Northern Ireland Assembly, 21 September 2020

455 contributions from 69 members. The official report.

Assembly Business

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Before we move to the first item of business on the Order Paper, I would like to make a couple of remarks. First, and in particular, I want to wish Christopher Stalford well. As many Members will know, he is still in hospital after taking ill again last week. On behalf of the Assembly, I want to send our best wishes to Christopher and his family. Secondly, I have spoken to Daniel McCrossan this morning, who is in isolation having tested positive for COVID-19. I want to commend Daniel for the robust self-isolation measures that he has taken. Again, on behalf of the Assembly, I send our best wishes to Daniel and his family in the time ahead.

Matter of the Day

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Mrs Naomi Long has been given leave to make a statement on the death of Mr David Cook, which fulfils the criteria that are set out in Standing Order 24. If further Members wish to be called, they should do so by rising in their place and continuing to do so. All Members who are called will have up to three minutes to speak on the subject. I remind Members that I will not take any points of order on this or any other matter until the item of business has finished.

Before I call Mrs Long, I want to say that I knew David personally very well and worked with him on Belfast City Council. Many people will know that the years when we were both on the city council in the 80's and onwards were, at times, marked by very toxic circumstances. David was a man who was always very measured, civil, polite and easy to work with. We may not always have agreed politically, but that is irrelevant. I want to pass on my personal condolences to David Cook's family.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

Thank you for your words about David, Mr Speaker. I am, obviously, very sad but also honoured to pay tribute to an Alliance Party founding member, David Cook, who passed away peacefully on Saturday evening after a brief illness. Having previously suffered a stroke, he, sadly, contracted COVID-19.

On occasions such as this, I am reminded that it is because of the vision and courage of people like David Cook and all those who came together to form the Alliance Party that I am standing here today in the Chamber and that people have the option of voting for a different kind of political representation, committed to the creation of one community, united but diverse and inclusive. We are proud of their hard work, their desire to see a better way forward for Northern Ireland and their determination to make it happen. We are committed to continuing that work for a new generation.

David not only was a leader within Alliance as a member of our first executive and later as deputy leader from 1980 to 1984 but broke the mould in City Hall when he became the first non-unionist to be elected Lord Mayor in 1978. He served south Belfast faithfully on Belfast City Council from 1973 until 1985 and then at the ill-fated Northern Ireland Assembly from 1982 to 1986. He was also a committed European and stood as a European parliamentary candidate in 1984.

In more recent years, he continued his interest in Alliance and was a regular at party conferences and dinners over the years. His loss in this our fiftieth year is all the more poignant as we never got to celebrate that anniversary together as a result of COVID-19, to which he ultimately and tragically succumbed.

He also continued with his work in community projects, because that was what led him into politics and that was what he continued to do in his retirement from politics.

My thoughts and those of the Alliance family are very much with his wife, Fionnuala, today, his sons Barbary, John, Patrick, Julius and Dominic, his granddaughters Romy and Imogen, his sisters Alison and Nora, and the wider family circle as they mourn his passing.

David was a beacon of liberalism during very dark times, and he was a trailblazer for equality, respect and fairness when all three were in short supply. He offered the hope of change when hope was scarce, and for that we will always be grateful. He was also a gentleman, well liked by those who met him and dearly loved by those who knew him, not least for his warm wit and his sense of humour. He will be very sadly missed by us all.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

I rise to speak on behalf of the Democratic Unionist Party and to extend my sympathy and that of the party to David Cook's wife, Fionnuala, and to the wider family circle.

As you mentioned, Mr Speaker, David Cook served on Belfast City Council. I did not have the opportunity to serve at a time when David was a public representative. He represented south Belfast in the Cromac ward, as it was known at that time. In my time, anything that I heard about David Cook was always extremely positive. He came into public service at a time when it was much more difficult and dangerous than perhaps it is today. He brought to civic life his particular skills, not only his personality but his legal mind, and applied those to problems.

We are all the sadder in society for the loss of David Cook, not only in the political realm but in the community realm where he concentrated his efforts after his retirement from politics.

