

My Department plays a full and active part in the delivery of the Executive's Bright Start initiative, particularly in relation to the recruitment and development of the childcare workforce. Since 2011, my Department has provided funding support for 355 employees to commence training in childcare learning and development qualifications across 205 settings at a cost of over £300,000. Level 5 training for managerial staff in childcare settings will become a mandatory requirement in 2016 and, as a result, my Department will no longer provide funding support. This is because increasingly limited resources are targeted at encouraging employers to upskill their staff beyond the legislative or mandatory requirements that they must meet.

All further education colleges provide a range of high-quality full-time and part-time childcare courses at a variety of skill levels. In the last academic year, childcare-related provision accounted for over 2,500 enrolments across Northern Ireland. In addition, Stranmillis University College provides a degree course in early childhood studies and the Open University in Ireland provides a range of degree courses in early years and in childhood and youth studies.

My Department's employment service supports clients seeking employment in the childcare sector and offers a range of services to meet employers’ recruitment needs. Vacancies in the childcare sector are regularly advertised on our recruitment website and employment service staff have recently worked with childcare providers Employers for Childcare in the delivery of job fairs. These events promoted childcare as a career and offered opportunities for industry-related training and employment opportunities. In the past year, my Department's Bridge to Employment programme has assisted 19 people into employment in the sector through customised training related to the skill requirements of specific vacancies. The careers service can also provide advice and guidance for those who wish to work in the childcare sector.

Brenda Hale (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Minister for his very detailed answer. Given that we are in times of increased austerity, will he tell the House how his Department is encouraging males, in particular, and individuals from minority communities into the sector?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

It is worth stressing that all our opportunities are open to people across the community irrespective of their gender or their ethnic or religious background etc. Obviously, where there are particular areas of under-representation we are always very keen to encourage more applications. We often talk about the under-representation of females in certain areas, and the Member has asked questions on that particular theme in the past. The reverse also applies in other areas. We want to make sure that we maximise the talent pool to our best advantage as a whole. There are also particular opportunities through the apprenticeship strategy and the forthcoming youth training strategy. Again, gender considerations will be built into those areas to ensure that we have a balanced representation of people coming forward into new opportunities.

Bronwyn McGahan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for his responses so far. What initiatives has he taken with employers in the childcare sector to encourage participation in the Steps 2 Success programme?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

The Steps 2 Success programme is for people who are unemployed. We have a number of contractors who, in turn, appoint subcontractors. They are there, based on an outcome-focused approach, trying to getting people into employment. They will be looking for every opportunity that exists and will provide the relevant training and encouragement to people to take up those opportunities. No doubt where they see growth in opportunities they will be incentivised to move in that particular direction.

Sandra Overend (UUP, Mid Ulster)

Does the Minister believe that there is currently sufficient childcare provision to enable parents to take up part-time training courses or employment?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for her question. That is a slightly broader issue than our approach to supporting training for childcare. However, looking at some of the different programmes that we are bringing forward, we are very conscious of the issues that participants may be facing, and childcare may well be one of those. Perhaps the most recent example that we can cite is the economic inactivity strategy, where we have recognised that, in terms of the inactive population, one of the target groups is those with family commitments. Often, that will predominantly be females with childcare responsibilities. We are looking to see how we can provide innovative solutions to encourage people who are interested in working but perceive barriers to overcome those barriers and participate fully in the labour market.

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

Minister, I was speaking with Employers for Childcare this morning about the shortage of childcare workers. It told me that there is a great shortage; it cannot recruit enough qualified childcare workers. Apparently, trying to get qualifications is very expensive; it can be up to £1,200 per course to get people qualified. Is there —

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

I ask the Member to come to her question.

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

— any possibility of helping or subsidising those courses?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

We are looking a range of different provision. One of the interesting developments that will be coming forward shortly is the outcome of the review of youth training. In particular, we will be looking to see how we can support and incentivise training for people leaving school at 16 or other young people between the ages of 16 and 24 who have not accessed employment or do not yet have the qualifications to do so. There will be particular opportunities under that strategy in the field of childcare.

Máirtín Ó Muilleoir (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

2. Mr Ó Muilleoir asked the Minister for Employment and Learning for his assessment of the importance of the John J Sweeney scholarship in applied peace and conflict studies being based at the International Conflict Research Institute (INCORE) at Ulster University. (AQO 8293/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I very much welcome the introduction of the John J Sweeney scholarship at Ulster University's international conflict research institute. The scholarship is open to all US citizens who have been offered a full-time place on Ulster University's MSc in applied peace and conflict studies and who are members, or have a familial connection to a member, of the American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO). This fully supports my Department's stated aim to increase the numbers of international students studying in Northern Ireland. It is a coup for Ulster University which will further enhance the institution's international standing. This is the first year of the scholarship, and my officials have been informed that there are already 18 applicants for this year's intake.

Máirtín Ó Muilleoir (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire fosta. Thank you, Minister. Given the recent appointment of Tom Moran as chancellor of Queen's University, how can we encourage increased interest via the diaspora in our universities? John Sweeney was, of course, an eminent member of AFL-CIO. Is there a way in which we can join together to encourage other labour unions to support scholarships at our universities?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

First of all, I very much welcome the appointment of Tom Moran. It is an excellent appointment. I have already written to congratulate him in that regard. Our universities have to be very much outward-facing. They are not here as universities servicing a local market; they are part of Northern Ireland's wider outreach to the world. They should be seen as global players in their own right.

We have some very particular challenges at present with the very regrettable cuts that we have had to pass on to universities. We are seeing a situation where we are losing places. Our universities will be very keen to encourage more and more international students; that has been a long-standing commitment, not least in terms of our current higher education strategy. However, we also have to be very mindful of offering opportunities for local students. There is a very real danger of the displacement of students out of Northern Ireland to Great Britain or the South of Ireland, or, indeed, people not going to university at all.

For sure, we can do a lot more around scholarships. If more scholarships come forward, including from local businesses or major investors in Northern Ireland, that will, in itself, create opportunities. For example, we have a new scholarship programme in computing and engineering that has about 20 places on offer. That is moving in that direction, but we need more of it. However, scholarships, in and of themselves, cannot make up the shortfall and the pressures that the sector is, very sadly, facing at present.

Basil McCrea (NI21, Lagan Valley)

3. Mr B McCrea asked the Minister for Employment and Learning, given the proposed closure of the Belfast Metropolitan College Tower Street campus, how he will ensure specialist performing arts training remains available and accessible for young people. (AQO 8294/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

Preparing our young people for the jobs of the future is a priority for my Department and the Executive's Programme for Government. That includes the provision of training in the performing arts. Although Belfast Met's Tower Street campus will no longer offer dance and drama courses beyond the end of the current academic year, students currently enrolled at Tower Street will be able to continue and complete their studies at the college.

Belfast Met has been working closely with South Eastern Regional College (SERC) on options that might be offered to those wishing to commence performing arts courses from September 2015. The £12 million investment in the new SPACE facility at SERC's Bangor campus will offer students wishing to pursue a career in this area a wide range of high quality courses that will be delivered in a world-class learning environment. The courses will mirror those currently delivered at Belfast Met. SPACE includes rehearsal and production studios and a theatre that can permit the staging of professional productions. Performing arts courses will also continue to be provided at SERC's Lisburn campus. Other colleges, including Northern Regional College's Ballymoney and Newtownabbey campuses, offer a range of performing arts courses from level 2 through to level 5. Students will be able to apply for courses commencing in September.

Basil McCrea (NI21, Lagan Valley)

That is all very well, Minister, but it does not really address the issue. The performing arts associations have issued a statement; I am sure that you are aware of it because Dan Gordon has been quite vociferous. Bangor is too far away for many people, and it does not offer the specialist courses that the industry needs. People would like to know what you are going to do about it.

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

The first remark to make is that we are getting very close to a sense of parochialism in that, if it is not in Belfast, it does not work. I am surprised that a Member for Lagan Valley, who actually has performing arts offered in his constituency in Lisburn, is buying into the argument that, if it is not in Belfast, it cannot work. We have colleges across Northern Ireland delivering performing arts courses very successfully. If you take the logic of what is being said to its conclusion, if it is not in Belfast, it does not matter. That is a terrible message to send to the other five colleges and, indeed, students who are functioning there.

