Northern Ireland Assembly, 13 September 2016

350 contributions from 65 members. The official report.

Ministerial Statements

Robin Newton (Speaker, Belfast East)

I have received notice from the First Minister and the deputy First Minister that they wish to make a statement on the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC) plenary meeting.

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

In compliance with section 52C(2) of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, I wish to make the following statement on the twenty-second meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council in plenary format, which was held in Dublin on Monday 4 July 2016.

The Executive Ministers who attended the meeting have agreed that I make this report on their behalf. Our delegation was led by the First Minister, Arlene Foster MLA, and me. In addition, the following Executive Ministers were in attendance: Minister Givan, Minister Hamilton, Minister Hazzard, Minister McIlveen, Minister Ó Muilleoir, Minister O'Neill, Minister Sugden, Minister Weir, junior Minister Fearon and junior Minister Ross. The Irish Government delegation was led by the Taoiseach, Enda Kenny TD.

The meeting provided the new Governments in each jurisdiction with the opportunity to meet formally for the first time and exchange views on a wide range of issues of mutual interest and concern, especially in the light of the referendum decision to leave the EU.

In the opening discussion, Ministers welcomed the early opportunity for the new Governments to discuss the implications of the then recent referendum decision and for relations between both jurisdictions. At the meeting, the Council agreed that, as the mechanism for a UK exit from the EU becomes clearer, the implications of the referendum decision on North/South cooperation should be explored in detail under all sectors.

Ministers welcomed the development of the Irish Government's new Programme for a Partnership Government and the Executive's new draft Programme for Government framework and noted that building and maintaining relationships between each jurisdiction features in both documents.

At the meeting, the Health Ministers announced that they were jointly opening the cardiac catheterisation lab in Our Lady's Children's Hospital in Crumlin later that day. They also announced the way forward for the all-island congenital heart disease network. They said that they looked forward to working together to build on the good progress made by their Departments and committed to further scope opportunities for all-island cooperation in health and social care.

The focus of the meeting was very much on financial and EU matters, and the Council had a detailed discussion on the potential impact of the UK referendum result to leave the EU. In order to optimise joint planning and engagement on key issues arising from the referendum result, the NSMC agreed to work together to ensure that our interests are protected and advanced and that the benefits of North/South cooperation are fully recognised in any new arrangements that emerge as regards the UK’s future relationship with the European Union. It also noted that there are a number of priority areas where implications arise, particularly the economy and trade; Northern and British and Irish relations; the common travel area; and the EU.

It agreed that a full audit will be undertaken in all sectors to identify the possible impacts, risks, opportunities and contingencies arising in the phases preceding and following the UK’s withdrawal from the EU. It agreed that this work will in turn be submitted to ministerial sectoral meetings for consideration as to the strategic and cross-cutting issues arising and that final priorities will be agreed by the next NSMC plenary meeting for the pre-negotiation and negotiation phases. It agreed that a further discussion on the implications of the referendum result will take place at the next NSMC plenary meeting and that the NSMC can provide a useful forum for ongoing discussion on relevant matters.

It reiterated the joint commitment of the Irish Government and the Executive to the successful implementation of the Peace and INTERREG programmes and agreed that the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform and the Executive’s Finance Minister will consider the issue of securing European regional development fund (ERDF) funding for Peace and INTERREG, including through engagement with the European Commission. It agreed that the frequency of the briefings on relevant EU matters provided by the Irish Government for senior officials should increase and include consideration of issues arising from the referendum decision. It agreed that the Irish Permanent Representation in Brussels and the Executive Office in Brussels will continue and intensify their close working relationship and noted and welcomed David Cameron's clear commitment to engagement of the Executive in the negotiating process with the European Union. Ministers also provided updates on economic conditions, North and South.

The Council noted the continued commitment of the Irish Government and the Executive in the Fresh Start Agreement to investing in infrastructure, which will support cooperation and unlock the full potential of the economies of both jurisdictions. Ministers noted the progress report by senior officials from relevant Departments in both jurisdictions addressing the Fresh Start commitments, including work on the A5 western transport corridor, noting that the A5 is on schedule to start in 2017, and the review of options for the Ulster canal and the Narrow Water bridge. Ministers noted that the group of senior officials will continue to meet regularly to maintain a strategic overview of the projects and commitments set out in Fresh Start and to explore funding opportunities for economic and infrastructure investment. The Council agreed that a further update on the Fresh Start section E commitments will be brought to the next NSMC plenary meeting.

The next item on the agenda was the north-west gateway initiative, and Ministers noted the continued engagement between officials from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Executive Office, with regional stakeholders regarding the direction and priorities for the north-west region. Ministers agreed that senior officials from relevant Departments in both jurisdictions should meet with the two councils as part of the framework and noted the continuing commitment to a meeting of Ministers from both jurisdictions to take place in the north-west. Ministers noted the additional Fresh Start commitment to support the north-west gateway initiative through the establishment of a north-west development fund and welcomed the contribution by the Irish Government of €2·5 million and the commitment of match funding from our Executive. Finally, Ministers agreed that the next plenary meeting would be held in Armagh in November.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

The Irish Government's commitments through Fresh Start section C are explicitly linked to their capital plan for 2016-21 called 'Building on Recovery'. This makes no fewer than 45 references to the benefits of public-private partnerships (PPPs), and, yet, for many years, the Minister's party has been implacably opposed to PPPs, calling them "folly" and saying that "they just do not work". There are dozens of such quotes. How does the Minister square that circle?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

The Member is quoting the Irish Government's position on all these matters. As we go forward, we do so on the basis that the different projects we will be engaged in will be cost effective. To do so with a closed mind would be folly of the worst kind. At the same time, this does not commit us to anything that would, in any way, undermine the quite reasonable position that we, as a party, have taken. Remember that when I am at the NSMC, I am not there representing Sinn Féin. I am there representing the Executive alongside the First Minister. In the course of our engagements with the Irish Government, and, inevitably, with whatever projects we commit ourselves to, there will always have to be some sort of compromise between us on how we can get projects on the road. It would have been the same with you had you been our First Minister.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

A lot of the predictions made regarding the economic impact of the decision on Brexit have come to nothing. A recession is defined as being two consecutive quarters of negative growth. Someone in the Chamber said that we had been plunged into a recession and that is clearly not the case. In maximising the opportunities presented by the decision, will the deputy First Minister outline to the House what message the Executive will be conveying to overseas investors about Northern Ireland being a good place to do business?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

I know that the Member is new but the questions we are answering here are about the plenary session of the North/South Ministerial Council that took place in Dublin. This question is outside that format but it is a reasonable one. We, as a political party, with the DUP in the new governmental arrangements, have a duty and a responsibility to work together to make this place work, and we are absolutely dedicated and committed to doing that. My track record — for example, working with the late Rev Ian Paisley and Peter Robinson in attracting foreign direct investment — is second to none. That work will continue. The First Minister and I will continue to do our jobs to bear down on unacceptable unemployment levels, and we have had some success in that in recent times. We will continue our engagement with North America in particular.

The Member talked about us not having had a recession and that it is not doom and gloom at the moment. Obviously, in the context of Brexit, it is early days. We do not know what the outcome of the negotiations will hold for us as a region. The First Minister and I, even though we are on different sides of the debate and the argument on Brexit, still have a responsibility to lead the Executive, deliver first-class public services, provide employment and ensure that we are giving leadership to the people we represent. That is important and I am absolutely determined to do it.

Philip McGuigan

Will the deputy First Minister provide an update on elements of the Fresh Start Agreement relating to the North/South Ministerial Council?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

The Irish Government were very much involved in the Fresh Start negotiations from a distance and made very important commitments during the course of those negotiations. The successful implementation of the Fresh Start Agreement is vital and they have a role to play in that. It laid out an agreed way forward and we must work hard to ensure that it is fully delivered.

I am particularly pleased that work on the A5 remains on target and that, subject to completion of all the statutory processes, the project could start next year. Narrow Water bridge is an important project in the Newry and Louth areas and there is real desire in those areas for the bridge. I have met numerous delegations to discuss the bridge and I hope that we can find the funds and a way to make the plans a reality.

I also think the commitment to the north-west is vital. We are all aware that the region suffers due to a legacy of underinvestment and the lack of connectivity between the area and Belfast or Dublin. Senior officials are taking forward work to consider what impact, if any, Brexit may have on the delivery of these projects and others that are specified in the Fresh Start Agreement. All the conversations thus far clearly indicate that the Irish Government are as exercised as we are to ensure that we fully implement the Fresh Start Agreement, including the commitments that they have made.

Richie McPhillips (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the deputy First Minister for his statement and for providing an update on the latest meeting and the implications of the vote to leave the European Union that were centre stage at the discussion. Can he outline what discussions there have been on setting up an all-Ireland forum to consider the implications of Brexit, and does he agree that no single party in the Chamber has the power to veto the establishment of such a forum?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

It has been the subject of some public discussion recently, and I understand that, while the Taoiseach was at a political event in England at the weekend, he clearly indicated that he intends to take the process forward. My sense is that it will happen with an open door for everybody entitled to be there — all the relevant stakeholders and political parties will be invited to attend. It is also the right of any political party not to attend if it so wishes; we cannot force people to do what they are not willing to do. We wait with interest to see the establishment of the forum. My party is very much in favour of it, and such a forum could be held without injuring anybody's political allegiance.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

I thank the deputy First Minister for bringing the report to us. What does intensifying their close working relationship entail with regard to the Irish Permanent Representation and the Northern Ireland Executive office in Brussels? How long do you expect that intensive relationship to last, and will the Northern Ireland Executive maintain its office in Brussels after the UK leaves the European Union — if it ever does?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

The Member's last comment is as relevant as anything else that has been said in the Chamber today. Who knows what lies ahead with these matters? We have committed to intensifying our relationships with the Irish Government and the Executive office in Brussels. That is the common sense thing to do, given the huge challenge that will face us all, if article 50 is triggered at some stage early in the new year. When the First Minister and I met with Theresa May, she made it absolutely clear that she was not going to trigger article 50 this year but that she would do so early next year because she would not allow others to accuse her of being slow to move forward with Brexit, whatever Brexit means; many of us wonder that. It is very important that the Executive office in Brussels is utilised to the full and that our engagement through it, with the Irish Government and Brussels, is intensified.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the deputy First Minister for the statement this morning. He referred to welcoming the Executive's commitment to engagement in the UK's negotiations with the European Union. How does he see this engagement with Her Majesty's Government progressing, following the recent visit by David Davis?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

In the discussions that we had with David Cameron and Theresa May, they made it absolutely clear that we would be involved. Obviously, the mechanism of how we do that has yet to be agreed, but there are a number of options, including the Joint Ministerial Committee in London, which the First Minister and I attend with the First Minister of Wales, the First Minister of Scotland and, on occasion, the British Prime Minister. That is one option; there are others. It has yet to be negotiated with the British Government, and that is something that the First Minister and I will turn our attention to. It is obvious that others in Scotland and Wales are exercised about this as well.

To be honest, when Peter Robinson and I attended previous meetings of the Joint Ministerial Committee as First Minister and deputy First Minister, we, along with Wales and Scotland, were underwhelmed by the seriousness with which the British Government took the views expressed by the devolved Administrations. If that is to be the mechanism, there will have to be a fundamental change of attitude by the British Government, and we will test that in the time ahead.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Cuirim fáilte roimh ráiteas an Aire. I welcome the Minister's statement. I will take his advice and stick to the statement. I refer to paragraph 9 on health: will the Minister give us a wee update on cross-border cooperation in health?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

As I said in my opening statement, the meeting dealt with health in a positive and important way. In the aftermath of the meeting, Health Ministers from the North and South went off to be involved in the initiatives that they have agreed on children's health and on heart conditions, North and South, through joint working processes. The fact that they committed themselves during the conversations that they were involved in to further exploration of how we can, on an all-island basis, improve our people's health is very important.

We all know that great work has been done at the South West Acute Hospital, with patients from Cavan and Monaghan being treated there, and that there will be a very important initiative in the north-west at Altnagelvin Area Hospital when the new radiotherapy unit opens in a few weeks' time for the treatment of people from the north-west — from Derry, Tyrone, north Sligo and Donegal. These are all common-sense, important initiatives that can quite easily be undertaken without endangering anybody's political allegiances.