I will finish as I started by extending the sympathies of the Democratic Unionist Party to our colleagues in the Alliance Party and to the family circle.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Mr Speaker, in line with your opening remarks about Christopher and Daniel, I also wish them a speedy recovery.

I pass on my deepest sympathies on behalf of Sinn Féin to David Cook's family, to his wife, Fionnuala, and to the Alliance family. I knew David through meeting him at various events and through his community work. I always found him, as you said, to be a gentleman. He was someone who was prepared to listen, who engaged in a respectful manner, and who, in my opinion, was always in a listening mode. It is easy to have a conversation with someone and to nod your head, but with David, you could say, "There is somebody who is taking on my point of view. We are taking on each other's point of view. We may not always agree". That tribute has to be paid to him.

I met David's wife, Fionnuala, on several occasions, and, I have to say, they were a lovely couple, always very welcoming and very warm. I offer the family my deepest sympathies. It is another reminder, as if we need one, of the dangers that COVID-19 presents to our communities and another tragic loss for a family as a result of this terrible disease. I pass on my sympathies and the sympathies of my party to all concerned.

Matthew O'Toole (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

Mr Speaker, I, too, associate myself and my party with the remarks that you made about my constituency colleague Christopher Stalford and, indeed, my party colleague Daniel.

As others have, the SDLP would like to pass on its sincere condolences to David Cook's family, his wife, Fionnuala, the broader family and indeed our Alliance Party colleagues. David Cook was clearly someone who represented the very best of our politics and our society. He was someone who cared immensely about finding, building and expanding the common ground in a conflicted society.

On Twitter, Naomi Long talked about a painting of David Cook from his term as Belfast Lord Mayor. I remember my first trip to City Hall as a schoolboy. At some point, after seeing these very grand portraits, I saw a more modern, bright, colourful painting by Neil Shawcross. I did not know who David Cook was then and I did not know who Neil Shawcross was, but, in many ways, that painting stood for a lot of what David Cook seemed to stand for: bold, progressive, modern politics. His loss will clearly be felt by the Alliance family and by people in south Belfast. In a sense, he was a predecessor of mine as an Assembly Member for the constituency.

It is a deeply sad day for David's family, but, hopefully, they and the Alliance family will look on at the warm words being said about him today in the Northern Ireland Assembly and be consoled that his legacy is a very proud and important one.

Rosemary Barton (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

First, I send my party's best wishes Christopher and Daniel and wish them both a full recovery.

On behalf of the party, I extend our condolences to Mr Cook's family and his wife on their recent bereavement. While I did not know Mr Cook, I understand that he was a great community person, great company and a gentleman. Although in politics we do have our differences, I think that, at this time particularly, we should put those differences aside.

I also express our greatest sympathies to the Alliance Party.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

I will open my remarks by asking the Assembly to think about Christopher Stalford and Daniel McCrossan in the circumstances in which they find themselves.

I rise to add a personal tribute to the remembrance of David Cook and to send my sympathies to Fionnuala and the wider circle. I came into elected politics in 1977. David was already an elected representative by that stage. I have fond memories of David and Fionnuala; not only were they key for me in listening to the sort of speeches that they made at party meetings and conferences but they were there for young branches starting up in the Alliance Party. They were always there to help us canvass, pointing us in the right direction and encouraging us in those days. That is what it was all about. It was the encouragement that David and Fionnuala gave to all of us in respect of the party.

I also had a professional relationship with David Cook. He was a solicitor in Sheldon and Stewart when I was working as a conciliation officer in the Labour Relations Agency. We could have been canvassing or at party meetings at the weekend, but, on a Monday, I had to deal with him on a professional basis. He was very professional in his work as a solicitor. He worked very hard for his clients, and I remember those meetings with fondness, but we always had a good chat afterwards as to what had been going on at the weekend.

I just want to add my personal and deep felt condolences to Fionnuala and the family at this very sad time.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

OK, Members. Thank you. That brings that matter to a close. I ask Members to take their ease for a moment or two.

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

Assembly Business

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Members, the next item of business is a motion regarding Committee membership. As with similar motions, it will be treated as a business motion, and there will be no debate.