I am sure that the Member is very much aware that we are going through an unprecedented level of cuts in Northern Ireland. I would not like to see any courses being cut, but the sad reality is that we are passing on a £12 million cut to the FE sector this year. I know that the Member is not responsible for the Budget mess that we find ourselves in, but I would like to think that he would at least acknowledge the context in which the colleges are operating and their need to take some very tough decisions. The fact is that this particular decision by Belfast Met has a very clear mitigating factor in the context that we have a brand-new, state-of-the-art facility coming online in Bangor in September. It is 13 miles from Belfast. If we are suggesting that, if it is not on people's doorstep, they cannot function, we are in very real danger of missing the point, not least given the fact that we have a Northern Ireland of six counties and six FE colleges.

Fra McCann (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Can the Minister give a breakdown of the current labour market information pertaining to specialist performing arts?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I am happy to write to the Member to give an indication of any figures that we have on file from the employment service on some very particular vacancies that may exist. We are also developing in conjunction with Ulster University a skills barometer that will give us much better real-time information on where there are emerging opportunities in the economy. I am not diminishing whatsoever the importance of performing arts to the future of our economy and, indeed, the wider creative industries. They are of absolute importance, as are many other subjects.

I say particularly to the Member, given that he is from Sinn Féin, that the answer to the dilemma that we find ourselves in very much lies within the power of his party and the SDLP to adopt a different approach to the Budget madness that we are facing. The singular approach around welfare has already had major knock-on consequences. Unless we have a change of course, we are going to see this situation deteriorate even further and end up with people asking similar types of questions but not actually joining the dots as to why certain things are happening.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

I have had the privilege of visiting the Belfast Metropolitan College Tower Street facility. In what is clearly a vibrant learning environment, I met acting and dance students from Belfast, Donegal, Austria and America, some of whom have already performed in shows like 'Vikings' and 'The Fall'. What would the Minister say to students and professionals who genuinely believe that it is a wrong decision by Belfast Metropolitan College to apply a 100% reduction to this provision and who are genuinely concerned and have reasoned arguments that the provision at SERC Bangor is not an appropriate alternative?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

People should visit Bangor. Indeed, I think, 20 students took the opportunity, only this past weekend, to go down to talk to local staff, view the emerging facilities and see for themselves the real value of the investment that is being made in students for everyone across Northern Ireland.

Ross Hussey (UUP, West Tyrone)

4. Mr Hussey asked the Minister for Employment and Learning for his assessment of the importance of training in freight transport and logistics in relation to local economic development. (AQO 8295/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

The relevant training and skilling of the workforce is vital for local economic development. That applies not only to the transport and logistics sector but to all sectors of our economy. My officials work with businesses, universities and colleges to identify, plan for and meet workforce development needs though a range of curricular provision, from entry level to foundation degrees.

I have commissioned the Northern Ireland Centre for Economic Policy to develop a Northern Ireland skills barometer. That will indicate where there are skills gaps, where they are emerging and where they are forecast to emerge over the medium and longer term. The barometer will help to shape all areas of skills provision.

The Ulster University delivers a BSc(Hons) in transportation and a master's degree in transportation planning. The university is also planning to introduce a specialism in logistics/supply chain management as part of its business studies programme. The Northern Regional College provides two courses at level 3 for transport managers. In the academic year 2013-14, there were six enrolments, and there were nine in the current year. That course will be available for the forthcoming academic year as well.

Recently, my officials met representatives from the sector to discuss how they can work more closely together. That includes liaising with the employment service to assist in filling some current vacancies, and with the Careers Service on the promotion of the sector within schools. The Department is willing to work with and support the sector, wherever possible.

Ross Hussey (UUP, West Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for his response so far. In your response, Minister, you made reference to the BSc(Hons) degree and the MSci in transport planning at UUJ. Is it not the case that those are going to be stopped? Is that not very short-sighted?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

As I said to Mr McCann, a moment ago, a whole host of things, which, on the surface, seem very short-sighted and nonsensical, are happening, but we are in a situation where, in the forthcoming year, we will be taking £16 million out of higher education and £12 million out of further education. Universities are going to have to take some very difficult decisions. The decisions that were taken were those for Ulster University to make. It is its job, not the job of the Department, to determine which courses are offered and which are not. The universities are seeking to rationalise the courses that are on offer. In that way, they are better placed to maximise the number of opportunities for students in Northern Ireland. I appreciate that there are particular consequences for the sector from those decisions. We are in discussions with the sector, and opportunities may well emerge to address those particular high-skilled demands. In particular, I draw your attention to the apprenticeships strategy and the fact that we have money under the change fund for pilots. To my estimation, that type of course, particularly given its vocational nature, would lend itself very readily to a higher-level apprenticeship. Through that course, we may actually see the needs of the sector being not only addressed but addressed in a more efficient and effective manner.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

Will the Minister undertake to examine such issues as the one that was brought to my attention in my constituency, in which a private sector company, an expertise of which is training people for HGV courses, has found it extremely difficult to compete with other companies whose practices are not as in-depth and comprehensive as theirs? Some allegations were made about dealings that were not entirely in keeping with legislation that restricts companies like the legitimate company that came to me.

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I would be very happy to take a look at the issue, if the Member could drop me a line or an email to set out some of the issues. Some of the factors will be whether we are talking about an entirely private sector situation or about some degree of public-sector involvement. The potential way forward, the Member suggests, would be set in the context of the contracting of a lot of the skills offer that we have and the provision within FE and higher education. I am more than happy to look at the points that the Member has raised.

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

I am sure that the Minister agrees that transport and logistics is not exactly a new phenomenon. Indeed, it probably dates back to the days of the red flag. Will the Minister explain to us why he is only making plans now for the development of this and why these subjects are not integrated across a range of degree courses, so that we can catch up with the rest of Europe, which is light years ahead of us in training people for transport and logistics?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

The issue probably predates the red flag; people were transporting things before the motor car was invented. We have historical provision. The situation is evolving, and I have explained why that is the case. At the same time, under my watch, we are developing a new approach to vocational training, in the apprenticeships strategy and the strategy on youth training. If the Member wants to go down the avenue of asking, "Why is this only being done now? This is not rocket science", I would remind him that his party held this Department in the first mandate of the Assembly, from 1999 onwards, and there was no revolution in vocational training — if I can use the term "revolution" when we talk about transport — at that particular time, but it is now being addressed.

Gary Middleton (DUP, Foyle)

5. Mr Middleton asked the Minister for Employment and Learning to outline the strategies being pursued, or proposed to be pursued, to reduce the level of youth unemployment in Foyle. (AQO 8296/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

My Department has a wide range of measures to address youth unemployment in Foyle and will be implementing the new initiatives from 2015-16 to improve opportunities for young people across Northern Ireland.

The youth employment scheme was introduced to help those aged between 18 and 24 to develop skills, compete for jobs and sustain employment. In the Foyle and Lisnagelvin jobs and benefits offices' catchment areas, a total of 1,200 young people participated between July 2012 and March 2015. To date, over 400 participants have moved into subsidised or unsubsidised employment. A refreshed youth employment scheme will be introduced from June 2015, subject to funding being available.

The main employment programme, Steps 2 Success, is delivered by EOS NI in the Foyle area. Steps 2 Success is available to all eligible jobseekers, irrespective of their employability need or age. Clients who are in receipt of jobseeker’s allowance and aged between 18 and 24 will be mandated onto the programme after nine months on benefit.

I recently introduced Into Work Training Support, enabling clients to undertake short training courses to improve their employability. In addition, enterprise allowance, a new measure of support for clients seeking to start their own business, was made available from April.

The Department is leading in the development of the United Youth programme. The target group for the pilots beginning in 2015-16 are those aged between 16 and 24, who are not in education, employment or training.

We are also undertaking a review of youth training. It is planned that the new proposed youth training system will be available to all young people aged between 16 and 24, facilitating progression into an apprenticeship, further education or sustained employment. A series of pilot initiatives will be implemented during the current financial year, prior to implementation in full in the next year.