The sensible view taken by our Health Minister and previous Health Ministers, including DUP Ministers, speaks volumes for their very open-minded approach to ensuring that we work in a common-sense way not only to lower costs but, in a very effective way, to deliver a first-class health service for the people whom we represent.

Phillip Logan (DUP, North Antrim)

I thank the deputy First Minister for his statement. Was a single electricity market mentioned?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Absolutely. The issue of the single electricity market is important for all of us, and it is a high-level commitment. There are processes being undertaken, North and South, in relation to the statutory obligations of fulfilling whatever conditions are required to ensure that that goes forward. That represents a huge challenge to all of us, particularly when we hear people in the manufacturing sector talk about the high costs that they have incurred as a result of the failure to put in place the single electricity market. We recognise that they are clearly working with the view that those costs could be radically reduced against the backdrop of a more effective way of delivering electricity. That represents another big challenge for us in the time ahead, and the Executive and the Irish Government are looking closely at it.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I thank the deputy First Minister for his words. When communicating with Ministers during the North/South Ministerial Council meeting, were you able to express some of the differing perspectives that the Northern Ireland Executive have to the Irish Government? When you were doing that, what was the response from the Irish Government?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

The Irish Government are as experienced politicians as we are in the North, and they know that, during the referendum debate, the DUP and Sinn Féin were on different sides of the argument. There was complete understanding on the Irish Government Ministers' part that that was the case. As in everything else, when we find ourselves in the situation that we are in at the moment, with the real prospect that article 50 of the Lisbon treaty will be triggered and there will be a very intensive negotiation, we have to work in a common-sense, practical way to ensure that we defend the interests of the people we represent, North and South. Brexit obviously has profound implications for the South, and they have expressed that publicly. I believe it has profound implications for us in the North, but we all have to work together.

I think a clear signal of our ability to work together is the joint letter that the First Minister and I sent to Theresa May identifying areas of real concern to us. I am sure that those concerns are shared by the Irish Government. It is important that we have the Irish Government as an ally in relation to the arguments that we intend to make in the time ahead, whether it be around the issue of funding or the issue of a hard border. We have identified those issues in the letter that we sent to Theresa May. I think that clearly indicates to the Irish Government that we are working together to make the best of what is a very difficult situation for all of us.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Since the essential burden of the meeting related to Brexit, may I ask for clarity on a central issue? Do the deputy First Minister and his half of the Executive accept the reality that the United Kingdom, including all of its parts, is leaving the EU? Without that unequivocal acceptance, the supposed agreed approach in the joint letter to the Prime Minister is an empty sham. Can the deputy First Minister, without evasion, answer that simple question: do he and his Ministers, whether they like it or not, accept that we are leaving the EU?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

I am not here to speak on behalf of one half of the Executive; I am here to speak on behalf of the Executive and the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister. I am aware of the outcome of the Brexit vote. I know that overwhelmingly in England they voted to leave. I know that in Scotland they voted to remain. I know that, here, the people of the North voted to remain. That represents a real issue that the British Government and the European Union have to take under consideration. I am for staying in Europe, but, if the British Government trigger article 50 and are then involved in a negotiation to exit Europe, I as a responsible politician have a duty and a responsibility to work with the First Minister and the other Ministers in the Executive to make the best fist of what we can in relation to defending the interests of the people whom we represent.

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Mr Speaker, in accordance with the requirements of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, I wish to make the following statement on the 27th summit meeting of the British-Irish Council, which took place in Cathays Park, Cardiff, on 22 July 2016. The deputy First Minister and I attended the summit, and he has agreed that I make this statement also on his behalf.

The British-Irish Council was established as part of the multi-party agreement reached in Belfast on 10 April 1998. The Council plays a valuable role in developing and furthering links between its eight member Administrations. It provides a dynamic forum for exchange of information and collaboration on policies of mutual interest, and it fosters positive, practical relationships across these islands.

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

This was an extraordinary summit of the Council, hosted by the Welsh Government and convened specifically to consider the outcome of the referendum on the United Kingdom’s membership of the European Union. The heads of delegations were welcomed by the First Minister, the Rt Hon Carwyn Jones AM. The Irish Government delegation was led by the Taoiseach, Enda Kenny TD. The UK Government delegation was jointly led by the Rt Hon James Brokenshire MP, Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, and the Rt Hon Alun Cairns, Secretary of State for Wales.

The Scottish Government delegation was led by the First Minister, the Rt Hon Nicola Sturgeon. The Isle of Man Government were led by the Chief Minister, the Hon Allan Bell MHK. The Government of Jersey were led by the Chief Minister, Senator Ian Gorst, and the Government of Guernsey were led by the Chief Minister, Deputy Gavin St Pier. A full list of delegation members is attached to the copy of this statement provided to Members.

Council members offered their condolences to the people of France following the terrorist attacks in Nice in July and to victims of conflicts around the world.

Member Administrations discussed the result of the referendum and reflected on the implications for each individual BIC member Administration, including those Administrations that are not part of the European Union, as well as for the Council as a whole. The Council noted that implications arise in a number of priority areas, in particular, the economy and trade, the common travel area, relations with the European Union and the status of all citizens affected by the change. It further noted that the process for implementing the referendum outcome would become clearer in the coming months.

During discussions, Ministers collectively reaffirmed the importance of the Council as a key institution of the 1998 agreement and an important and unique forum to share views, enhance cooperation and strengthen relationships amongst all member Administrations at this time. They reiterated their commitment to facilitating harmonious and mutually beneficial relationships among the people of these islands. It was agreed that the Council should be fully utilised to ensure that all member Administrations work together to this end. The Council also agreed that an update on developments following the referendum result, including for the BIC work sectors, would be facilitated at the next BIC summit.

As a final item of business, the Council noted that the next BIC summit would be hosted again by Wales in November 2016.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I thank the Minister. With regard to Ministers collectively reaffirming the importance of the Council as a key institution of the 1998 agreement, what other elements of the 1998 Belfast/Good Friday Agreement does the Minister now affirm?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

That question is not relevant to what happened at the meeting in Wales. That meeting was formatted to discuss the outcome of the European referendum in the United Kingdom. Part of the benefit of meeting in that format is that we get to speak to those member Administrations that are not members of the European Union and to learn from their experiences in how they deal with members of the European Union. I found it very interesting to hear from Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man as to how their protocol 3 rights are dealt with in Europe and how they manage to deal with other issues on which we have been able to deal directly with Europe because of our membership of the European Union. However, they have managed very well outside the European Union. That is of interest to me, and I intend to have further discussions about that with Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man. It was a very useful meeting, and that, of course, is what the statement is about.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

Will the First Minister outline for the House just how important she considers the role of Executive Ministers to be in ensuring and maintaining confidence in Northern Ireland as a destination for investors?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Member for his question. It amazed me slightly that some Members of the House — not just Ministers — took the opportunity after the European Union referendum to talk down Northern Ireland as a destination for foreign direct investment. They should hang their heads in shame, frankly. For them to call themselves unionists is quite beyond me.

As an Administration, we will continue to seek further foreign direct investment because our proposition has not changed. Our talent, our young people, the skills that we have, the fact that we have a low-cost base to do business out of and have attracted so much foreign direct investment over this past period stands us all in good stead. I look forward to working alongside my Executive colleagues to present a positive front for the future of Northern Ireland and what we can do for all our people.

Sean Lynch (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for her statement. Will she expand on the key concerns expressed by the various Administrations on the Brexit outcome?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Those are concerns that we share as well. Just because I campaigned for Brexit does not mean that there will not be short-term issues that need to be dealt with. However, in the medium to long term, I believe that it will be right for the United Kingdom to be outside the European Union. That does not mean to say that we do not have to deal with short-term challenges. Of course, we set out those short-term challenges in our letter to our Prime Minister on 10 August, and those challenges are shared across the Administrations. Of course, we will have the additional challenge of having a border with the European Union once we leave Europe, and we intend to make sure that that does not present an impediment to trade and to people wanting to visit Northern Ireland in the future. I look forward to continuing our discussions with colleagues in Westminster. Of course, it is for the United Kingdom Government to negotiate the terms of our exit from the European Union, but as the deputy First Minister said in relation to the previous statement, we intend to have a full and active voice at the table to get what is best for all the people of Northern Ireland.

Richie McPhillips (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the First Minister for her statement. Coming from the border constituency of Fermanagh and South Tyrone, I know that there are genuine concerns that there will be a hard border following the vote to leave the European Union, which will negatively impact trade, investment and travel arrangements. In light of that, David Davis, the Minister responsible for negotiating the exit from the EU, has said that they do not have a solution for the border. How confident is the First Minister that there will not be a hard border, considering the ambiguity that currently exists in Westminster?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I remind the Member that there was never a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. Those of us who were the subject of a terrorist campaign wished for a hard border at times, however, that did not occur. If he is talking about the military presence in the border area, that was completely different from what may be needed in the future for customs. The reason it was there was to deal with a terrorist threat at that particular time, and there will be no return to that because of what we have achieved here in this place to present a positive and peaceful Northern Ireland.

We can negotiate with our colleagues in the European Union about what is best for both sides of the border. As I said, we will continue to work with our colleagues not only in the United Kingdom Government but in the Republic of Ireland Government so that we can work out what is best for each side of the border. That, to me, is the best way to move forward in negotiations. Of course, negotiations will take some time; they may well be protracted, but we should not be lacking in ambition for what we want to see for Northern Ireland moving forward. People who continually look for challenges and problems, instead of looking for opportunities and ambition, really do depress me at times. It is about time people had ambition for the place they represent, instead of talking it down.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

Thank you, First Minister. Given that one of the ambitions of many through the Good Friday Agreement was to secure additional citizenship rights for people in Northern Ireland, and given our unique citizenship position in Northern Ireland, what efforts will you make, along with the deputy First Minister, to protect those rights as negotiations continue towards Brexit?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Member for his question. As he well knows, the Belfast Agreement of 10 April 1998 is an international agreement that was signed by two sovereign Governments: the United Kingdom Government; and the Republic of Ireland Government. Therefore, the contents of the Belfast Agreement, though some of us would like to change some elements in it, still remain in place.

Phillip Logan (DUP, North Antrim)

What was the First Minister's reaction to suggestions by some that the joint Executive letter to the Prime Minister was, in some way, a softening of this party's position on the exit from the EU?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I have heard many things since the European Union referendum but that was probably the most bizarre. It ranked up there with the time that I was with the deputy First Minister at the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister before the election and was accused of being a "Remainer", which was bizarre in the extreme, however, these things come to us all.

Look, there will be short-term challenges ahead. I am not going to shy away from those, but I fundamentally believe that the medium- and longer-term interests of this part of the United Kingdom and all of the United Kingdom are best served outside of the European Union. To those who do not think that it is going to happen and who say, "'What does 'Brexit means Brexit' mean?", I say that it means that we are leaving the European Union institutions. It does not mean that we are leaving Europe. It gives us a huge opportunity to move forward as a country.

William Irwin (DUP, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the First Minister for her statement. Following the referendum result, what message will she be offering to potential overseas investors in Northern Ireland?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I will be saying to potential first-time investors in Northern Ireland that we have a very good proposition for them here. The deputy First Minister and I have been pleased to make some announcements since the Assembly election and the European Union referendum took place about people coming to and investing in Northern Ireland. There is much more that we can do around all of that. Indeed, he and I intend to go to China towards the end of this year to talk about trade but also to look for investment opportunities from China into Northern Ireland. We will continue to support the work of our Economy Minister. I am very passionate about wanting to create more and better jobs. It was part of the five-point plan that I stood on in the Assembly elections and is something that I will continue to push vociferously.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I congratulate the First Minister very much for the use of the word "ambition". It is vital that we have ambition for Northern Ireland going forward. I would ask her to read our fantastic document, 'A Vision for Northern Ireland outside the EU' —

[Laughter.]

— which very clearly looks towards ambition, as we see ourselves becoming a gateway to Europe. She needs to look very carefully at some of the key ideas in it.