Resolved:

That Mr John O'Dowd be appointed as a member of the Committee on Procedures. — [Ms Ennis.]

Ministerial Statement

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

The Speaker has received notice from the First Minister and the deputy First Minister that the deputy First Minister wishes to make a statement. Before I call the Minister, I remind Members that, in the light of social distancing being observed by parties, the Speaker's ruling that Members must be in the Chamber to hear a statement if they wish to ask a question has been relaxed. Members still have to ensure that their name is on the speakers' list if they wish to be called for a question. They can do so by rising in their place or by notifying the Business Office or the Speaker's Table directly.

I remind Members to be concise in asking a question: it is an opportunity to ask questions, not to make speeches. This is not an opportunity for debate, and long introductions to questions will not be allowed.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

In compliance with section 52C(2) of the 1998 Act, I wish to make the following statement on the 24th plenary meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC), which was held in Dublin Castle on 31 July 2020. The Irish Government were led by the Taoiseach, Micheál Martin TD, who chaired the meeting. The Executive were led by First Minister, Arlene Foster, and by myself. All Executive Ministers, with the exception of the Minister of Justice, attended the meeting. The First Minister has agreed that I can make this report on our behalf.

Ministers welcomed the resumption of meetings of the Council. The meeting provided the new Irish Government and the new Executive with the opportunity to meet formally for the first time and to exchange views on a wide range of issues of mutual interest and concern. Ministers received a report from the joint secretaries on the work of the NSMC since 2016, including work undertaken across the NSMC sectors. They noted that three meetings of the Council, including one institutional meeting, had taken place since the last plenary meeting in November 2016.

The Council noted that the work of the North/South bodies has continued to make a significant contribution to communities, society and the economy of both jurisdictions. It also expressed appreciation to the boards and staff of those bodies for their work since 2016.

The Council also welcomed the mutually beneficial cooperation that is taken forward between Ministers and their Departments across the areas of cooperation. Ministers noted the ongoing work of the north-west strategic growth partnership and the continued engagement of senior officials in both Administrations with regional stakeholders regarding the direction, and priorities, for the north-west region.

With regard to coronavirus, the Council was briefed by the Chief Medical Officers, Dr Ronan Glynn and Dr Michael McBride, on the current public health situation and on ongoing cooperation on the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Ministers extended their condolences to all those who have lost loved ones as a result of the pandemic. They also expressed their appreciation to all those who have played a part in the COVID-19 response, in particular health and social care workers, who have shown extraordinary courage and dedication in their work on the front line.

The Council noted that senior representatives of the Executive and the Irish Government, along with their Chief Medical Officers, met at the NSMC secretariat offices in Armagh on 14 March to review the situation regarding the COVID-19 virus and how best to address the outbreak. At that meeting, Ministers affirmed that everything possible would be done in coordination and cooperation between the Irish Government and the Executive and with the active involvement of the health administrations in both jurisdictions to tackle the outbreak. Senior representatives of both Administrations have continued to meet regularly to discuss the ongoing COVID-19 response. The Council noted the memorandum of understanding on public health cooperation on the COVID-19 response agreed between the Departments of Health, North and South, on 7 April. The Council welcomed the close and productive cooperation that has taken place between Health Ministers, Chief Medical Officers and health administrations, North and South, to deliver an effective public health response. Ministers agreed that an early meeting of the Council in the health sector should review ongoing cooperation in responding to the pandemic.

The Council also noted the impact of the pandemic on society and on the economy, North and South, and the measures put in place by both Administrations to support communities and businesses affected by the crisis and to assist with economic recovery. Ministers agreed that the upcoming meetings of the Council in relevant sectors will consider how North/South approaches can contribute to the promotion of economic and social recovery.

Ministers noted the continued commitment of the Irish Government and the Executive to work through the North/South Ministerial Council to help deliver projects that will benefit people across the island, including through investment in infrastructure that will support cooperation and unlock the full potential of the economies of both jurisdictions. The Council welcomed the progress made to date in progressing commitments identified in section E of the Fresh Start Agreement relating to infrastructure and support cooperation and noted the new and renewed commitments set out in 'New Decade, New Approach' and the associated Irish Government commitments.