Gary Middleton (DUP, Foyle)

I thank the Minister for his response and welcome the new initiatives and those that he already has in place. Will he advise what conversations or engagement he has had with other Departments about getting out the message as to how young people can get involved in these initiatives?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

We have certainly encouraged other Departments to offer opportunities, and I am pleased that all my ministerial colleagues understand the logic of that. We have also spoken to arm's-length bodies and to district councils about offering placements. However, in the current financial context, we have a situation where there is an inevitability about a lot of the public-sector organisations wishing to shed staff. In that context, opportunities in the public sector are going to be very limited or, indeed, next to impossible. We have to have a wider discussion around the continued problem of youth unemployment. The Member will be aware that, in 2012, the Executive came forward with a major package of funding over three years to fund the youth employment scheme. Sadly, given the context around the Budget, it was never going to be viable for the Executive to renew that particular pot, so we are now in a situation where, from existing resources — there is even a question mark over those, as the Member will be aware — we are trying to offer a more limited package of opportunities in direct interventions to help young people.

Maeve McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Go raibh maith agat. I thank the Minister for his answers so far. I noted that he said that of the 1,200 young people who participated in the youth employment programme, 400 had moved into subsidised or unsubsidised employment. Can the Minister break that figure down further and give us an indication of how many moved into quality or sustainable employment?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

We are happy to come back to the Member with the precise figures, but it is important to bear in mind the range of different job opportunities out there for young people. Some will be of a permanent nature and some will be of a temporary nature. All are of worth, and it is important that we do not create some sort of hierarchy or dismiss opportunities. It is very important that we encourage young people to get that experience because it allows them, in turn, to progress to other opportunities, or to go back into further education or higher education. The worst possible situation is that we get defensive about opportunities and end up with young people being left on the shelf so that their education or training goes rusty. If they have not invested in skills, they will very quickly be overtaken by other cohorts of young people coming through. They would then face a life of unemployment or economic inactivity, so it is very important, for a whole range of reasons, that we encourage people on that journey.

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Minister for his answers thus far. Of course, the Foyle constituency has the highest levels of any type of unemployment in all the Westminster constituencies. That was the case long before the welfare discussion, or crisis, as the Minister likes to talk about. What progress are we making in increasing the maximum student number (MaSN) at the North West Regional College, which will, of course, be essential in trying to tackle youth unemployment and underemployment?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

First, I concur with the Member that there are major structural issues in relation to unemployment and economic inactivity, which is the hidden form of unemployment, and that both are particularly high in the Foyle constituency. It is a bit of a stretch to jump into the issue of MaSN and the potential expansion at Magee —

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

[Inaudible.]

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

— but let me stress that we are processing the business case and waiting for revised information to come forward from the strategy group. If we are to see the expansion of MaSN, we need to have the funding to do that. I am happy to bid for that, but we have to have a sense of reality about it. I mean —

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

That is not what I asked you.

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

— we are talking about a situation in which we will need recurring money, in excess of £29 million or £30 million every year, to facilitate that. That is on top of the very deep cut to higher education that we already face.

I hear the Member mentioning from the sidelines that that is not what he asked. He asked whether there was any progress on increasing MaSN. There is no point in increasing MaSN if you do not have the money to back it up: it is an utterly futile and pointless gesture to make.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

I ask the Member that when he asks the Minister a question, he allows the Minister to answer without being interrupted.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

7. Mrs Cameron asked the Minister for Employment and Learning how many people took up higher level apprenticeships in South Antrim during 2013-14. (AQO 8298/11-15)

Paul Girvan (DUP, South Antrim)

14. Mr Girvan asked the Minister for Employment and Learning to outline the number of apprentices in South Antrim. (AQO 8305/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, with your permission, I wish to group questions 7 and 14 and request an additional minute for the answer.

The latest published figures indicate that, at the end of January this year, 461 apprentices from the South Antrim constituency were undertaking Apprenticeship NI-funded training in a range of subject areas. Engineering has the highest programme occupancy in any single area, with 88 apprentices. Of the overall number, 228 apprentices are working towards level 3 apprenticeship framework qualifications, including 46 undertaking level 2 en route to level 3, and 233 are working towards level 2 apprenticeship framework qualifications.

The Department is in the early stages of testing higher level apprenticeships as part of the implementation of the new strategy. Between 2013 and 2014, those opportunities were taken up by 106 people across Northern Ireland. However, it is not possible, at this stage, to break the figures down to a constituency level. Seven high-level pilots are under way across five occupational areas including professional services, ICT, engineering, accountancy and life sciences, and off-the-job training has been tested by four further education (FE) colleges, including the Northern Regional College (NRC). They are working with employers including Schrader Electronics, Acute Engineering Surveys (AES) Ltd and Michelin to deliver an engineering apprenticeship.

In total, there are now over 120 higher-level apprentices working with 46 different employers across Northern Ireland.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

That ends the period for listed questions. We now move on to topical questions. Question 1 has been withdrawn.

Bronwyn McGahan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

T2. Ms McGahan asked the Minister for Employment and Learning for an update on his Department's review of post-19 special educational needs for further education and disability employment services in her constituency. (AQT 2582/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for her ongoing interest in the area. As she will know, we conducted an audit on further education provision across Northern Ireland in those areas, and we are trying to preserve things in the face of pressures in the sector, and, indeed, in other sectors, at present.

The issue of transitions is being discussed at Executive subcommittee level. It is one of the topics that was discussed by the Bamford committee dealing with mental health and learning disability issues, and an action plan has recently been agreed across Departments on how to co-ordinate services better. There is a range of different players involved. My Department has a role to play in further education. There is also a role for the Department of Education in planning better for transitions, for the Department of Health in day-centre provision and for DRD on transport facilities. Work is under way with Departments to try to ensure a more coordinated approach, but it is important to bear in mind that, as with everything at this stage, we are hampered by a lack of finance.

Bronwyn McGahan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat. I thank the Minister for his response. What engagements have you had with South West College regarding post-19 special educational needs in Fermanagh and South Tyrone?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

As the Member knows, the college is extremely proactive in almost every area of its work and is very much part and parcel of the community. We have had ongoing discussions with the college on the whole spectrum of its activity. Like others, it is trying to do its best in very trying circumstances to ensure that it can continue to deliver. It is conscious of issues around trying to ensure that there is a level playing field for provision across all areas, and, in that regard, it is not any different from any other college, given that there are always issues around ensuring that there is equal provision in different parts of Northern Ireland. It is almost impossible to provide that, given the nature of geography and funding limitations.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

Before I call the next Member, I want to say that Hansard is having some difficulty with the mics. Members should direct their mic towards them when speaking. Thank you.

Michaela Boyle (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

T3. Ms Boyle asked the Minister for Employment and Learning for an update on the strengthening the all-Ireland research base programme. (AQT 2583/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

A number of different initiatives are under way, and, as the Member will know, it is important that we seek to develop more and more collaboration on high-level research. A global phenomenon is what is expected. Several years ago, I signed an agreement with Richard Bruton, my equivalent in the Republic of Ireland, for a partnership between Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) and my Department to support collaborative funding for research on a North/South basis. Indeed, we announced a number of such projects during May. The Member is hopefully aware of that, and we can provide further details if she wishes to receive them.

The Executive are very keen that we maximise the drawdown from Horizon 2020, and some very challenging targets have been set. The collaboration that we do, particularly around the SFI-DEL investigators programme partnership, gives us a very strong foundation on which we can then move into Horizon 2020. Other collaborations are already happening in that regard, and, of course, given that it is European funding involved, they are very keen to push collaboration between different jurisdictions.

We are very hopeful that there will be some very strong progress on Horizon 2020 over the coming months, and I urge the Member to look out for that.

Finally, I stress that we are privileged to be part of the US-Ireland research and development alliance, which is an agreement between both jurisdictions on the island and the US State Department. That sponsors a number of collaborative projects. We are seeking to build upon all our different strengths and to make a much bigger impact.

Michaela Boyle (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for his response. Can you detail any specific areas of research taking place under the programme? How are they advancing? Go raibh maith agat.

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

We will send on a copy of the press release and associated information that will list all the programmes that are happening. I will not attempt to list all the areas off the top of my head, but the Member will be aware of the general priorities that we have for research, particularly life sciences, cybersecurity, agriculture, agrifood, nanotechnology and other areas of life sciences. Those are areas where we believe there are strengths on both sides of the border. We are very keen to build on existing strengths, but we will ensure that the Member has the full list of projects, who is undertaking them and the institutions involved with them.