When you were having discussions with the First Minister of Scotland in particular, did you consider the idea of setting up a Northern Ireland council, similar to the Scottish Standing Council on Europe that has been set up to promote the interests of Scotland, as we move to deal with issues to do with the EU? Would that not be a good opportunity for Northern Ireland to make its case very strongly?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I intend to continue the work that we have already started regarding the EU. The deputy First Minister and I asked Invest Northern Ireland to set up a stakeholder group, which has already met on a number of occasions, to speak directly to business about where concerns and opportunities lie when it comes to our exit from the European Union. That is something that we did very quickly.

I will not say that I have had the benefit of reading it, but I have read the document that was published to much fanfare yesterday. I am not sure whether it is the official Ulster Unionist document, the official Opposition document or the continuity Ulster Unionist document. I do have the document, however, which is entirely uncosted — no surprise there. It is also a document that brings forward propositions that are some six to 10 years old. A Northern Ireland-wide enterprise zone was first mooted by his party when it stood under the umbrella of UCUNF back in 2010. However, at that particular —

[Interruption.]

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

Order.

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

It is very difficult to take some of this back, is it not? It is very difficult to take back the fact that, since 2010, there has not been one suggestion as to how we would progress with that enterprise zone for the whole of Northern Ireland, even though it was first talked about then.

We also have a tripling of investment for infrastructure, despite the fact that the deputy First Minister and I were roundly criticised for borrowing money. We were asked where that money was coming from and whether we were borrowing it. There seems to be very little detail on that issue.

There is, of course, the talk of an awakening of constitutional arguments around Irish and Scottish nationalism. I think that we can say that that was dealt with last week. I still find it bizarre that a unionist party would seek to talk about those issues.

Then, bizarrely, it talks about some "pre-Brexit legacy project" for:

"people born in the north east of this island."

What is that about? Does it exclude me? I live in the south-west of Northern Ireland; this talks about the north-east of the island. In any event, I am sure that other Members will want to look in great detail at the Ulster Unionist document.

The thing about the Ulster Unionist Party is that it opted out. It opted out of the Executive, and it opted out of helping to make decisions for the people of Northern Ireland. Therefore, it is left to the Executive and to the deputy First Minister and me to present the best way possible for the people of Northern Ireland, and we will do that.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the First Minister for the statement this morning. Will she tell us how she considers the Northern Ireland economy to be performing in the aftermath of the referendum?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Despite all the predictions, I think that the economy has been presenting itself well. Of course, we are assisted in that, particularly those who want to export, with the lowering of the pound, which was getting to an overvalued stage. As I say, we will continue to look at the talent of our young people as our best natural resource, and we will talk about the fact that this is a good place to do business in terms of costs for businesses. Then, of course, we look forward to the proposition of lowering our rate of corporation tax in April 2018, when we will have the talent, the cost and the tax offering. We have a very strong proposition, and we will continue to sell it.

Claire Hanna (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

I thank the Minister for her answers so far. The summit notes refer to the status of EU citizens, which was raised in the letter that your colleague mentioned. How does the First Minister envisage the movement of labour if we are outside the European Union and the status of EU citizens who are not from this island?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Of course, that will be a matter for negotiation between the Prime Minister and the European Union. All four freedoms will have to be looked at, including the movement of people. The Prime Minister has been very clear that she has listened to the vote and to the message that it gave about the free movement of people. Therefore, I expect that she will have something to say about that.

In negotiations, one does not show one's hand because one ends up in the position where everyone knows that that is the bottom line. I presume that this is something that we will have very close negotiations on, particularly at our joint meetings with the United Kingdom Government. We look forward to those discussions because we here in Northern Ireland value the contribution made by those who have come to Northern Ireland to work. I know that that is true for many companies across Northern Ireland. We will continue to value their contribution as we enter this period of negotiation between our own Government and the members of the European Union.

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

I acknowledge that the First Minister recognises that there are short-term challenges arising from the Brexit decision. She may want to review the Hansard record from yesterday and the comments of her Economy Minister, who appeared to bury his head in the sand about the short-term challenges.

The First Minister said in an earlier reply that the Northern Ireland Executive wanted a "full and active voice" for all of Northern Ireland in the Brexit negotiations. Of course, the deputy First Minister said in reply to an earlier question that you have not heard from London yet about what the role of the Northern Ireland Government might be in those negotiations. Can you advise the Chamber of, or lodge in the Library, what proposals you have put to London so that the Northern Ireland Executive are not marginalised in the London negotiations with Europe on Brexit?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Let me say to the Member that I was here for the deputy First Minister's answers, and that is not what he said about our negotiations with London. The Prime Minister visited here in the last week of July, and we were very clear with her that not only would we have a voice in what happens in the European Union exit but that it would be a direct voice at the table so that no unintended consequences could occur for the people of Northern Ireland in the leaving of the European Union.

We will have a direct voice at the table. Whether that is through a mechanism called the Joint Ministerial Committee or some other mechanism, we, jointly, are very clear that it will be a direct voice because we feel strongly that, to represent the people of Northern Ireland at the table, we must be there and we must be heard.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Does the First Minister accept that, to have a positive impact on the national negotiations on Brexit — I stress that they are national negotiations — it is a prerequisite that the Executive are all pulling in the one direction on the issue and that this voice at the table cannot serve Northern Ireland if one part of it is saying out of one side of the mouth, "We agree with Brexit", and the other part is saying, "We do not accept Brexit", such as we had yesterday from the Finance Minister and in the equivocation of the deputy First Minister this morning? Will the effort to get a positive outcome for Northern Ireland not be impeded unless the Executive are all pulling in the same direction and accepting the reality that we are leaving the EU?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

The reality is absolutely that we are leaving the EU. Already this morning, we have heard the suggestion, not from the party opposite but from other parties, that article 50 will not be triggered. That is certainly not my sense when I speak to David Davis and Liam Fox. I know that my colleague had a meeting with Greg Clark when he came to Northern Ireland. It is certainly not my sense of where the Prime Minister is in relation to these matters. We are leaving the European Union. It is, therefore, imperative that we represent the best interests of all the people of Northern Ireland — I believe that we will — in getting what is right for them. That is our primary focus. It was my focus the day after the referendum, it is still my focus, and it will continue to be so.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. Will the Speaker take a view on the First Minister's answers? When I asked a question, she declined to answer on the basis that that matter had not been discussed at the summit in Cardiff, yet later she gave her critique of a document that could not possibly have been discussed in Cardiff because it was published only yesterday. That is not the consistency that we expect of our First Minister.

[Interruption.]

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

Order. I will consider the point of order and refer it to the Speaker. I also remind Members that Ministers give the answers that Ministers give. That is very often the case.

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

I wish to make a statement regarding a bilateral meeting under the auspices of the intergovernmental agreement (IGA) on cooperation on criminal justice matters held in Dublin on Monday 4 July 2016.

[Interruption.]

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

Order, please. I ask Members to leave quietly. The Minister is on her feet.

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

This was the first occasion on which I represented the Executive at these meetings with Frances Fitzgerald, the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality. The bilateral meeting provided an opportunity for Minister Fitzgerald and me to make acquaintance and to foster new and closer working relationships between our two jurisdictions. The intergovernmental agreement provides a helpful framework for supporting North/South cooperation on criminal justice matters. I am committed to developing our cross-border relationships for the good of the people of Northern Ireland. It is my intention to keep the Assembly informed of meetings held under the auspices of the agreement.

I expect that most Members are familiar with the mechanics of the intergovernmental agreement. Briefly, there is a requirement for our respective Justice Ministers to meet annually and agree a collaborative work programme. The intergovernmental agreement's work programme runs from summer to summer. Our meeting on 4 July provided an opportunity to review progress against the 2015-16 joint work programme. It was pleasing to note the positive progress that has been made in a number of areas and the good collaborative working that has been built up by the criminal justice agencies, North and South.

The backbone of the agreement is the work of the project advisory groups, of which there are five and which bring together practitioners from criminal justice agencies from both sides of the border who have experience of delivering operationally at the front line. The project advisory groups serve to facilitate and promote the exchange of ideas and best practice approaches to problem-solving to our mutual benefit. I will highlight just a few examples.

We have seen the benefits of such collaboration through the excellent work between the PSNI and an Garda Síochána to increase capacity among officers in dealing with diverse communities both North and South. Whilst we both acknowledge the progress that there has been, the Tánaiste and I believe that there is potential for more learning in that area. We have therefore asked this to be considered as part of the 2016-17 work programme.

The value of our cross-border relationship is also evidenced through the excellent cooperation between the two probation services. For example, the agreement of offender behaviour programmes for high-risk offenders recently saw the first group of offenders completing the programme in Dublin. It is now planned that both services will meet to review progress and assimilate learning. The Probation Board for Northern Ireland also took part in a conference earlier this year organised by the National Office for the Prevention of Domestic, Sexual and Gender-based Violence in Ireland to help inform the delivery of a national programme in the South. Later this year, Dublin will host the joint annual public protection seminar, which I shall attend, as will Frances Fitzgerald. This is the seventh such event since devolution and a testimony to the success of the collaboration between our probation services.

Meanwhile, good engagement between criminal justice agencies and with voluntary sector partners continues to improve the experience of victims at court through the vehicle of the victim project advisory group. Ongoing support between the co-chairs has also been particularly beneficial in the implementation of the EU victims directive. Support and guidance is being provided to our Irish counterparts on the use of intermediaries in court following the success of our scheme.

Relationships established between our respective forensic services facilitated visits to Northern Ireland to participate in the development of the forensic service strategy for Northern Ireland and the exchange of information on drug trends. Best practice interaction in relation to DNA is also ongoing, with good on-the-ground arrangements in place. The strong rapport between the two youth justice services continues, with regular exchange visits taking place. Good relations between our Youth Justice Agency and an Garda Síochána in the sharing of information and development of best practice also supports the management of young offenders who seek to exploit the border for their own criminal purposes. Each of the project advisory groups has continued to promote and support cooperation across the broad spectrum of criminal justice agencies on both sides of the border. Frances Fitzgerald and I are committed to ensuring that that continues.

In going forward, the Tánaiste and I have commissioned our officials to develop a work programme for the year ahead. Building on the progress made last year, we recognised further potential under the existing themes. We have asked the five project advisory groups to develop activities that will further promote engagement in those areas. Frances Fitzgerald and I will consider the revised draft work programme when we meet later this month. It is my intention to provide a further progress report to the Assembly after that meeting and when we will publish the 2016-17 work programme.

I also want to take the opportunity to update Members on the joint agency task force. I welcome the progress made towards tackling serious and organised crime by the cross jurisdictional joint agency task force in the last six months. The task force, which was established under the Fresh Start Agreement, has carried out a series of operations tackling areas such as rural crime, child sexual exploitation and human trafficking for labour exploitation. An Garda Síochána and the Police Service of Northern Ireland, together with other statutory agencies, have worked collectively in a partnership approach on both sides of the border. The results have included a number of arrests, the seizure of illicit goods and the return of stolen items to their owners. The task force will continue to report regularly to the IGA on its ongoing work as required under the Fresh Start Agreement.

Given that when we met on 4 July we were in the initial wake of the UK referendum to leave Europe, Frances Fitzgerald and I also had a short discussion on Brexit. We shared the view that the need to maintain close working relationships in the justice field is more important now than ever. We have commissioned a programme of work that will allow us to better understand the implications in the criminal justice sector of the decision in the recent referendum. Since devolution, the criminal justice agencies on both sides of the border have worked hard to develop a culture of cooperation and mutual support. I want that relationship to continue. Brexit will undoubtedly challenge the unique arrangements that we have on this island. However, I trust that the good relationships that have been established will position us to continue to work together to achieve the best possible outcomes from any future negotiations. That is crucial to protecting the safety and security of all the people on this island.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her statement, in which she referred to fostering new and closer working relationships and developing a culture of cooperation and mutual respect. She referred to five advisory groups. In her efforts to address crime and corruption, did the discussions include cross-border financial crime and corruption, which is becoming an increasingly important area, particularly in light of the recent allegations that were made in the BBC 'Spotlight' programme regarding the National Asset Management Agency (NAMA)?