Colin McGrath (Social Democratic and Labour Party, South Down)

I thank the Ministers for today's statement. I will gently push this: this is our third week back, and we have had very light amounts of work from the Executive. The statement probably could have been made two weeks ago, but I am thankful that it has been made today.

In the statement, you referenced the appointments to the board of Tourism Ireland and the fact that there are vacancies on some of the other boards as well. Given that the North/South Ministerial Council can cover areas including health, the environment, agriculture and transport and with Brexit approaching in a matter of a few weeks, will the Council undertake to do all that it can to fill those vacancies? Is it possible to get in writing information on what the vacancies are at this stage?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

This is the first opportunity that we have had to come to the Chamber. I accept that it is preferable that, after an NSMC meeting, we come quickly to the Chamber, because it is still current and we are able to discuss things, so we take that on board.

On the appointments, you are right: the Council approved the appointment of four directors of Tourism Ireland with effect from 31 July 2020 to 30 July 2025. The members appointed were Ruth Andrews, Joe Dolan, Stephen McNally and Mary Mulvey. They were nominated by the Irish Government. Obviously, there are outstanding board appointments — 10 in total — from the Executive, and we need to move speedily to nominate people. There will be a lot of sectoral meetings happening over the next weeks and months, and they will provide plenty of opportunity to get all those positions filled as quickly as possible.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Members will note that there are considerable numbers wishing to ask questions. I remind Members that some leeway is given to the Committee Chair, but I ask others to be more concise.

George Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

Does the deputy First Minister accept that Great Britain is our largest market and that avoiding friction in trade east-west should be the Executive's key priority in the ongoing negotiations?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I say to the Member that is in all our interests to minimise disruption to trade. We want to see frictionless trade North/South and east-west. We as a people are being used as a pawn in the middle of the Brexit debate right now, and that is not a good place for us to be. Our people need certainty. Our businesses need certainty. We will work to make sure that that happens. That is one of the issues that we discussed at the NSMC, and, no doubt, we will have to keep coming back to it. We need an outcome that serves the people here well.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

I remind Members to make sure that they speak into an adjacent microphone for the benefit of Hansard and other Members.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Was there any discussion of scoping out the possibility of a high-speed rail link between Belfast and Dublin?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

It was something that we discussed. Improving connectivity between Belfast and Dublin is key in delivering opportunities for better connecting the island of Ireland and enhancing our respective economies. Our rail network, whilst relatively small, presents a unique opportunity. In line with that and the commitments in 'New Decade, New Approach', officials in the Department for Infrastructure have begun early discussions with their counterparts in the South regarding the process for developing a feasibility study of a potential high-speed rail connection between Belfast, Dublin and Cork. I know that our colleagues in the north-west would include Derry in that. That work is ongoing, and Nichola Mallon, the Minister for Infrastructure, intends to engage with Minister Ryan to discuss the improvement of the transport links — both rail and road — between Belfast and Dublin. An NSMC transport sectoral meeting is scheduled to take place in early October where this and other matters will be discussed, following which Minister Mallon report to the Assembly.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I trust that the deputy First Minister will agree that a seven-week delay in reporting to the Chamber is not consistent with the spirit of the New Decade, New Approach commitment to transparency and accountability.

My question is about the commitment to an early meeting of the Council in health sector mode. Can the Minister tell us when that took place and what was the outcome?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I concur with the Member, as I did with the Chair of the Committee, that it is important that we turn the statements around quickly and bring reports to the House. The Assembly has been sitting for only two weeks, so, obviously, there has been a bit of a delay, but I take on board what the Member has said.