Paula Bradley (DUP, Belfast North)

T4. Ms P Bradley asked the Minister for Employment and Learning when he expects to make an announcement on the reconstitution of the further education colleges’ governing bodies. (AQT 2584/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

It is not a form of reconstitution as such because we are going through a process of gradual incremental change, but there are a number of governor posts that we will seek to fill in the coming weeks. That is at a fairly advanced stage. Given the nature of public appointments, as the Member will well know, I, as Minister, simply sign off on the specification at the outset of the process and then I have no role until recommendations come forward to me from the panels that study the applications for me to make the final appointments. We are not at that stage just yet, but my understanding is that that will be with me in the next few weeks.

Paula Bradley (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Minister for his answer. In the same vein to do with further education colleges — the Minister might have partly answered this earlier — with the transfer of community development and urban regeneration to councils next year, how does the Minister believe that colleges can collaborate with our local councils to tackle underachievement and low educational standards in their areas?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I am happy to encourage that. In January, I hosted a dinner between the incoming chief executives of the 11 councils and the directors of the six FE colleges to spark those types of conversations. A number of initiatives are being pursued already in that regard at different speeds in different parts of Northern Ireland. I am hearing some very strong noises about the Northern Regional College and BMC. It is very proactive in that area with Belfast City Council, so, in the Member's area, that work is happening.

There is a very clear opportunity for community planning and urban regeneration for colleges. Also, when they are developing their community plans, skilling and upskilling will be key elements for what they are seeking to do on the economy, and they will quite rightly be looking to FE colleges to provide a lot of the solutions. We are encouraging FE colleges to be the first point of contact for businesses and, by extension, councils at a local level, appreciating that Northern Ireland is not homogeneous and that there are different specialities in different areas, so, again, that is an opportunity.

We also recently devolved what was formerly known as the Department's skills solution service to the FE colleges. Previously, when businesses wanted solutions to their training needs, they went to centralised services. We now take the view that that is better devolved through the FE colleges, where they already have a business development infrastructure, and it is best to build upon that and have that seen as the first point of contact for local businesses. So, we will reroute contacts back to the FE colleges with a stronger localised knowledge to engage with their local community.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

T5. Mr Frew asked the Minister for Employment and Learning for an update on the ongoing work to assist the JTI Gallaher workers. (AQT 2585/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

There are a number of different initiatives that we committed to doing. One is the potential pursuit of an application to the European globalisation adjustment fund. On previous occasions, I reported to the Assembly the parameters around which a bid needs to be made and the potential difficulties we perceive in trying to see how JTI would fit into it. Ultimately, it will be a decision for the Department for Work and Pensions in London on taking forward a bid, given that it is the national Government in that regard. Again, that is a discussion that we will have to have. That bid can be made only in the context of the redundancies becoming live. As the Member knows, they are still some time away. This is a rather unusual situation to come before us.

While not wishing to disrupt the factory's ongoing work, which is of importance and which, if anything, has been intensifying in recent months, there is a commitment from JTI to work closely with the Department and the Northern Regional College over a skills audit and to then see what additional courses can be put in place to facilitate the retraining of workers who are affected by redundancy.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his very detailed answer. Will he give the House an assurance that he will continue to work and provide support to JTI employees and that he will also work, as he and his officials have been doing, with Invest NI and the council, which has now set up a working group on the issue?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I am happy to give the Member that reassurance. I am conscious of the interest of the outgoing Ballymena Borough Council, which, if my lingo is correct, is now Mid and East Antrim Borough Council. I know that it is very keen to work with them. We also highlighted the potential for a critical mass of highly skilled workers, particularly with engineering skills, to come on to the market. As the Member knows, there are engineering companies out there that are keen to recruit. We are seeing what we can do to match workers coming out of JTI with opportunities. Again, we need to be conscious of the timescales in this, because we want to respect the company's ongoing business needs, but I am more than satisfied that there is a full commitment from it to work with us at the appropriate time to make sure that we fully implement the opportunities that are there to assist the workers.

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

T6. Mr A Maginness asked the Minister for Employment and Learning what further measures he can take to expand the range of skills in IT, especially as, during the general election campaign, in which, although not elected, he had the honour of standing as a candidate, he attended a meeting at which a distinguished local businessman claimed that he could double his workforce in IT if the skills were available, albeit that the Minister has put effort into developing skills, but the businessman was claiming that there is still no breakthrough in the range of IT skills. (AQT 2586/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I welcome the Member's interest in the IT sector. It is a sector with huge potential for the local economy, and it is also one that has grown very significantly over recent years. Indeed, it never really experienced a recession as such, unlike some other areas. We have an ICT working group that brings together universities, colleges, Departments and the business community to map out the needs of the sector. Indeed, a meeting has been scheduled for a couple of weeks to review progress on that.

There is a global shortage of IT skills, so Northern Ireland is not alone in having that particular pressure point, but we have a range of different interventions that we are taking forward. We have seen a significant increase in the number of places at university and an increase in the interest and application rate to them. We announced the rebuilding of the Bernard Crossland Building at Queen's earlier this year to facilitate expansion in that regard. Notwithstanding the cuts that the higher education sector is facing, I am pleased that it has given a commitment to seek to protect narrow STEM subjects, which are of particular relevance to the IT sector.

We are also looking to develop higher-level apprenticeships in IT, and, again, one of our early works under the new strategy is a sectoral partnership on that. We also developed a number of different academies under our Assured Skills programme, working predominantly in the IT sector in areas such as data analytics, cloud computing and software testing. Again, that is proving a very good way of providing, in effect, a conversion course for young people to enter the IT sector.

Obviously, we would like to do more. What is important is that we that we have the resources to do more and that, through careers, we have a good throughput of young people who are interested in skills and careers in this area.

Oral Answers to Questions — Enterprise, Trade and Investment

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

I congratulate the Minister on his appointment and welcome him to his first Question Time as Minister. Question 12 has been withdrawn. We will start with listed questions.

Michael McGimpsey (UUP, Belfast South)

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, I join you in welcoming the Minister.

Michael McGimpsey (UUP, Belfast South)

1. Mr McGimpsey asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment for his assessment of the latest adjusted labour force survey estimates for Northern Ireland for the period January to March 2015. (AQO 8307/11-15)

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

First, I thank you, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, and Mr McGimpsey for the congratulations.

I am pleased that the latest figures demonstrate that the economic recovery is progressing. That is evident across both short-term and long-term indicators. The claimant count measure, which is best used as a short-term indicator, shows that the number of people claiming unemployment benefits has fallen for the twenty-eighth consecutive month, reducing by 20,500 over that period. The labour force survey, which is best used for examining medium- to long-term trends and making cross-country comparisons, is showing similar improvement, with the current unemployment rate at 6·2%, which is down considerably on its previous high. That same positive trend is also reflected job growth with nearly 30,000 net new jobs added to the local economy since the start of 2012. However, I do not want anybody to feel that I am complacent, despite those positive figures. All of us will recognise that we still have a number of labour market challenges to address.

Michael McGimpsey (UUP, Belfast South)

I thank the Minister for quoting those figures. Can I quote him two other figures that he omitted? The figure for the economically inactive is the highest in the UK and is up 4,000 from this time last year. Most crucially, our rate of youth unemployment is also the highest in the UK, up 3,000 from last year. Will the Minister undertake to give the same deal to our young people as young people get in Scotland? In Scotland, when young people leave school, they are offered a place in education, training or employment. That way, we will not have an indictment on this House that young people in their hundreds and thousands leave school to go on the dole.

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

The Member makes a strong point about our young people that concerns all of us greatly. In terms of economic inactivity, if you look at the European standard measurement, you see that we are slightly below that, and we are slightly below the figure in the Republic of Ireland. I fully accept the concerns that he has expressed.

It will be a joint approach by Minister Farry and me, in conjunction with DSD, the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety and Invest Northern Ireland. We have a strategy called "Enabling Success". That is what we want to do: enable success. To do that, we have to tackle what the Member rightly points out as the high level of economic inactivity here. The strategy will look at how we can reduce the persistently high levels of economic inactivity in Northern Ireland by helping economically inactive groups to make the transition towards and into the labour market. Key within those target groups are the long-term sick, the disabled and those with family commitments. In particular, I have in mind lone parents and carers.