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for his question. At the meeting of the intergovernmental agreement group, the Tánaiste and I discussed a number of issues including those that affect the border. Most prominently, hate crime, rural crime, domestic and sexual violence and abuse, victims, fuel fraud and human trafficking were discussed. I note the Member's comments. If it is something that I need to raise at my next meeting with the Tánaiste, I am quite happy to do so.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her statement to the House. She has indicated a very welcome cooperation between the probation boards in the two countries. What new ideas and learning on the prevention of domestic, sexual and gender-based violence did Probation Board NI take away from the conference? What initiatives are in place to improve information sharing and prevent sex offenders and domestic violence offenders from using the border to prevent detection and carry on their abuse? Does the Minister realise that there is a significant problem in that area?

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

I thank the Chair for his questions. He will be familiar with the fact that tackling domestic and sexual abuse will be my overarching priority for the next five years, so I welcomed the opportunity to discuss that with Tánaiste Fitzgerald when we met in July.

I want to highlight the importance of cross-border working in learning from shared experiences. It is about how we can do that. I think that our colleagues in the Republic of Ireland can take away the experiences that we have had in Northern Ireland, particularly the pilot of the domestic violence court in the city of Derry.

The problem-solving approach to justice will be another thread that runs through my next five years in office. It is about taking a common-sense approach to how we tackle issues in the criminal justice system to satisfy the needs of those who find themselves in the system and look at better and more efficient ways of working so that we can speed up justice.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

The joint agency task force has been established. Is the Minister satisfied that it has the necessary resources to operate effectively and that there will be no negative impact from the recent Brexit referendum?

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

Yes, at this stage, I am quite content that we can work collaboratively on sharing information and best practice. Indeed, that work was ongoing long before my tenure in the office. The work addresses issues such as rural crime, child exploitation, financial crime, illicit drugs, excise fraud and human trafficking. Regardless of the outcomes of Brexit, those issues would still come up in Northern Ireland and, indeed, in the Republic of Ireland concurrently. As we share that special relationship with our colleagues in the South, it will be good to ensure that this work is continued and perhaps even strengthened, even in the wake of Brexit.

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

I welcome the fact that the meeting addressed the joint agency task force to tackle organised crime and criminality. Inevitably and properly, that will deal with paramilitarism. As the Minister will be aware, in Dublin today the British and Irish Governments are entering into a treaty to deal with paramilitarism. A four-person commission will also be established, two of whom will be nominated by the Executive. Will you advise when the Executive will nominate its two members of that commission? Are you being consulted about who those people should be?

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

I do not have that information at this stage. The Member rightly points to the joint agency task force and the collaborative working on tackling paramilitary activity. That is really important and I appreciate the comments. Indeed, that leads us to the work that we are doing in relation to the Fresh Start Agreement and how we can do that. Again, we are mindful that we have to look at all the various agencies when consulting on that, as well as the community and voluntary sector. Undoubtedly, that will include people in the border areas.

Trevor Lunn (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

The Minister's statement points to a high level of cooperation between North and South, which is very welcome. I only hope that it does not come to a juddering halt in about two years' time.

Specifically, I understand that drug courts operate in Dublin, which enable offenders to access programmes that are led by the probation service there — the statement refers to those — to tackle their addictions and turn away from crime. In the context of our proposed problem-solving courts, is there any intention to try to learn from their model?

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

By all means. My Department has continued to take a problem-solving approach from the previous mandate. I am keen to explore it, as it seems that problem-solving courts have been quite successful across other parts of the world, for example in North America and Scotland. We can learn from that. It is a common-sense approach to tackling these things, and it will have wider positive implications for the rest of the criminal justice system. I take the point.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her statement. I welcome the update on the work of the cross-jurisdictional joint agencies task force to tackle serious and organised crime. Can the Minister provide further details regarding the number of arrests made in Northern Ireland, the volume and type of illicit goods seized and when she expects prosecutions to take place?

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for her questions. I do not have that information to hand, but I am happy to write to her. Cross-border working has been very successful, and I am aware that a number of arrests will be taking place. It is really a case of coordinating that. I am quite happy to provide the Member with those details.

Michaela Boyle (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for her statement. In a letter to the Committee for Justice, the Chief Constable raised a number of issues relating to high-priority policing and criminal justice matters. Europol obviously no longer provides information on criminal activity across Europe. Given that one of those high-priority issues is child sexual exploitation and abuse, can the Minister give assurances that she and her counterparts will keep those high-priority issues, which also include cybercrime and international organised crime, high on the agenda? I welcome the fact that the Minister will work with her counterparts on a commissioned work programme. When are we likely to have an update on that?

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for her questions. Of course, child sexual exploitation and cybercrime are high on our priorities for cross-border working. Indeed, we have seen an increase in crime of this nature. Crimes within the cyber arena are becoming more prevalent. They are almost hidden, because it is difficult to catch someone working from behind a keyboard. At our most recent joint agency task force group, I raised the issue of cybercrime, because it is moving more quickly than we are. We need to get on top of it. Every Member will be familiar with the opportunities that these criminals take through the Internet. There is a serious amount of work. It seems to be almost a channel for other types of crime, as well as those direct crimes that actually happen online.

As the Member rightly said, we need to focus on child sexual exploitation, and I confirm that I am keen to do that.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I welcome the Minister's statement. I imagine that, during cross-border discussions, cross-border financial crime, particularly white-collar crime, would be of considerable concern, particularly to the Irish Government, especially as we look forward to the publication of the NAMA report that we expect presently from the Irish Government. Will the Minister please state that she does not feel in any way constrained by the First Minister, deputy First Minister or Finance Minister and can set her own agenda, particularly on issues of financial crime and NAMA?

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

I can absolutely confirm that I do not feel constrained in issues surrounding NAMA. I have a body of work which I am quite keen to get on with. NAMA was not covered in discussions at my recent meeting with Frances Fitzgerald, but, as the Member's party colleague suggested, it is something that we can look at. There are a lot of impending issues that I feel I need to prioritise. Certainly, the impact of Brexit will be a big consideration in cross-border working. There is an opportunity, as part of our continued working relationship with colleagues in the South, to strengthen our approach to the challenges of Brexit.

We will need to focus on rural crime. Members who represent such areas will be familiar with rural crime, which is almost heightened because of their proximity to the border and how that affects things.

My first meeting with Frances Fitzgerald was an opportunity to strengthen that relationship and understand the day-to-day problems that we are facing on the entire island, whether in Northern Ireland or in Ireland. That relationship is important so that we can all put our best foot forward.

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her statement. Whilst she was not able to answer Mr Attwood's question about the composition of the Independent Reporting Commission, I trust that, when she next reports on an IGA meeting, she will be able to tell us about the discussions that she and Frances Fitzgerald have had about the operation of that.

Two years ago, some of us remember the very great problem that this society nearly ended up with because of the opt-out engineered by Theresa May and Chris Grayling from European justice and home affairs measures, particularly the danger of very nearly losing the European arrest warrant. What discussions has the Minister had with Frances Fitzgerald on ensuring that we maintain a measure that is at least similar to the European arrest warrant if the UK were to leave the European Union?

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for his questions. When I get five years into this job, I may be better equipped to answer some of the questions that he suggested that he was able to answer as Minister.

We are quite confident that we will be able to maintain the European arrest warrant. These arrangements, as the Member will know, were put in place not necessarily with any consideration of leaving the EU but for the sake of pragmatic working across the jurisdictions. That will not be a threat. When we discussed the European arrest warrant at our most recent meeting, we were confident that we could secure it moving forward.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

In answer to Mr Aiken, the Minister said that she did not feel constrained by political influences inhibiting the investigation of financial crime and corruption. As Justice Minister in this jurisdiction, what steps has she taken since last Tuesday night's BBC 'Spotlight' exposé of precisely such corruption and financial crime? What steps has she taken to ensure that such matters are not swept under the carpet and that those culpable, whoever they might be, are brought to justice?

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

Order. I remind Members that all questions have to be relevant to the statement made. I will refer it to the Minister as to whether she chooses to reply.

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I am quite happy to say to the Member that, as Justice Minister, I consider all things. I may not make statements as frequently as the Member does for the sake of posturing, but I consider everything. It would be irresponsible of me not to do so.

Ross Hussey (UUP, West Tyrone)

I apologise to the Minister for not being here for the start of her statement, but I have read your statement and was paying attention as you spoke. You referred to paramilitarism and also to forensic services. Clearly, in the Republic of Ireland, quite a few explosive devices and arms caches have been found. Will you assure the House that any evidence gathered that is forensically linked to the previous use of weapons etc that may relate to crimes in Northern Ireland will be provided by the Southern authorities to the Northern authorities?

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for his question. We discussed the forensic arrangement around information sharing and best practice. Those specific issues were not discussed, but I will keep it in mind for potential further meetings.

Private Members' Business

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

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

Paul Girvan (DUP, South Antrim)

I beg to move

That this Assembly expresses its concern at the lack of competitiveness and availability of rail services between Belfast city centre and Belfast International Airport; and calls on the Minister for Infrastructure to investigate all options for remedial action including the re-introduction of the Lisburn to Antrim rail link.

I take this opportunity to bring the motion to the House on the basis that, since the closure of the Knockmore line in 2003, an area of Northern Ireland has been denied access to the rail network. In the past, it seemed to be the policy to close rail lines. The Bleach Green line was also one of the lines in question. It was reopened and is now one of the busiest routes. If you build it, they will come. I am taking the line that we have villages and towns along the route, such as Crumlin, Glenavy and Ballinderry, that have all grown dramatically. In fact, Crumlin has grown extensively since 1999 and would, in fact, be nearly double the size that it was at that time. As a consequence, it is an area that could and should have that rail link re-established. The Knockmore line has been in place and to date — not from 2003, but from 2010 until now — has cost £1·5 million to maintain in a state of potential readiness. It is also used as a training link.

Our main angle in the motion is to bring another form of transport and connectivity to the International Airport. Unfortunately, our International Airport has not necessarily had the same help and assistance that Dublin Airport has. Dublin has managed to get round what I deem to be an excuse that we have used in relation to state aid to actually encourage that and suck the life out of our International Airport. In fact, it has done nothing but attract routes for which potentially we should become a hub. I want to grow the traffic to the International Airport. I do not see the point when they say that they need 10 million passengers coming into the airport before they see the necessity of a rail network. I believe that we have to put the investment into the infrastructure and ensure that we have it there. I believe that if you have that, you will attract those routes to our area.

The other opportunity that we have is something that we have not made use of up to now. In fact, it has been mentioned in the Committee for Infrastructure. We have a rail network that is not being used for freight. I believe that we could establish the International Airport as a major freight hub, not just for Northern Ireland but for the whole United Kingdom, as a consequence of that. A very large area of zoned land around the airport has already been identified for potential growth of the airport. We should encourage that. To do so, the Executive need to make a decision not just to mothball the rail estate that we have but to actually make use of it and give another opportunity for additional links to Lisburn, Antrim and Belfast. That is on the back of what we have already encountered up to now, which has been to see nothing but the lack of a joined-up approach, both from Translink — I will use Translink as the overall head as it used to be — and the rail and bus networks not being totally joined together. That seemed to be a point —

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Paul Girvan (DUP, South Antrim)

I will indeed, yes.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

The Member talks about Translink. I am sure that he is aware that a bus leaves the International Airport every 15 minutes to take passengers to Belfast. Do we not see the benefit then of a rail link that gives passengers an option and removes some of the traffic congestion on our roads?

Paul Girvan (DUP, South Antrim)

I see that as a vital point. We do need to see that complementing, not taking away from. On the basis that we have an existing railway running very close to the airport, it is vital that we make use of the land that is already zoned and bring a rail halt to the airport itself.

As well as mentioning what goes on from a Translink point of view on the roads, I must say that Templepatrick is a village that is being blighted by traffic all day, every day. As a consequence, it is vital that we try to remove some of those bus runs coming through what is a sleepy village every 15 minutes. I use the term "sleepy village", but it has become a place on a major commuting route to our International Airport. As a consequence, we need to look at other ways of dealing with that traffic.