The draft strategy was agreed at the Executive on 16 April and was published by the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment and the Minister for Employment and Learning on 20 April. Implementation has begun on key points, but I will just give two because I am conscious of the time. We have worked on a competitive pilot testing process to test innovative ways to reduce inactivity, and work has begun to develop the proposed way forward for that process. Secondly, we are establishing and facilitating a strategic forum to oversee the delivery issues, improve coordination and increase public awareness of those who are economically inactive.

Jimmy Spratt (DUP, Belfast South)

Can I too be associated with the remarks congratulating my friend the Minister on his new appointment? Since Northern Ireland has had an economic downturn across the whole Province and suffered job losses, what assessment does the Minister have for future job creation in the South Belfast constituency?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

The Member makes his point well, and I thank him for his congratulations. I suppose that South Belfast, like all our constituencies elsewhere in Northern Ireland, was impacted by the downturn. However, I am pleased to say that I believe that things are now moving in the right direction. For example, the latest figures show that there has been a sustained fall in the number of people claiming unemployment benefits in South Belfast since early 2013. That is a fall of almost 1,200, equivalent to a fall of approximately one third.

In light of both the Member's question and what Mr McGimpsey raised about the concerns for young people, it is particularly welcome that we see significant falls in the number of claimants amongst young people aged 18 to 24. They have fallen by more than 600 since the recent peak, and there have been improvements in the number of long-term unemployed — those who have been claiming benefit for 12 months or more. Those numbers have fallen by more than 300 since the recent peak. It is important that the Member raises his constituency, but, when we look at job opportunities and at addressing unemployment in South Belfast, we should not become overly localised. New jobs in any part of the city will create opportunities for people right across the city of Belfast and beyond. I look forward to further progress in those areas.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

2. Mr Sheehan asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment for his assessment of the implications of the Northern Ireland composite economic index on driving local economic growth. (AQO 8308/11-15)

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

First, I believe that the composite economic index provides us with a good short-term measure of how the local economy is performing, in the absence of GDP figures. However, to clarify, this measure does not drive growth; it measures growth. The latest results showed that local economic activity expanded by a relatively modest 1·1% on an annual basis. However, it is pleasing that the growth was driven by the private sector, which posted 2% growth over the year. The index shows that our production sector has been performing particularly well, with services also posting solid growth. While the construction sector is still facing difficulties, I welcome some emerging signs of growth in that sector.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a fhreagra. I thank the Minister for his answer. I also offer my congratulations to the Minister on his recent appointment to his new role.

The economic index shows that local economic growth has been flat in three of the last four quarters. What proposals does the Minister have to ensure that we have sustainable local economic growth?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for his congratulations. One of the key levers for growth — this is not only what I believe but what the Ulster University economic panel has told us — is to see us develop our corporation tax rate. We simply need a date for when we are going to develop a reduction, and we need the rate to give to businesses. The research is clear: there is a strong economic case for lowering corporation tax. Many Ministers, including the First Minister and deputy First Minister, worked hard to achieve that. If we are to follow the research and reduce the rate to 12·5% in 2017, let us for a moment consider the prize for local economic growth of where we could be: we could create almost 40,000 additional net jobs, and we could see our economy grow by 10%.

In particular, for the West Belfast constituency, I note also that there have been some improvements recently. On an issue that has been a theme in the House, the number of young people aged 18 to 24 who were claiming unemployment benefit in West Belfast has fallen by 900 since the peak.

That is equivalent to almost one half of all young claimants. We have to continue to provide job opportunities, particularly for those young people. Generally, the number of people claiming unemployment benefits in West Belfast since early 2013 has fallen by almost 2,000, which is equivalent to approximately one third.

Gordon Dunne (DUP, North Down)

I, too, congratulate the Minister. As a north Down resident, there is no doubt that he will do a good job. Will the Minister give his assessment of the economic impact and the need for political stability in Northern Ireland following the need for a decision on welfare reform?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

The more stability we have, the more we can drive forward the promotion and creation of jobs and build a wonderful future. I know that talks are under way, so I want to be diplomatic in what I say because I want to see those talks reach a successful conclusion and I do not want to see anything that would jeopardise them.

We should all remember where we were in 2011. We set a target to create 25,000 jobs. I was there when that target was lifted from 20,000 to 25,000, because I remember that the First Minister really wanted to drive job creation at that time. We are sitting today with 37,277 jobs; a 49% increase on the target that we set ourselves. We set ourselves a target to have £1 billion of investment, and we have got £2·7 billion of jobs investment; a staggering 167% increase on where we were. We set ourselves a target of £300 million in research and development, and we have delivered £520 million; a 73% increase. We looked for £28 million in the growth loan fund, and we have delivered £30·8 million.

Northern Ireland is very much open for business. We saw the most tremendous Dubai Duty Free Irish Open and the PRO12 rugby final. I spoke to hoteliers in Belfast who had completely sold out back-to-back and were struggling to get people accommodation. We have a great country with great sporting events and an economy that has the potential to grow by almost 10% and deliver some 40,000 new jobs. Friends, that is a prize that none of us can afford to lose.

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

I, too, congratulate the Minister on his recent appointment and I welcome the figures that he just reflected on. However, does he agree that the target figures that he mentioned for corporation tax will not shift us sufficiently from the 66% reliance on the public sector and 34% reliance on a weakened private sector to allow Northern Ireland to stand on its own two feet?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

Unemployment today is at 6·2% and, over the previous four years of this Assembly period, we have, for the vast majority of that time, had lower unemployment per capita in Northern Ireland than the rest of the UK. We have had significantly lower unemployment than the Republic of Ireland. If you take that 6·2% and add to it some of the things that we are trying to do, particularly around growing the tourism industry to a £1 billion industry by 2020 and improving on our golf tourism, think of all of the jobs that will flow from that.

Sometimes, it is important to look at what we have done and where we need to go. Look at the results of just the last year, and I congratulate my predecessor, Invest NI, the Enterprise, Trade and Investment Committee and all the people who worked so hard to deliver all this. In 2014-15, 13,829 jobs were secured. That was the highest ever. We created 9,410 jobs; again, that was the highest ever. We put in £1·4 billion of investment; the highest that we have ever done. We brought 25 new investors for Northern Ireland; again, the highest figure ever. We also got a customer satisfaction rate of 85%; the highest ever recorded.

Northern Ireland is very much open for business. Many of us saw, over the last couple of days, significant investors here for the sporting events taking time to look at what Northern Ireland has to offer. I tell you this: they went away very impressed.

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

3. Mr McCartney asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, in light of the recent labour market survey, which listed Derry and Strabane District Council as the area with the highest percentage of people claiming jobseeker's allowance, what additional interventions are planned in the areas of highest unemployment and of greatest need. (AQO 8309/11-15)

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

Under local government reform, local councils now have the responsibility for some local economic development functions. Invest Northern Ireland is a statutory partner in the community planning process and will actively work with a range of stakeholders to address the social and economic issues in the local area. Invest Northern Ireland is also co-funding the development of an integrated economic strategy for the council area.

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a fhreagra. I thank the Minister for his answer. Indeed, I congratulate him on his recent appointment to the post. The Minister will be aware that the business start-ups that were administered through the local councils have been cut, particularly in neighbourhood renewal areas, where they were of some value. Has the Minister any proposals to alleviate that cut?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

It would be good to take a wee look at where we are for the Member's constituency; I did that in the research to answer his question. The number of new jobs brought to Foyle by Invest Northern Ireland has increased by 156% in five years, from 340 in 2009-2010 to 871 in 2013-14. I congratulate all those in the Foyle constituency who worked so hard to make that a success. Of the 2,496 jobs that were promoted in Foyle during the five years, 1,269 were in locally owned companies and 1,227 in externally owned companies. We have a good balance between locally and externally owned.