The only quick fix that I see currently is to encourage a rail link. Ultimately, we would like to have the opportunity to look at having some form of link to the M2. If that is a possibility, it is something that we should look at. However, we currently have infrastructure that we should be locking into for the airport itself.

Spending £1·5 million — what I call "putting a sticking plaster on" — is throwing money down the drain. We would be better investing money.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Does the Member agree that one of the significant issues that we have in South Antrim is an infrastructure problem, full stop? That has been caused by considerable underinvestment over the years. Part and parcel of looking at Belfast International Airport, which is our key international hub and one of our major economic areas, is being able to develop a broad-ranging infrastructure strategy, particularly for South Antrim.

Paul Girvan (DUP, South Antrim)

I have absolutely no problem with that, and that is one area that we should look at. Not just South Antrim but Northern Ireland as a region should be putting that forward. I know that the Minister will focus on that.

The line was closed in 2003, under the leadership of the Ulster Unionist Party and the SDLP. They were aware of what was going on in pulling out of what was a potential jewel in the crown of having a rail link to our airport. In fact, it is not that long ago since a question was asked in the House on what help could be given to Dublin to create a rail link to Dublin Airport. That is just sucking the life out of what is here. Those who represent border areas such as Newry and the Mournes may say that Dublin is closer, but why should we not look at the infrastructure that we have in Northern Ireland to ensure that passengers use it and make the best of it? That is what we should be doing: making sure that our network is there.

I know that the freight aspect is something that the airport would welcome, because there is an opportunity there. We have slots available. There are difficulties with flying into Belfast harbour airport at night — I still call it "Belfast harbour airport". I want to see Belfast International Airport being the main way forward. There is an opportunity for us to designate an enterprise zone in the airport area, not just to build up distribution networks but to drive business into the area.

South Antrim is an area that I have a great love for. I represent it and want to pull as much into it as possible. I want to see that the networks there are not being lost. We had a fantastic rail network in Northern Ireland back in the 1950s, but it has been disappearing ever since.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

I thank Mr Girvan for giving way. Does he also recognise that, in order to achieve his ambitions for additional rail services in that part of South Antrim, the Minister needs to give serious consideration to the dualling of the Dargan Bridge as it crosses the river at York Street? Unless that is included in the York Street interchange, none of the rail improvements referred to will ever be able to happen because of the engineering contingencies of the interchange.

Paul Girvan (DUP, South Antrim)

I do not know enough about the intricacies of the full rail network, but I ask those who have the expertise to look at this, because I see the Knockmore line as an opportunity to create a loop. Effectively, where we are talking about dualling railways along the route, given the opportunity, it can be dealt with.

I met the people of Glenavy and Crumlin, all of whom are requesting additional services.

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

I ask the Member to conclude his remarks.

Paul Girvan (DUP, South Antrim)

They believe that the railway stations in their villages should be opened again and used.

Jennifer Palmer (UUP, Lagan Valley)

I welcome the motion. I am pleased that the party that tabled it has finally decided that a rail link between Belfast city centre and Belfast International Airport is worth serious consideration.

The Ulster Unionist Party's document, 'A Vision for Northern Ireland outside the EU', which was launched only yesterday, identified 10 key asks, one of which was a trebling of the investment in infrastructure, including hard infrastructure such as airports, roads and railways. We have urged the Northern Ireland Executive to treble their investment in infrastructure. That will require making the case to HM Government that investing some of the funding currently being directed to Brussels should be used to increase Northern Ireland's competitiveness.

There is no doubt that, in an ideal world, we would have a rail link to the International Airport. In Great Britain, there are direct rail links to all London airports as well as to Birmingham and Manchester airports, Newcastle airport is connected to the city centre by the Tyneside metro and Edinburgh is connected by a hugely expensive and recently completed tram system. However, Glasgow, Liverpool, Leeds Bradford, East Midlands and Bristol airports do not have train links to their city centres and all rely on shuttle buses, as is the case for the International Airport.

With regard to the International Airport, it is obvious that improving transportation links to our largest airport would yield benefits to tourism and the local economy. Additionally, any modernisation and extension of the rail network in Northern Ireland has some intrinsic value as we seek to increase the use of public transport. In 2013, my colleague Danny Kennedy commissioned a consultation that estimated that the cost of reopening the Antrim/Knockmore line with a halt at the International Airport would cost in the region of £50·5 million. That cost would be substantial, and there would also be ongoing maintenance costs.

The key question from the motion is whether the benefit outweighs the cost to the taxpayer. If the new Minister should use his limited funds, bearing in mind the vast deficit being dealt with in the Department, to fund this, presumably that would be at the expense of other projects. It would be better to concentrate on the completion of the Belfast hub project, which has the potential to transform public transport in Northern Ireland and to improve and renew the Northern Ireland Railways fleet.

Evidence suggests that, until recently, the DUP did not feel that the project was a priority use of funding. Only five months ago, the former Minister for Regional Development, Michelle McIlveen, said:

"my understanding is that the usage of the airport would need to increase to around 10 million passengers to make that rail link viable". — [Official Report (Hansard), 1 February 2016, p33, col 1].

In April, the managing director of Belfast International, Mr Graham Keddie, stated that he believed that the airport would serve five million people this year, taking into account the additional passengers travelling for major events like the Euros and the Olympic Games. That number does, however, fall well short of the volume necessary to make a rail link financially viable.

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I appreciate the Member giving way. Has she taken into account the difference between a railway system to serve an airport and a railway to serve the population between Antrim and Lisburn as well as the airport? That makes a fundamental difference to the numbers involved.

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

The Member has an extra minute.

Jennifer Palmer (UUP, Lagan Valley)

I do not concur with my friend's opinion that another five million passengers could be found with that rail link.

With that context in mind, I wonder whether the motion is motivated more by the desire to be seen to be doing something than by genuine belief that this is the best use of departmental funds.

That is especially true in the context of Brexit, which the party that tabled the motion so vociferously supported. Translink's rail service has already availed itself of a great deal of European funding, hence the EU flag on almost every train run by the service. Given that we are set to lose out on £58 million of TEN-T funding, I must ask where those who tabled the motion intend to find the money for this project.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Member for giving way on that point. I take the Member back to the start of her contribution, when she talked about their 10-point plan, which, by her own admission, was launched only yesterday. In your contribution today, you said that infrastructure projects were on that list; indeed, you went on to say that the linkage between the International Airport and the City Airport was on that list. Maybe you can tell us in your contribution where you are getting the money for your 10-point plan.

Jennifer Palmer (UUP, Lagan Valley)

It is for you boys to have the negotiations in Europe.

Given that we are set to lose out on £58 million in TEN-T funding, I must ask where those who tabled the motion intend to find the money for this project.

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

I ask the Member to conclude her remarks.

Jennifer Palmer (UUP, Lagan Valley)

It is only fair — I did not hear you, Mr Deputy Speaker.

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

I ask the Member to conclude her remarks. The time has now expired.

Jennifer Palmer (UUP, Lagan Valley)

Is there not an extra minute, Mr Deputy Speaker?

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

I have already allowed the extra minute. Thank you.

Jennifer Palmer (UUP, Lagan Valley)

I will finish. It would be cynical of me, of course, to suggest that now that the DUP —

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

I advise the Member that time is up.

Jennifer Palmer (UUP, Lagan Valley)

— no longer bears primary responsibility for funding —

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

I ask the Member to resume her seat. Time is now up.

Fra McCann (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Like many here today, I will speak in support of the intent of the motion and its call for rail services to connect Belfast city centre with Belfast International Airport. The destruction of the rail networks many years ago was short-sighted and led to the isolation of many communities across the North, especially in rural towns that had a rich history of rail provision. In fact, I believe that we lost something when we moved from the train to the car. Whilst I understand that there are now a number of public transport options available to people to get from A to B, the fact remains that rail can be more efficient, is cleaner and sends out all the right signals to encourage people to get out of the car or bus and on to a greener, cleaner mode of travel.

Between 4 July and 13 July this year, Belfast International Airport expected over 200,000 people to pass through its doors, an increase of 30,000 over the same period last year. Most of them travelled by road to reach the airport. That figure is expected to increase over the next number of years. In fact, Belfast International Airport showed a 9% increase in 2015, with figures of 4·4 million, and that is also expected to increase. Also, there is a huge increase in the number of people using Belfast City Airport. That is a clear indication that more and more people are choosing to use local airports as their first choice of travel.

I understand that people argued a number of years ago that the rail route would not be financially viable, but what has not been considered is the impact of making the decision to create a rail connection between Belfast city centre and Belfast International Airport, which could lead to a serious rise in passenger usage at the airport. It would offer an alternative form of travel to the tens of thousands who use their car or a bus. It could revitalise the small communities in its wake and send a positive message that we are committed to rail as a positive mode of transport. It could offer competition in provision and could lead to a business hub in the shadow of the airport that creates thousands of new jobs.

I take into consideration what the previous Member to speak said: how do we find the money and the resources at present to drive that forward? That is a crucial element in the whole debate about how we create and bring in new rail networks to different parts of the North. The parties in here probably need to get their heads around and discuss the impact of taking the train rather than the car or the bus. I leave it in the hands of the Executive to work out the best way.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Member for giving way. It is right and proper to ask where the funding is coming from. If you look at the way we have worded the motion — you have picked up the essence of it, unlike the previous Member — you will see that we are asking the Minister and his Department to investigate options. Among those options is Ballymartin park-and-ride, which has not even been talked about. It is another facility where we are bringing people out of Belfast, removing some of the tensions in Belfast and, indeed, actually increasing investment because people on business can move, making their journeys easier. We are not suggesting that the Minister must do it, we are asking him to investigate ways in which it can be done.

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

The Member has an extra minute.

Fra McCann (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I do not disagree with what has been said. In many ways, everything we discuss here is a wish list for somewhere down the line. I believe that the current Minister for Infrastructure is a person who is not only willing to listen but will also look at how best to plan and put into operation things that could benefit our communities in the longer term down the road.

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in support of the motion, and I thank the proposers for bringing this important issue to the House.

The SDLP supports improved connectivity between all our airports and rail services. Access to airports through direct railways is a hallmark of most major European and international cities and is essential to expanding Northern Ireland as a business and tourist destination. Airport rail links are vital to any European city and any country that must compete for inward investment. Over the summer holidays, like many in the House, I have been abroad. I have been to London and Barcelona, and it amazes me how connected public transport is and how efficient the services are. It should be our ambition in Northern Ireland to seize the opportunity and reap the many benefits that airport and rail connectivity can bring.

As we consider the Programme for Government and the infrastructural needs, it is my view that a modern Northern Ireland must have modern rail infrastructure and we must ensure the continued development of a modern railway system throughout the North and across the island. Minister, the fact that, in 2016, we do not have a rail link to Belfast International Airport or any other airport is nothing short of scandalous. Any airport rail link to and from Belfast International Airport has the potential to stimulate economic growth not only in Belfast but throughout Northern Ireland. It also has the potential to assist with the growth of tourism through the provision of direct access for air passengers and would offer a long-term sustainable public transport alternative for accessing Belfast International Airport. It would reduce congestion and provide important environmental benefits, as articulated by other Members.

Over the past number of years, there have been several proposals put forward on establishing a direct line to Belfast International Airport including reopening the Knockmore line through the construction of a rail spur to provide a halt serving the airport. If operational, the Knockmore line would enable the airport to be accessed directly from stations across Northern Ireland through connecting with existing services from Lisburn to Belfast or Portadown and from Antrim to Belfast. It would also allow for far greater west to east train connectivity because the Knockmore line would link Belfast International Airport and Derry. There is also potential to link Derry with Dublin for a train journey that would last three and a half hours. We have considered the infrastructure deficits in the west including the failure to develop the A5 and the A6, and I have spoken clearly about them since I was elected. Expanding the limited rail infrastructure could go some way to alleviating the regional imbalance. My constituents and the people of the west have suffered for decades.

We must also consider the cost. It has been estimated that re-opening the Knockmore line may cost in the region of £100 million. I ask the Minister how much it has cost to maintain the line in the 13 years since it was closed. We know that, since 2012, it has cost £1·5 million, despite being used only in an emergency. I ask the Minister, rather than pay for a railway line that serves little purpose, to invest in and pay for a railway line that serves the North and its people. The Minister has also said that in order for the service to become economically sustainable there needs to be 10 million passengers per year, which is 5·5 million short. From the population projections, the airport will reach 10 million by 2035. I ask the Minister if it would be better to invest now rather than pushing the issue down the track for another day?

Although today's debate focuses solely on Belfast International Airport, we must also consider rail connectivity to the other regional airports: Belfast City, and the City of Derry. At the former, the Sydenham halt is about half a mile down the road from the airport, and you often see passengers with suitcases walking along the road in very dangerous circumstances. That is not acceptable, and it is my view that the halt could be moved adjacent to Belfast City Airport, with an over-road accommodation bridge for foot passengers. I would welcome the Minister's views on this and whether a feasibility study has been conducted.

To conclude, I support today's motion. The rail infrastructure in the North is not fit for purpose, and if we genuinely want to compete internationally for investment and boost local tourism, airport rail connectivity plays a central role and it is up to the Minister to lead on this. Minister, I believe that you could lead fully on this and set the bar very high.

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

On behalf of the Alliance Party, I support this motion, which highlights this key question for the Minister: how attractive is he making Northern Ireland for business travellers and tourism? If we are to attract inward investment and grow our tourism market, we need better connectivity and investment in public transport solutions. By making it easier for people to get about, we make Northern Ireland easier to visit and therefore easier to do business with.

I welcome the call for the Minister to investigate options that would enable the reopening of the Lisburn to Antrim line and provide accessibility to Belfast International Airport, for the following reasons. First, local people want this line reopened. The local community in Crumlin, Glenavy, Ballinderry and the surrounding areas support the reopening of the Lisburn to Antrim line. The local community has petitioned my colleague David Ford, who has consistently brought the issue to successive Ministers, only to be told that it will be considered in the future as part of a long-term plan — on the long finger. The line was closed in 2003; that is 13 years ago. That is a very long finger.

The local community is very frustrated by the lack of progress on this issue. During recent Antrim and Newtownabbey Borough Council community planning consultation sessions, the community reiterated its wish for the line to be reopened and for the council to initiate a project under the connecting our communities theme, potentially in partnership with the Department. This opportunity will not progress if the Minister and the Department continue to consider the issue on the long finger. The Minister should look to his regional development strategy, where an increasing modal shift from car to public transport figures strongly. In this instance, we have a community who would use the public transport system but are unable to do so because the line is closed to the public. The line is maintained and operational for training and emergency rail use, at considerable cost, as has already been mentioned, but it is not available for use by passengers. Really? We spend £1·5 million and it is not available to passengers? Secondly, the Minister and his Department have predetermined the cost-benefit of reopening the line as being too expensive, based on a Translink estimate of £100 million and not on actual cost. In July this year, in response to a written question from David Ford, the Minister confirmed that the reopening of the Antrim to Bleach Green line cost £18·2 million. While I accept that the Lisburn to Antrim line may be more expensive, it does raise the question of whether the £100 million is a fact-based figure, or a guesstimate.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

I will.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

It might be of interest to note, particularly on the Mossley line, that when the original projections on cost were made, there was not expected to be any growth in traffic. At the time, there was a lot of criticism of the investment in it. I understand that the Minister has some choices to make, but one of the most interesting things is the idea that if you build it, they will come. There is no doubt that there is a large amount of interest in improving rail links through this area, and I encourage the Minister in particular to get the Department to look critically at future growth projections rather than present growth, particularly across the great constituency of South Antrim. Thank you very much indeed.

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

The Member has an extra minute.

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

Thank you. It is, therefore, appropriate that the Minister considers reopening the line using fact-based figures —

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

On that point, will the Member give way?

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

Can I continue, or I will run out of time? Thank you. An investigation will give Translink the opportunity to provide a detailed business case showing the actual cost to maintain and modernise the line, with a view to reopening it for passenger use. It is not appropriate for the Minister or his Department to continue to ignore the opportunity on the basis of an estimate.

Thirdly —

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

Will the Member give way very briefly?

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

Yes, certainly — briefly.

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

Since my colleague was not a Member of the House at the time, I am sure that she is unaware that a few years ago — before the property crash — a private business was interested in investing in the line, given the development opportunities on it, which could well have provided a cost-effective service. It would undoubtedly have been significantly cheaper than the £100 million guesstimate that is being prepared, particularly in light of what Mr Aiken highlighted about the potential for growth.

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

Thank you.

I was talking about figures, and the third reason that is repeatedly given is that passenger numbers through Belfast International Airport need to be around 10 million. I am unclear as to what that figure is based on. Is it the Translink calculation whereby the number of passenger trips is counted, or is it the throughflow in the airport? If we are to understand whether the project is to be economically viable, we need figures quoted as targets to be clarified.

If we assume that the 10 million is the number of passengers, the airport's ability to grow to reach the proposed figure is being stymied by the lack of joined-up or integrated transport solutions for onward travel for business and other passengers. This lack of joined-up regional transport planning and provision has been highlighted by airlines over a number of years, but, amazingly, no survey of the business or tourism community appears to have been completed to establish whether better connectivity to Aldergrove would benefit or improve business.

The regional development strategy highlighted the need to promote regional gateways as economic development opportunities, to exploit the economic development of the key transport corridors, to undertake or, where appropriate, facilitate a programme of infrastructure improvement essential to business needs and to promote a sustainable approach to the provision of tourism. If the Minister is to deliver the regional development strategy to 2025, he must take action to consider the viability of opening the line and enabling better connectivity. As was mentioned, it needs to take into consideration the Yorkgate interchange and creating that better connectivity to Belfast International Airport.

While I appreciate the loss of potential income streams following Brexit, I reiterate that we need to make Northern Ireland attractive to business and tourist travellers by making it easy to travel once they arrive here.

Finally, if Northern Ireland is to reduce carbon emissions and congestion, the Minister and the Department for Infrastructure must create the ability for modal shift and prioritise investment in public transport.

When I was in business, I travelled to England often, and it was easy to go to a meeting in a place where there was onward travel availability. My counterparts do not come to Northern Ireland because it is too difficult to travel across the country here.

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

I ask the Member to conclude her remarks.

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

Road building has been prioritised over public transport. If we want to entice businesses and tourists and meet the needs of our local communities —

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

The Member's time is up.

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

— there needs to be a shift in departmental investment.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. It is good to see you in the Chair.

Mr Ford and I go back a very long way on this issue. I remember standing in Crumlin with Oliver Frawley fighting the campaign to keep the Knockmore to Antrim railway line open. As I look at mothballed railway lines, particularly at one that runs through my constituency between Lisburn and Banbridge, I think of the time that would be taken off the Belfast to Dublin rail route if that line had been kept open, so avoiding Lurgan and the problems that arise every so often when some brave Irish heroes think that they will achieve a united Ireland by blocking the railway line between Belfast and Dublin. I can only look with regret at the mothballing of that railway line, which is probably beyond bringing back. However, when I look at the Knockmore to Sprucefield railway line, it is not beyond bringing back. There is every opportunity to restore that railway line with imagination, conviction and good business sense. That is why we tabled the motion. We do not believe that it will be delivered very quickly, but, nonetheless, we believe that it can be achieved, and we need to focus on it and target it.

Mrs Armstrong's last comment about England being so much easier to travel around than Northern Ireland is patent nonsense. Most people who come from England remark on how much easier it is to travel around Northern Ireland than it is to travel around England, where the rail networks are heavily congested.

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

Will the Member give way?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Yes, I will give way. The rail networks are heavily congested and heavily overpriced.

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

In England, you can get on a train, travel anywhere with no difficulty, there are the necessary halts and there is accessibility. We are completely and utterly disconnected, and that needs to be appreciated in this debate.

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

The Member has an extra minute.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Thank you for that, Mr Deputy Speaker. Travelling around England is a nightmare —

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Allow me to respond to the point, Mr Aiken. Travelling around England is a nightmare compared with Northern Ireland. Our public transport network is not as good as it should be, and considerable work has to be done on that, but Northern Ireland is a very accessible place, and it takes little over an hour to get from one side of it to the other.

I look forward to hearing from Mr Aiken, because the last time I heard from him he seemed to contradict his colleague who spoke earlier. I am completely confused about what the Ulster Unionist position is. Are they supporting the motion? Are they against the motion? Do they want to see the railway re-established? Does Mr Aiken want this service running through his constituency? It appeared that Mrs Palmer did not, so perhaps he can clarify that.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I will let Mr Aiken go ahead.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I was asking the Member to give way to support the Member's statement about English railways. As somebody who has been stuck in what the Great Western Railway laughably called the rapid transit route across the central section of England, I can fully appreciate those issues. It is unusual for someone to support your comment, but that is indeed true. We will address those other issues as we go further in the discussion. Thank you.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Thank you very much for that very useful contribution, Mr Aiken.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Member for giving way, and I appreciate the work that the Member has put into the campaign over the last number of years around his constituency. How does it make you feel when you see a large party in this place — the Ulster Unionist Party — completely divided on this issue? It is very much like how they were divided in Europe, with some of their members campaigning to leave and others campaigning to stay. How does that make you feel?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

It does not really matter that much to me.

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

We are going off the rails.

[Laughter.]

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

That is a fair comment, Mr Deputy Speaker, and we will try and get back on track.

Mr Hazzard has a very substantial job in terms of infrastructure in Northern Ireland. Considerable bounds have been made over the last 10 to 15 years. We look at the road network, at the train sets that have been bought and the quality of those train sets and at lines such as the Bangor to Portadown line, which is so well used. We want to extend and encourage that. We see in the new line to Londonderry that the numbers using it are 225% greater than anticipated. Let us reinvigorate our railways; let us see how we can invest in our railway systems to ensure that we do better. Connecting people in Lisburn and Antrim, who may well be in one constituency in due course, would be a great thing. We can do that together. The 10 million that is required for the airport is augmented by the numbers who are using it. You do not have 10 million passengers using the railway line; you need 10 million passengers going through the airport to get the appropriate number using the railway line.

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

I ask the Member to conclude his remarks.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Cuirim fáilte roimh an díospóireacht; tá sí iontach suntasach ar fad. Tá sé fíor-riachtanach go ndíríonn an Tionól a aird ar an cheist shuntasach seo. I speak in support of the motion. The reality is a lack of competitiveness and availability of rail services between Belfast and the International Airport. In my constituency of South Antrim there is indeed — it has been touched on by other Members — a long-held local desire for the Lisburn to Antrim rail line to be restored, and I support that wish.

There has been a dramatic increase in population growth in the wider Crumlin, Glenavy and Ballinderry area over the last 30 years. There has been a quite phenomenal explosion in population. Once small rural villages are now growing towns with large numbers commuting daily, particularly for work and education, into Belfast. This is a catchment that is badly served by public transport generally. Bus services in that part of the lough shore area are completely inadequate. The transport infrastructure in these parts of South Antrim does not correspond to the needs of local people. I welcome the fact that I and constituents will meet the Minister — in October, I hope — to deal with some of the issues that are now unfolding as a result of these serious difficulties in the local transport infrastructure.

The reality is that the design of local transport infrastructure fails to meet the needs of local business, and, in turn, that fails to assist in optimising economic growth or attracting new investment opportunities both locally and from abroad. Not surprisingly, in parallel with the growth in population, there has been a spike in car use, with inevitable environmental consequences in terms of the carbon footprint and so on.

The Antrim to Knockmore section of the Lisburn railway line runs directly past Belfast International Airport, yet, as others Members have correctly observed, there is no connection. The role of the airport complex as an economic driver for growth and investment in our regional economy cannot be ignored in the context of this debate. In the last two years, there has been a significant upswing in passenger footfall and air routes available through Aldergrove airport. The airport has also benefited from important commercial investment. It has the potential to become an enterprise zone in the future, and it should be recognised and nurtured as a strategic economic hub within the regional economy. However, that growth trajectory, that potential, is in fact fettered and limited by the absence of an overall integrated transport infrastructure.