The Member raised the point of start-ups. Over the past five years, the regional start initiative (RSI) has offered support to 892 people in the Foyle constituency area, helping them to develop their business plan for a new business. In addition to the RSI, Invest Northern Ireland has offered £1·4 million of assistance to start-up businesses in Foyle over the last five years. Invest Northern Ireland support for business development and investment in the region has been targeted not only at job creation but at other business development activities, such as research and development and skills development. Really, it is all about targeting and underpinning business competitiveness to sustain jobs and eventually lead to what we hope will be growth and more employment opportunities in your area.

Gary Middleton (DUP, Foyle)

I thank the Minister for his answers so far and wish him well in his new post. Can the Minister outline — he touched on this in his previous answer — what investment in research and development is being made in the Londonderry and Strabane council area?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

I gave some of the figures for the new jobs that have been promoted. I also gave some of the figures for the start-ups and the investment that has gone in. We will continue with that, right across the board, in Foyle and in East Londonderry, where 904 jobs were promoted in locally owned companies and three in externally owned, while support was provided to 826 people in the East Londonderry constituency as well.

There is a good news story to tell about Londonderry and Strabane specifically. Unfortunately, I do not have a long time to tell it in; I get two minutes. Let us look at two particular areas in the Strabane and Londonderry area. Let us look at Waste Systems Ltd. It designs and manufactures equipment primarily for use in the waste and quarry industries. Since its foundation six years ago, turnover has increased steadily year by year. The company, currently based in Plumbridge, County Tyrone, has secured a number of awards and accolades in recognition of the innovative nature of the product, with virtually all sales being exported outside Northern Ireland. Two grants for research and development offers have been issued to support the development of equipment to separate light waste and stones from a biodegradable product.

The second one that I will briefly touch on is Seagate Technology Ireland. A major research and development project in the area was announced in October 2014. It provides the read/write heads for Seagate's final hard disk drive products. All output from the Springtown plant is supplied to other parts of the Seagate group, mainly in Asia-Pacific areas.

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

May I just add my congratulations to the Minister and tell him that I strongly believe in the old adage that a new brush sweeps clean. The Minister made reference to East Derry. Will he, being that new brush, agree with me that we desperately need an economic task force set up in the north-west to identify the strengths of the region but also to establish why there has been a dearth of potential inward investors to that region, which has been savaged over the last decade, with losses of jobs in industry, textiles and farming?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for his congratulations. Certainly, if there is anything that we can do for the constituency, my door is open to do that. I will certainly try to encourage and push. Many Members in the House have sat with key investors from right across the world over the past week. They were over for the golf, and we used the time to talk to those investors. Karen McKevitt is shaking her head, and there are many others. We have to let business go where business goes, to a certain extent, but we will certainly try to look towards what we can do to support jobs and job creation.

It is important, because, in East Londonderry, the number of jobs promoted increased by 68% over the past five years. That went from 151 in 2009-2010 to 254 last year. As I said earlier to Mr Middleton, when you take a breakdown of the 907 jobs that were promoted during those five years, you see that, staggeringly, locally owned companies had 904 of those and externally owned companies only had three.

Over the past five years, the regional start initiative has offered support to 826 people in the East Londonderry constituency area to help them develop their plan to develop their new business. In addition to the RSI, Invest Northern Ireland has offered £0·8 million of assistance to start-up businesses in East Londonderry over the last five years. So, the door is open. Let us encourage to build upon what we know are very highly skilled and highly motivated people working in that constituency area.

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

4. Mr Wells asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment what assistance his Department can provide to encourage the building of a new hotel in Downpatrick. (AQO 8310/11-15)

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

New hotel developments may benefit from capital support from Invest Northern Ireland if the promoter can demonstrate that the project is market-driven with the capability of attracting visitors from outside Northern Ireland and not displacing business from similar projects. New hotel projects offering at least 30 rooms may be considered for support. Invest Northern Ireland is happy to engage with any promoter who may meet the criteria for support.

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

I join others in welcoming Mr Bell to his position, and I am sure that he will join me in congratulating the previous holder of the position. He is building on a very firm foundation laid by Mrs Foster, who achieved so much in that role. Will he accept that it really is very regrettable that a town the size of Downpatrick does not have a new, large, modern hotel at the moment, and that the issue of displacement does not arise because there is really no provision over a very wide part of east Down?

Will his Department continue to work with those who already have planning approval for a hotel in the town to ensure that this facility, which has been missing for so long, is brought back to the area?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

The Member makes two very good points. First, I thank you for your congratulations to me and my predecessor, Arlene Foster, who did an amazing job. Her record speaks for itself. More jobs were created in that four-year period than in any previous four-year period. We have more foreign direct investment per head of the population than anywhere else in the United Kingdom. The targets that I outlined earlier were passed significantly, which shows the level of competence and professionalism that Mrs Foster gave to the job.

If the Member has a promoter or developer who wants to see me about a hotel, I will certainly work alongside them. We have to keep to the rules that I laid out. It is the same for everybody right across the place. Over the past weekend, south Down in particular showed the very best of what Northern Ireland could be. Not only was it stunningly beautiful but it brought in some of the world's best golfers. Not only did the sell-out crowd of 107,000 behave marvellously but 1,100 volunteers, many from the south Down area and many others from golf clubs across Northern Ireland and further afield, gave of themselves to make that such a success.

On Saturday night, I had a difficult conversation about hotel accommodation with Gerry, Alison and their team, who did a marvellous job with Visit Belfast. We were at the Pro 12 rugby final, and, on the back of that and the hugely successful Dubai Duty Free Irish Open, you simply could not get a hotel space in the Belfast area. That, I think, that will add to the pressure to increase the number of hotels elsewhere.

Christopher Hazzard (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I, too, congratulate the Minister on his new role. He referred, of course, to the success of the Irish Open. On the back of the recent Irish Open in Portrush, we have seen that whatever north Antrim can do south Down can certainly do better. Unfortunately, in recent years, be it through Invest NI or the tourism bodies, south Down has played second fiddle to areas such as Belfast and north Antrim. Will the Minister now pledge not just to wait for hotel developers to come to his Department and Invest NI but to proactively engage with people and business interests in south Down to build what can be a primary tourist resort not just in the North but in all of Ireland?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

I am more than happy to speak to anybody. The door will be open, and we will make time available. South Down is definitely riding high. Not only do you have one of the world's best golf courses, you have a population and volunteers willing to serve and develop the tourism industry there. I want to build on that. I want to encourage that. That is what this is all about.

I also put on record my congratulations to Minister Ford and Minister Kennedy. In all my life, I do not think that I have ever travelled as easily into Newcastle as I did on Friday, Saturday and Sunday. The transport arrangements were fantastic. The security was low-key but brilliant.

A number of us were with South Down MLAs in Montalto House, and we spoke privately to key investors. I would love to tell you just who those people were because you would get an indication of the depth of their ability to promote jobs and boost the economy, but, due to commercial sensitivity, I cannot. Without exception, every person who visited south Down came away overwhelmed by the generosity of its people, its beauty and the fact that not only could you put on a world-class event but you could do so to a world-class standard. Anything that I can do to build on the legacy that the Dubai Duty Free Irish Open has left us — with 107,000 spectators, it must surely rank as the best ever, as far as I am aware — and develop the tourism offering, consider it done.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

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

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

I add my congratulations to the Minister on his recent appointment. I thoroughly enjoyed scrutinising and supporting his work in his former Department and look forward to working with him in his new post. I also add my congratulations to him and everyone involved with the successful Irish Open at the weekend, perhaps in particular to Rory McIlroy for being the ambassador that he has become for this region.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

I ask the Member to come to a question.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

T1. Mr Lyttle asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment how he will respond to the key challenges listed in a recent edition of PricewaterhouseCoopers' (PwC) 'UK Economic Outlook', which, although it confirmed that Northern Ireland has, thankfully, enjoyed falling unemployment, an expanding workforce, modest recovery in exports and property and a vibrant hospitality and tourism sector, found that there are ongoing challenges to increase the average wages earned by people in Northern Ireland and productivity. (AQT 2591/11-15)

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for his congratulations. They are much appreciated. He did a tremendous job scrutinising me in my previous role, and I look forward to working with him in future, particularly for East Belfast, which is an area that I love. The one thing that Chris and I share with Rory McIlroy is that we are old school friends. I think that I am the oldest among the three of us, sad to say.

I will address your other point, but I want to address your point about Rory McIlroy first so that it does not get lost. The importance of Rory McIlroy cannot be overestimated. He came in as the world's number one golfer and used all his influence. I talked to many of the other golfers, and I know for a fact that he could have been doing a thousand other things, many of which would have been financially more lucrative, yet he set aside all of those, not only for the Rory Foundation but to bring a top-class list of golfers here. We are indebted to him for what he did.

As to where we need to go in the future, we need to create high-value jobs. I think that that is what the Member was referring to. We have to do that by investing in our research and development and our skills base and by looking to where the key areas for growth are. The Member mentioned tourism, and we are looking towards growing that to a billion-pound industry by 2020. A theme of the question was golf, and we are specifically looking to golf tourism. We are currently bringing in somewhere around £33 million from that, and we want to grow that to £50 million. With the successful Irish Open, a future Irish Open in 2017 and hopefully, if everything works out, the Open in 2019, we are on a trajectory to achieve that.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the Minister for his answer. What impact is the current impasse on welfare reform and the uncertainty over budgets having on the economy and the potential investment that he will be working to achieve in Northern Ireland?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

With talks under way, I hesitate to say anything that could be considered undiplomatic. However, let me say this: I am told that business relies on security and stability. Northern Ireland has been given a unique opportunity to govern itself through these devolved institutions. We have significantly surpassed many of the targets for jobs, investment, research and development and growth loan funds, as I outlined earlier. We have surpassed all of those. We have done that because we have a highly skilled and motivated group of people. We now attract more foreign direct investment per head than any other part of the United Kingdom. One of the key factors behind that is that a significant majority of all the businesses that have invested in Northern Ireland have subsequently reinvested. I can give a sales pitch, but, more and more, I point investors to people who have invested in Northern Ireland and have subsequently reinvested, because that is the ultimate vote of confidence in Northern Ireland, its people and their skills.

We have no option but to come to an agreement.

When we sit with the prize, what will people say if we lose that prize of up to 40,000 jobs and a 10% growth in our economy, something that is in our hands if we can reduce corporation tax? There are some significant businesses that I cannot name that work on a three-year cycle and are ready to start immediately increasing investment in Northern Ireland when we get a date and a rate for corporation tax. Friends, that is very much the way forward.

David Hilditch (DUP, East Antrim)

T2. Mr Hilditch asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment for an assessment of Invest NI’s delivery of its Programme for Government targets, while also congratulating him on his appointment. (AQT 2592/11-15)

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

Invest Northern Ireland cannot be congratulated highly enough. My predecessor took so much of that work forward. The facts bear repetition because they speak for themselves. When we sat down to create the Programme for Government, we asked Invest Northern Ireland to be strategic and to look for a realistic target that it could achieve. It told us that its target at that stage was 20,000 jobs. I remember that in those discussions with the Executive, and particularly with the First Minister, we said that we wanted a target of 25,000 jobs. We pushed that because we wanted to sweat every asset that we had.

Here we are, in Northern Ireland, with 37,277 jobs — almost a 50% increase on what was meant to have been a very difficult target to achieve. We need to continue with our levels of investment in jobs, and we have done that. We set the target of £1 billion, and I can say today that we have put £2·7 billion in place. That is a 167% increase on investment on where we were before.

One of the key drivers is research and development, for which we set a very competitive target of £300 million; we achieved £520 million. We have been talking to companies; I have been talking to them from early this morning, and they are particularly interested in R&D. We are looking at a 73% increase in R&D on what was meant to have been one of the most difficult targets. There have been difficulties with exports; I do not shy away from that. I will continue to push at that, but we all have to realise that, in exports, if the euro falls 15 points against sterling it will automatically create challenges for our market.

David Hilditch (DUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his answer so far. Will he update the House specifically on the most recent figures for 2014-15?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

I will give some of them out again. I am happy to reiterate them because they represent the strongest performance that we have ever had. The headline results for 2014-15 show that 13,829 jobs were secured and 9,410 jobs were created — the highest number that we have ever achieved. It is fuelled by investment, and the investment that we made in 2014-15 amounted to £1·4 billion — the highest rate of investment that we have ever achieved.

We are constantly trying to source new investors. Success often follows success, and in 2014-15, 25 new investors, more than we have ever had before, came to Northern Ireland. The important thing is to ensure that the customers and the people whom Invest Northern Ireland serves are satisfied. The latest figures that I have for 2014-15 show that 85% of investors have recorded a customer satisfaction rate for the work that is ongoing. That shows that Northern Ireland is in a very healthy position, and the onus is on all of us to build on it.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

T3. Mr Clarke asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, after congratulating him on his appointment, whether he has had any discussions with Belfast International Airport or the airlines about the possibility of increasing the number of routes operating from South Antrim. (AQT 2593/11-15)

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for his congratulations. I visited Belfast International Airport (BIA) as part of a tenth anniversary celebration of the United Airlines route, and it was very productive. When I looked at the number of people from not just the airline industry but the travel industry who were there for that celebration, I thought that it shows just what a critical role Belfast International Airport plays. I met Graham Keddie, and I have met him on a number of occasions subsequently at different events. We will continue to do what we can to support the airport's route development endeavours. We support the international airport through the provision of tourism cooperative marketing assistance for airlines that serve BIA. We also organise Northern Ireland-specific stands at the annual World Routes conference. The next World Routes conference takes place in September in Durban in South Africa.

I was delighted to announce last month that Belfast has been successful in its bid to host Routes Europe 2017. That is a huge opportunity for Northern Ireland, because that is a major conference that brings together decision makers from the airlines, airports and tourism authorities and that gives them an opportunity to negotiate and build relationships that will go on to shape the world's future air routes network. To have that in Belfast is a huge vote of confidence for Belfast. The number of people involved from all around the world will provide a significant boost for our economy. We will work with BIA to develop new routes where feasible.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for that very fulsome answer. I am sure that, given that he is a Minister representing Northern Ireland, the Minister will, like me, be concerned at the flow of traffic leaving this area to go to Dublin Airport. I am sure that you agree with me that more needs to be done to promote Belfast International Airport and to prevent so many of our residents on this side of the border heading south. What more can be done to try to prevent that flow of traffic to Dublin and to keep people here in Belfast?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

My Department is in ongoing dialogue with our airports. We want to attract the routes to destinations that are currently served by Dublin Airport and that could be served directly from Northern Ireland. I think that all of us in the House would want to see direct access to destinations such as Germany, Scandinavia and Canada. That would provide increased choice for Northern Ireland residents, but it would also improve our linkages to important business and inbound tourism.

Support that we, as a Department, provide to Northern Ireland's airports is provided in a range of ways, including the tourism cooperative marketing assistance and organising the Northern Ireland-specific stands at the World Routes conference. We are also scoping the potential for a specific air route development fund for Northern Ireland.

The Member talked about the international airport. I was also delighted, in my first weekend in office, to fly back on the new KLM service from Schiphol. That is hugely successful for what it can offer. I was delighted to talk to many of the representatives of KLM, who gave me an indication that orders into the future were extremely healthy. The level of connectivity is key to growing our economy; having a direct flight into, in that case, George Best Belfast City Airport is huge for business. It gives us direct access to America and the Middle East through Schiphol, as well as return. I regard the continuing development of those air routes vital for our economy, and I intend to keep it fairly top of the in tray.

Question for Urgent Oral Answer

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

Mr Trevor Clarke has given notice of a question for urgent oral answer to the Minister for Regional Development. I remind Members that, if they wish to ask a supplementary question, they should continually rise in their seat. The Member who tabled the question will be called automatically to ask a supplementary question.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

Mr Clarke asked the Minister for Regional Development, given the well-publicised pressures on other essential aspects of his Department’s budget, what plans he has in place to fund phase 2 of the contracted Coleraine to Londonderry track renewal project.

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I believe that the important, and very good, announcement I made earlier today on the commencement of phase 2 of the Coleraine to Londonderry rail project is very good news for the north-west and for railways and public transport. The path to today's announcement has not been straightforward, and it has not been without criticism, but I have remained committed to the north-west and to this project. Today is very tangible evidence of that commitment. We successfully delivered phase 1 on time and on budget. The second phase announced today will safeguard the future of the line and enable an hourly service to be run on it.