I understand the business case that argues that passenger numbers in the airport do not meet the criteria for a direct rail connection from Belfast, but, equally, I do not accept that we should wait — I believe that we should not — until all the conditions are met before acting.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Member for giving way on that point about the passenger numbers. That is the point that we wanted to draw out in the intervention on Kellie Armstrong. I have a difficulty with the Department's projections. In the case of the projection for the Coleraine to Londonderry line, when it was built, it was 225% more than was estimated. They cannot accurately estimate how many people will use a line. As you rightly said, the figures show that the population in those areas is growing. We suggest that, by default, the number of passengers will grow.

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

I thank the Member for that contribution. I will revisit that point in due course.

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

The Member has an extra minute.

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

We cannot approach the issue in zero-sum terms. If the proper standard of transport infrastructure, including rail provision, is put in place, economic growth, new investment and population expansion will inevitably follow. All the options, including investment in light rail rapid transport, should be considered fully. We need to come at this in terms of what we can do and what we ought to do, as opposed to what we cannot do, simply on the basis of what we are told.

I understand that the Minister must contend with unremitting pressure on his departmental budget. There will be the impacts of worsening austerity, due to British Tory policy, and the unforeseen economic and investment damage that will be caused as a result of the Brexit decision. In the face of that type of adversity, there is an even greater need for blue-sky thinking. I refer that point directly to my colleague's earlier intervention. We need to coordinate the transport policy with foreign direct investment, industrial policy in the Six Counties, job creation and environmental priorities. We should be innovative and ambitious, even with the limited resources available. In that sense, we need to think about investing to accumulate, arising from our neglected transport infrastructure.

All our Departments and officials need to think about strategic challenges differently. Thinking the same way and doing things the same way will only guarantee more of the same results. Investing in rail services between Belfast and the regional airport and in the Lisburn to Antrim rail link should be seen as a strategic opportunity.

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

I ask the Member to conclude his remarks.

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

It will help to transform the regional economy and modernise our local transport infrastructure, particularly —

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

The Member's time is up.

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

— in my constituency of South Antrim.

Alex Easton (DUP, North Down)

I rise to support the motion and say from the outset that the motion is a no-brainer. At a time when we want to improve lives, enhance trade, create jobs, attract foreign investment and compete on a level playing field with our neighbours, we need to ensure that we have the best possible infrastructure to support those aims.

It is, therefore, vital, if we are to compete in a global economy, that our international airport has the best possible infrastructure in place to attract all those aims.

The lack of a fast, efficient rail network from Belfast to the International Airport is criminal and short-sighted and hampers growth and foreign investment in our local economy. We know that one of the main factors in attracting business and, indeed, foreign airline companies to Northern Ireland is to have the right infrastructure in place for quick and easy access from the airport for passengers and businesses to the main investment hubs. The way to do that is to have a fast transport system. In a world that moves at a quick pace, we in Northern Ireland lack that facility and are lagging behind our competitors.

We know that our main competitors are seriously looking at the possibility of extending their infrastructure. For example, a second runway at Dublin Airport and a rail network straight into Dublin from the airport are under serious consideration. If we are serious about attracting foreign investment and jobs —

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Alex Easton (DUP, North Down)

Yes.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Does the Member agree with me that the activity of the Irish Government and the Dublin Airport Authority is anticompetitive and is definitely detrimental to the Northern Ireland economy, particularly the state funding for terminal 2, for the outstanding debt for Dublin Airport Authority's pension fund and for the second runway? Those are examples of anticompetitive behaviour that we in Northern Ireland need to fight against.

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

The Member has an extra minute.

Alex Easton (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Member for his intervention, and I do not disagree with him. I thank him for that.

OK, jobs —

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Member for giving way. There has been a lot of discussion lately about how difficult it can be for us to compete with Dublin Airport at times. Some things are outside our control. Dublin Airport is able to offer, for example, pre-clearance to the United States. Does a railway link at the airport not go some way towards making us a more attractive opportunity for travellers?

Alex Easton (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Member for his intervention. I agree with that.

If we fail to act on the motion, our competitors will have the economic edge. We are aware that the former Department for Regional Development undertook a public consultation during 2013 and produced the 'Railway Investment Prioritisation Strategy', which was about how we could take forward and prioritise future investment in the Northern Ireland rail network up to 2035. One of the priorities identified was priority 3, which is what we are talking about today.

One of the main arguments that will be used for the case not to reopen the Antrim to Knockmore/Lisburn line will be that such an investment would not be viable because of airport passenger numbers, which in 2013 stood at around four million, and that, for the project to be viable, numbers need to grow to about 10 million. However, I argue that airport numbers are projected to grow to the 10 million mark by 2030. We can see from current levels that there has been an 8·9% increase in the past year, as well as a 2·5% increase in aircraft movements. We can see that there is positive movement in increased flight and passenger numbers. I argue that, if we had the right railway connection in place from the airport to Belfast, that would attract passengers and foreign investment and enable us to compete with our neighbours and increase those numbers even more quickly.

The potential cost of reopening the Antrim to Knockmore line and providing a link to Belfast would be in and around £50 million. That would involve the rehabilitation and resignalling of the track between Antrim and Knockmore, the construction of a single-track spur and a rail halt at the airport, two additional trains, station renewals at Ballinderry, Crumlin and Glenavy and a park-and-ride. Failure to do those things would be folly. In 2014, Dr Peter Bolan, director for international travel and tourism management at Ulster University, stated that the lack of a rail link to Belfast International Airport was detrimental to Northern Ireland and one of the reasons that there had a been a failure to secure a long-haul route to Canada.

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Alex Easton (DUP, North Down)

Very quickly.

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I appreciate the points that the Member makes. I am just slightly concerned that he does not seem to recognise that there were services on the Knockmore line until they were closed by a former Minister for Regional Development by the name of Gregory Campbell, whom he appears to have described as a criminal whose work is folly.

[Laughter.]

Alex Easton (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Member for his useless information.

Dr Bolan further said that, if Northern Ireland had serious ambitions to develop its economy by bringing in investment from places such as China or North America, it must improve its transport infrastructure, particularly to the main airport:

"International visitors simply just expect that but, instead, they're limited to buses and taxis, which isn't ideal."

As we enter talks on Brexit, we will enter a whole new set of negotiations for new and exciting global deals that we in Northern Ireland want to benefit from. If we want to benefit, it makes sense to invest in a rail link from Belfast to our main airport and show the world that we are open for business, investment and job opportunities.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

We welcome the motion on providing improved access between Belfast and the International Airport; indeed, in our recently launched 'A Vision for Northern Ireland outside the EU', we have specifically called for improving infrastructure. I am sure that the Minister for Infrastructure and other Ministers are already aware of the ongoing discussions in London on the provision of a significant potential infrastructure stimulus. A stimulus like that could be transformational if it is used to significantly enhance our position as a gateway to the EU. End of plug.

It would also be useful to note that Belfast International Airport will come close to and might exceed 5·2 million passengers. 2017 is expected to be a better year, maybe pushing towards 7 million passengers. In the airport, retail and food and beverage outlets are reporting high double-digit increases in business. One of the things that I am most pleased to report is that that increased activity has generated over 800 jobs this year, with 100 additional posts to be created shortly. That is a great success story. Indeed, the 1,000-acre site is a major economic hub for Northern Ireland, second only to Belfast harbour estate for employment numbers. Airlines such as Ryanair and Easyjet have made Gatwick the most important airport for Northern Ireland passengers, eclipsing Heathrow, with extra capacity being added on that route all the time. With Ryanair launching four new routes, including Berlin and Milan, and with extra routes to come, everyone in the House will be pleased to note that the airport has had a very good season and is looking to have a better year next year. All in the Assembly should thank Graham Keddie and his team for all that they have done not only for South Antrim but for all of Northern Ireland.

Our major international gateway — this is where I agree with DUP Members — has been hampered by unfair competition. I welcome the opportunity to compare the access that has been afforded to the fully state-aided and state-supported edifice that is Dublin Airport and to observe and listen to the advertisements, again state-funded, about the so-called great access that Dublin Airport has, coupled with significant enhancements, including the potential provision of a new runway — again state-funded. It is of concern that Tourism Ireland, to which Northern Ireland contributes over a third of its budget, actively promotes Dublin Airport as the gateway to Ireland. That raises obvious concerns about competition. If you couple that with the abolition of Irish air passenger duty (APD), VAT at 9%, EU-funded roads and well-established transport links to two terminals, you can see that the improvements that Belfast International Airport has made are well-nigh remarkable and it should be supported for them.

The competition will be even further skewed as our major airports are being starved of access. Again, as has been pointed out, can we name any major airport on these islands that does not have at least dual carriageway access? I will ask you to indulge me, Mr Deputy Speaker, while I quote one of my constituents who has contacted me on the issue:

"Our roads access is deplorable. What other major international airport do you go to and get stuck behind a tractor or even worse ... Our roads owe more to the 1950's than the 21st century. We need at least carriageway access from the M2 with a potential Templepatrick bypass, and improvements to the other main access route, the A56 ... There is also no advance planning under way to build infrastructure to meet increased passenger demand ... Everything is left on the long finger ... As for rail, we were told years ago that a rail spur would only be viable if we hit 8 million. Yet, as numbers grow, there is no discussion on this matter."

What are the Executive going to do about this, apart from utilising Dublin Airport regularly? I and, no doubt, all of the 1,000-plus workers who keep our airports working and the aircraft based here flying will be interested to see which Ministers and officials use Dublin rather than our own airports.

In supporting the motion, my party calls for a much wider discussion on improving access. We welcome an improved rail system across all of South Antrim. Connecting the airport should also include facilitating a major park-and-ride facility at Crumlin and a rail station at Ballymartin park-and-ride should be progressed with a degree of urgency. We would, as a matter of priority, push for a dual carriageway link from the M2 to be built first, and any additional infrastructure made available in the autumn statement should be fast-tracked to that provision. Indeed, the Executive, along with Antrim and Newtownabbey Borough Council, could significantly push the success of this programme by fast-tracking the planning of such a link and doing it now.

More importantly, APD has to go, and we know that the Scottish Government are already planning to reduce theirs.

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

I ask the Member to conclude his remarks.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Finally, while not germane to this discussion, we must address the challenge of Dublin Airport. We are all for competition —

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

The Member's time is up.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

— but competition against a state-aided airport seeking an all-island monopoly must be challenged. Thank you for your indulgence, Mr Deputy Speaker.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

It is a privilege and a pleasure to follow the Member for South Antrim, who has been very positive about the motion, unlike his colleague from Lagan Valley. I am still not sure whether she supports the motion, but perhaps Mr Aiken can have a little word in her ear and get the support of —

Jennifer Palmer (UUP, Lagan Valley)

Will the Member give way?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I would rather not, but I will. I do not want to hear any negativity from the Member. If she is upbeat and positive, I will give way.

Jennifer Palmer (UUP, Lagan Valley)

I remind the Member that, in my opening remarks, I started by welcoming the motion and saying that we fully supported it but have issues.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I wish that she had continued in the vein in which she started. We are pleased that she now says that she will support the motion, and I welcome that.

I welcome the motion because I think that it is important that we have a rail link from Belfast International Airport to the city of Belfast. I am pleased that the motion asks for the Minister to explore options. It is important that we find out what is necessary for this to happen. Today, a lot of figures have been bandied about: the number of airport passengers we will need; the number of rail passengers we will need; how much it will cost to sustain the line; and the cost of maintaining the line in its current unused state. We need to explore this. We need to find out about and nail these figures down, because I understand that some of them are from quite a few years ago. It is important that we take the time and have the feasibility study originally proposed in the strategy produced by the Department for Regional Development a few years ago. If we had those facts, it would put us in a better position to —

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I will give way very briefly.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I ask the Minister to, instead of looking purely at the potential growth in the number of people using Belfast International Airport, take on board the views of all the South Antrim MLAs here. We talked about the overall growth of the population of the area and looked at that as part of a wider prospect. I am sure that the DUP would also be delighted to look at wider options to improve those links.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Certainly, people in South Antrim and across Northern Ireland would welcome this.

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

The Member has an extra minute if he chooses to use it. I remind him to address all remarks through the Chair.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I will, of course, and I agree with the Member. It is important to note that the figure of the 10 million passengers that would need to go through the airport has also been used. There are lots of other rail stations linked to airports across the country that do not have that sort of figure. Glasgow Prestwick Airport has 600,000; Southampton has 1·7 million; and Belfast International Airport has four million, which obviously does not include the other passengers that would use the line to travel between Lisburn and Antrim or elsewhere.

I used to be a frequent user of Newcastle International Airport, and the Tyne and Wear Metro from Newcastle and Sunderland goes right into the airport. I have seen the economic growth and development that came along that line as a result of it being there. As other Members mentioned, we should look not only at the number of passengers that could use it but at the other growth that could come along that line; not just the airport.

We want better connectivity. We also need to look at the truth that will come from all of this, which is that more people might use the airport because of the train line. People like the certainty of knowing that a train will come. With buses, people are sometimes not sure where to get them or where they will go, but rail is one of the easiest ways to travel. You have only to look at the transport statistics from Northern Ireland over the last 15 or 16 years to see that, in the first decade of this century, we had a 60% increase in the number of people using the railways. Even in the last three or four years, we have had a 30% increase. One of the reasons why that happened was an increase in investment in the railway lines in Northern Ireland. It is the same here. Like Mr Aiken said, if the investment is put in and you build it, people will use it.

I understand that Minister Hazzard has an awful lot on his plate. There are competing groups and competing interests and priorities on his desk. However, it is important that, on such an important issue that has the potential to grow the accessibility of the International Airport and therefore grow our tourism potential, we at least explore the option of a rail link at the International Airport. Of course, an important thing to remember and realise is that the line is already there. We are not proposing a completely new construction here. It is there, but it is not being used. All that we are asking today is for the Minister to look into the feasibility of doing something with that.

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

I call Mr Gerry Mullan. I have to advise Mr Mullan that, because of the tight timescales involved in this debate and agreed by the Business Committee, I can allocate him only four minutes.

Gerry Mullan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, East Londonderry)

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. As a Member for the East Derry constituency, I, too, welcome the opportunity to speak in support of the motion, and I thank the proposer for bringing it to the Chamber. Rail connectivity is a major issue in my constituency. There have been some major advances in upgrading services, carriages and halts in recent times. Indeed, in June, I was fortunate enough to be invited to attend the opening of the new Bellarena halt, which has provided a great boost for local rail passengers.

As outlined by my colleague from West Tyrone, the SDLP is in support of improving our rail infrastructure. A vital component of that is improving airport rail connectivity. Access to airports through direct rail linkages forms a vital part of any modern city or region, especially when you consider its importance in attracting foreign direct investment and boosting local tourism. In this regard, we have seen cities throughout Europe invest heavily in their airport rail connectivity. We will all have experienced this when we have travelled to the continent and even within these islands. For example, no sooner do you land at London Heathrow than you are navigating your way through London Underground. This is the hallmark of any modern city that prioritises connectivity that saves travellers both time and stress. It is something that we in the North of this island should prioritise.

Today's debate has been informative in highlighting the many issues that surround establishing a rail link to the International Airport, especially through the reopening of the Knockmore line. In spite of the political posturing that we have seen across the Chamber today, I think that we can agree that this is supported by the majority of Members, especially those in the Antrim constituencies.

Despite no feasibility study having been conducted, it is estimated that reopening the Knockmore line will cost upwards of £100 million. However, as my predecessor John Dallat highlighted in the last mandate, the Department for Regional Development had been spending vast sums on the maintenance of the 20-mile stretch of line from Antrim to Lisburn with little or no return. Therefore, I ask the Minister to detail how much his Department has spent on the line since it closed 13 years ago and where exactly the money has been spent. Surely that money would be put to better use if it were invested in a project that would see the permanent reopening of the Knockmore line. That would be a massive boost for travellers from not only Belfast city centre but across the North. This is especially the case when we consider the prospect of having a rail link from Derry to Dublin, a service that would allow people from my constituency of East Derry and from Foyle to be able to travel by rail rather than rely on buses that are inconvenient and inaccessible for many people.

Although today's motion focuses solely on the International Airport, the people of my constituency want to see greater rail connectivity to and from the City of Derry Airport in Eglinton, where the Derry to Belfast service runs adjacent to the airport yet no halt exists for airport passengers. The construction of a railway halt at Derry Airport has the potential to transform connectivity in the north-west, especially when we are attempting to attract record numbers of tourists into the area. It would not only serve the people of Derry city but could act as a gateway by connecting Castlerock, Downhill, Coleraine and Portstewart. There is also a possibility of constructing a railway halt at the Shackleton site in Ballykelly. I therefore ask the Minister what consideration he has given to the possibility of constructing a rail halt at the City of Derry Airport and whether he plans for his Department to conduct a feasibility study.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Will the Member give way?

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

The Member's time is nearly up.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for giving way. Does the Member recognise that the argument that he makes is somewhat weak?

Danny Kennedy (Deputy Speaker, Newry and Armagh)

The Member's time is up and I am afraid that we have to conclude.

The Business Committee has agreed to meet at 1.00 pm today and I propose, therefore, by leave of the Assembly, to suspend the sitting until 2.00 pm. The first item of business when we return will be Question Time. This debate will continue after Question Time, when the Minister will respond to the debate.

The debate stood suspended. The sitting was suspended at 12.50 pm.

On resuming (Mr Speaker in the Chair) —

Oral Answers to Questions — Finance

Robin Newton (Speaker, Belfast East)

We will start with listed questions.

Steven Agnew (Green, North Down)

1. Mr Agnew asked the Minister of Finance to outline the impact on public finances of the likely statistical reclassification of housing associations from private to public bodies by the Office of National Statistics. (AQO 206/16-21)

Máirtín Ó Muilleoir (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Thank you, Mr Agnew. The outcome of the Office for National Statistics (ONS) review is expected shortly. While the result may be anticipated, we must await the formal notification and the detail of the ONS rationale before responding.

Any reclassification from the private to the public sector will affect how the bodies are treated in departmental budgets. Any new borrowing by them would require capital DEL budget cover and would therefore place a significant pressure on already constrained resources. I am working alongside the Communities Minister — in fact we met at 10.30 am today and this issue was very high on the agenda — and our officials are ensuring that we are ready to respond to the ONS decision.

I would add that we expect the reclassification decision to, as it were, go against us and to rule that housing associations are public-sector bodies. We expect that decision before the end of the month.

Steven Agnew (Green, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his answer. We had a debate in the Chamber yesterday about the need to invest in housing. My concern is that such a reclassification could inflict serious damage on our ability to invest, particularly in social housing. From his discussions with the Communities Minister, can the Minister tell us what contingency plans they hope to put in place?

Máirtín Ó Muilleoir (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Thank you for that supplementary question. I share those concerns. Last week, I addressed the finance directors of all the housing associations, and you can be sure that they also impressed on me the urgency of getting it right.

I am content that we are on the right path. When the decision is issued, I will seek a derogation and the Treasury will decide how to respond to that based on the work we have done. I am content that that work will have the desired effect and that we will get a derogation to allow us to put the proper regulations or legislation in order. Therefore, while Mr Agnew is right to stress the issue and be vigilant on it, I hope and trust that we are on the right path. Mr Givan gave me much confidence in that regard this morning.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

The Minister has already answered the question and said that he has met the Minister for Communities. Given his optimistic projections, will he give the House an assurance that he will continue to engage with the Minister for Communities to make sure that the potential ramifications of the decision are minimised if not reduced altogether?

Máirtín Ó Muilleoir (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Go raibh maith agat, a Chomhalta. The Member is right to stress how grave it will be if we do not get it right. Needs must in that case, and if we were to lose the ability for housing associations to borrow off balance book it would cost the Executive up to £100 million a year. We do not have that type of money, yet we are resolved to hitting very ambitious social housing targets. For that reason, I take on board Members' concerns and am heartened by the response of Minister Givan and his team this morning.

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Belfast South)

2. Mrs Little Pengelly asked the Minister of Finance to outline any engagement he has had with HM Treasury to ascertain the current position on the previously anticipated multi-year budget for the United Kingdom. (AQO 207/16-21)

Máirtín Ó Muilleoir (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

I have had a number of discussions with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury and the British Chancellor, Mr Hammond, on the EU referendum and its implications for the Executive’s Budget. In addition, I have corresponded with them on a number of occasions on issues including the implications arising from the EU referendum. I continue to press for early engagement on the Budget implications in advance of the Chancellor’s autumn statement, which will take place on November 23. I am pleased to say that the Chief Secretary to the Treasury has agreed to meet me on 24 October, which I think is a Monday. Shortly before that, we will meet Mr Hammond and, I believe, Theresa May.

I agree that it is essential that we have a clear path of communication with the Treasury on all these issues, especially in this period of uncertainty. My officials are in touch with the Treasury on a daily basis. It is fair to say, after our weekly meeting on EU issues this morning, that my officials believe that there is not enough information coming back from Westminster and the Treasury, but we can take some solace from the fact that, in Westminster, opposition parties are saying the same — they are not getting as much information as they would like. For our part — mine and my Department's — we remain on the ball on this issue.

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Belfast South)

I thank the Minister for his answer. I think that he shares my view that one-year Budgets should be avoided if at all possible, but we acknowledge that sometimes that is not possible. I ask the Minister, and I have raised this with him already, to take into particular consideration those in the third sector — the many thousands of community and other organisations relying on grant funding. For them, in particular, short-term one-year Budgets can be tough, especially when they have contracts and other things to extend and bills coming in. I therefore ask the Minister to continue to engage with the Department for Communities and to give a commitment to this House that he will try to get information out to them as soon as possible in this financial year to enable them to plan for the next financial year, if it is a one-year Budget.

Máirtín Ó Muilleoir (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Thank you for that supplementary question. Of course, you met me this morning as Chair of the Committee and made those points. I am very cognisant of the pressures on those on the front line of providing services. We did not take the decision on a one-year Budget lightly. I am pleased that our Celtic cousins in Edinburgh and Cardiff are following the same route. That is because there is no alternative, insomuch as we do not know what the autumn statement will bring in terms of corporation tax, this entire fiscal reset and other issues. However, I take that on board. We will not know the full impact of the autumn statement on 23 November; it will probably take us a week or two to assess it and prepare a Budget. However, before Christmas we should have a one-year resource budget and four-year capital budget ready. I hope and trust that we can get the information to the bodies that need it as soon as possible. I take on board the broader point that stability around Budgets would be a great boon to all of us, and I hope to return to the House in more stable times and say, "Here is a resource budget that will bring us right up to 2020."

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

3. Mrs Long asked the Minister of Finance what are the implications of proposals to set a one-year rather than a three-year Budget. (AQO 208/16-21)

Robbie Butler (UUP, Lagan Valley)

4. Mr Butler asked the Minister of Finance to outline any responses he has received from Executive colleagues on his proposal for a single-year budget instead of the previously suggested multi-year budget. (AQO 209/16-21)

Máirtín Ó Muilleoir (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I will group questions 3 and 4 together.

A single-year resource DEL Budget will allow additional time to plan for the fiscal adjustments that the British Chancellor is expected to set out in the autumn statement. It will also provide further opportunity for our Departments to reflect upon resources that are required in future years to deliver Programme for Government priorities. A multi-year capital budget is possible — I am very pleased by that — in light of indications that a degree of protection will be afforded to capital budgets to encourage investment opportunities. A local multi-year capital budget will provide more certainty in planning capital projects. The First and deputy First Ministers have written to express their support for this approach to the Budget, and the indications from other Ministers have also been positive, with acknowledgement that, in the circumstances, it is a pragmatic way forward.

While Mrs Long is focusing on a one-year versus a multi-year Budget, I think she would agree that there is another pressure on us. Not only do we have to adopt this Budget because of the circumstances — the lack of information and the uncertainty from Westminster — but we face into the problem of resource between now and 2020: we have a 4·1% real-terms cut. Battling that and finding a way round it, when we have obligations in the form of pensions and pay, is very difficult and challenging for us all. I believe, however, that this is the correct way forward at this time.