Translink's profile of capital spend for this project is one third in 2015-16 and two thirds in 2016-17. Translink's corporate plan includes this project in its plans for this year and next. I can reassure the Member that budgets are in place for this year. This project is a key Programme for Government commitment and, accordingly, it will be prioritised next year. I will make the funding available from my departmental capital budget. The Member will know that budgets have not yet been set for next year. As you are aware, the overall cost of £46 million is higher than originally envisaged, but it reflects the real market we are competing in. The project should be substantially completed by December 2016.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for that answer. I also want to put on record my thanks to the Minister for briefing me and the Deputy Chair yesterday on this and other aspects of what is good news for the north-west.

The only bit I am trying to draw attention to today is in relation to the budget. The Minister has outlined the pressures he faces in relation to the £70 million of his capital budget. We went into this project with an estimated £40 million, so there is an extra £6 million in terms of the capital cost. Where is the Minister going to find that additional £6 million? The other alarming part is that his chief accounting officer and the chief executive of Translink have suggested that it does not represent value for money, but you have given them direction to go ahead with it. It is those areas that are concerning me today, Minister.

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Chair of the Committee for his question. This has been a challenging project to deliver, and there have been issues that we have had to deal with. On the overall budget, as I said in my original answer, next year's budget is not fixed. However, the fact is that capital moneys will be allocated to the Department for Regional Development. I made it clear to both the Department and Translink that I see this as a priority scheme. It is a Programme for Government scheme and, therefore, has the priority of not only my Department and Translink but the Executive. I will make preparations for it on that basis.

I remind the Member that the caution of the chief executive of Translink and the permanent secretary of my Department was simply a consequence of their own financial responsibilities. They both agreed that to proceed with this project was the best thing to do, given its importance to the north-west and to transport generally. There is no dispute between me and my permanent secretary or the chief executive of Translink.

Jimmy Spratt (DUP, Belfast South)

What has the Minister done in relation to the senior officials in the Department and the senior management in Translink who created the shambles in the first procurement process?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his question. The Member will know that I instigated a PAR (performance assessment review) report, which is being made available to the members of the Committee for Regional Development. I am also indicating today that a copy of that report will be placed in the Assembly Library for all Members to consider. That deals with the issues.

The original problems were caused by a guesstimate, effectively, which was woefully underestimated at something in the region of £20 million. It is worth saying that this work could never have been completed — the work involved could never have been done — for that sum of money of £20 million. A more realistic assessment was carried out at my behest. We have moved to that situation, and we are now able to progress this important scheme. I think that it is positive as we go forward.

Cathal Ó hOisín (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a fhreagraí go dtí seo. I thank the Minister for his statement, and I welcome it absolutely. It would be churlish not to do so, but, as you rightly said, Minister, this has not been without its hitches. In fact, phase 2 of the project should have been finished at the end of this month, but it has been allowed to go on. I am worried about the fact that it will not be completed, substantially, by the end of December next year. I also welcome the publication of the project assessment review. I cannot see anything in it that the Committee should not have been supplied with at an earlier date. The one line in the statement that bothers me, in reference to the budget of £46·4 million, is that it has created a difficulty. Will the Minister expand on that?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his question, and I acknowledge that he has welcomed today's announcement. This is a scheme that there have been challenges in. I believe that the timescale that we are operating to at this point is not that different from the timescale that had been previously hoped for and indicated. That is welcome.

In terms of the capital investment, when I arrived in this Department, the Coleraine/Londonderry line was on a life support machine. There had been insufficient investment, and it was ready, ultimately, for closure. I take pride in the fact that we were able to resurrect it. Lazarus is going to be alive and well here. I hope that that fact can be recognised. I take considerable pride in the fact that it was the Ulster Unionist Party that breathed life into the project and has made it viable. Into the future, people will enjoy the benefit and the additional connectivity that it brings between Belfast and Londonderry.

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

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, we are talking about the railway, which Michael Palin described as one of the wonders of the world. This is a day for celebration; it is a day when we can all get together and say, "Success." Yes, the Minister is an Ulster Unionist, but I do not mind that, because, since he took over the portfolio, he has invested almost £70 million in this railway. He took it over when, as he said himself, it was on life support. Let us look to the future. Can the Minister assure us that his ambition to create a fit-for-purpose station at Derry which is able to accommodate the increasing number of people from the north-west who are choosing rail as a means of travel is still on target?

Finally, this is not just about the north-west; this is about the railway network of Ireland as a whole. It is a fabulous day for everybody.

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his complimentary remarks. I know that he, personally, has been a long-standing supporter of the retention and upgrading of the line and, in difficult days, has given support to the overall project. I thank him for that. The Member will know that the old Waterside station is a popular option for the potential new transport hub.

Translink is in the process of negotiating about sites and it will take forward a feasibility study. We will also be actively pursuing EU funding sources. There are not sufficient funds available to us to indicate whether it is possible at this stage, but we will pursue options whereby we can make that dream a reality too.

Ross Hussey (UUP, West Tyrone)

I, too, thank the Minister for his announcement. I know that it will be welcomed by my colleagues in the Foyle constituency and the citizens of Londonderry. I have two questions for the Minister. The first relates to phase 1. Has there been an upsurge in the numbers of the public using the line since phase 1 was completed? Secondly, can you give us an indication of when this project will actually start?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member and thank him for his encouraging comments. In line with the success of rail in Northern Ireland and the major investment that my Department has put into it, I am pleased that this line has shown considerable increase in usage, even in the current circumstances. The number of journeys last year on the line amounted to something like 2·2 million, which is very considerable indeed and represents a 12% increase on the previous year. To those who doubt the wisdom of investing in this rail project, or indeed of investing in public transport, I think that that answers that. The public wants to use this system but we need to improve and upgrade it. Hopefully, in the future, we will achieve an hourly service because that is what the public needs and demands. The work will begin almost immediately, hopefully later this month, and it will continue through to successful completion by the end of 2016.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Will the Minister clarify whether this commitment of £46 million encompasses everything that was to be done under phase 2, including the loop connection? If not, how and when is that to be provided?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his question, and I am happy to confirm that the project includes the provision of the loop service in the Bellarena area. It is a comprehensive project that will meet in full the requirements of phase 2 of this important development.

David McNarry (UKIP, Strangford)

Previously, I have asked the Minister to resign over his lamentable ministerial performances. In the light of him blatantly overriding, in cavalier fashion, advice from his permanent secretary and the Translink CEO by this intention to sink an overspend of £6 million into this project — some might say £26 million in real terms — which is not value for money as they have advised him, will he not resign forthwith?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am sorry that Mr McNarry has become the Victor Meldrew of this Chamber and can see nothing of a positive nature, particularly, it seems, from his erstwhile colleagues, but we will leave that aside. It might be easy to make hits like that from the luxury of Strangford, but when you need transport connectivity to be improved between Belfast and Londonderry, this is essential work. That is why it was a Programme for Government commitment by the Executive, why it is supported by the vast majority of Members and parties in the Chamber and why, though it has been challenging, we have been able to bring it to a successful conclusion. I have to say that I am disappointed in the ongoing tone adopted by Mr McNarry, which leaves him little more than a Poundworld version of Nigel Farage.

[Laughter.]

Alex Easton (DUP, North Down)

I welcome the Minister's statement. It is a good news story for Northern Ireland. In his statement, he mentioned that phase 2 will be substantially completed by 2016. Has it got the potential to go into the 2017-18 financial year? Have there been any other capital schemes that you have had to put back to find the extra £6 million for the project?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Member for his welcome of the announcement and of the project itself. I very much hope that we can meet the target. Translink and, no doubt, the contractors will be working to achieve the completion date, which we outlined today, of the end of 2016. We have made provision in this financial year, and I have indicated that I am prepared to treat it as a priority in the next financial year. Hopefully that will resolve the issue of finance.

As for other commitments and capital projects, those are brought forward by Translink on an ongoing basis and will be considered in their own right, subject to the availability of funding.

(Mr Speaker in the Chair)

Mitchel McLaughlin (Speaker, South Antrim)

Members will take their ease while we get organised at the top Table.

Executive Committee Business

Sean Lynch (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Much of what I had to say was touched on earlier in the debate.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Speaker, South Antrim)

Order.