There is a health sectoral meeting planned for 2 October, which is only a short time away. I believe that that meeting will take place virtually, given the restrictions. Given where we are across these islands with the rise in COVID and what we are witnessing, it is really important that that meeting happens as quickly as possible so that we can share our information and work together where we can.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

The ambition for the all-island memorandum of understanding was that there be greater cooperation and alignment across the island. However, the nature of restrictions reimposed in Belfast versus Dublin is different, the statistical analysis presented by the Chief Medical Officers is different and the communications are different. Can you provide some examples of where the memorandum of understanding is working or has worked?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The signing of the memorandum of understanding was crucially important in our fightback with regard to COVID-19. As we know, the virus does not recognise borders and does not stop somewhere because there is a different jurisdiction. The work that we have done across the island — sharing data and modelling and the work with the app to make sure that, no matter where you travel on the island, the app works — is all crucial, but we could do an awful lot more. I hope that, at the sectoral meeting on 2 October, the two Health Ministers and the Chief Medical Officers, in response to the current situation with COVID, will bring forward additionality to the memorandum of understanding and what else we can do to work together to get through the winter months, which, we all readily acknowledge, will be very challenging.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

Will the deputy First Minister give her assessment of the action taken by the Taoiseach and the Irish Government in response to some of the Ministers and their colleagues breaking health guidelines?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

That is a matter for the Taoiseach and the Dáil.

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Minister, can you give us an outline of how EU-related matters of interest to the North and the whole island of Ireland will be taken forward by the North/South Ministerial Council?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

At the plenary meeting in Dublin, the Council had a useful discussion around the implications of the British Government's withdrawal from the EU. There was a recognition that the jurisdictions had a common interest in minimising disruption to trade and economic activity on the island. The North/South Ministerial Council provides a useful forum for the consideration of such matters, and Ministers will continue to engage on the implications of the withdrawal from the EU, both at NSMC sectoral meetings and bilaterally, where appropriate, and we will consider EU exit again at the next plenary.

Officials from both jurisdictions will also continue with their ongoing engagement.

You will also be aware that the Joint Committee established by the withdrawal agreement will keep under constant review the extent to which the implementation and application of the protocol maintains the necessary conditions for North/South cooperation and that the specialised committee will examine proposals concerning the implementation and application of the protocol from the NSMC. Should matters be identified that Ministers believe merit consideration by the specialised committee, the NSMC provides a mechanism to enable that.

Paula Bradley (DUP, Belfast North)

Can the deputy First Minister give us any update on the progress of the Ulster canal?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Some progress has been made. Back in 2007, as you know, Waterways Ireland was given NSMC approval to explore the potential to restore the Ulster canal from Upper Lough Erne to Clones. Phase 1 of the restoration, from Upper Lough Erne to Castle Saunderson, is now complete; preliminary work on phase 2, from Clones to Clonfad, has now commenced; and phase 3, when complete in the future, will connect Castle Saunderson with Clonfad and complete the restoration of the Ulster canal from Upper Lough Erne to Clones. I welcome the progress that had been made and the commitment from the Irish Government to completing the third phase. The project will deliver social and economic benefits and will absolutely improve citizens' lives.

Martina Anderson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

I thank the joint First Minister for that statement and ask her for an indication as to what focus the North/South Ministerial Council will have on the north-west development fund in any future funding arrangements.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Thanks for the question. The current north-west development fund is still running, with funding approved until 2022. This includes a six-month extension of the funding period to take account of the COVID pressures and their implications for projects. The total investment committed by the Executive is approximately £2·15 million. This commitment is match funded by the Irish Government, as agreed in the Fresh Start Agreement in 2015. The north-west development fund has delivered a number of successful projects. Some examples are: developing economic growth through trade and investment missions; developing the physical environment by contributing to the INTERREG greenways project; and, through north-west sports development, strengthening community cohesion and well-being. The Irish Government indicated in New Decade, New Approach that they were committed in principle to providing further funding to the north-west development fund in collaboration with the Executive. The north-west regional development group recently wrote to us seeking a continuation of the fund beyond the current arrangements, and the First Minister and I are considering this request, which will require engagement with the Irish Government.

Matthew O'Toole (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

Deputy First Minister, there has been a lot of chatter in the last few weeks about what is and is not in the Good Friday Agreement. Do you recognise that paragraph 17 of strand two of the agreement says that the North/South Ministerial Council should:

"consider the European Union dimension of relevant matters, including the implementation of EU policies and programmes and proposals under consideration in the EU"?

To that end, can you be more specific about exactly what the North/South Ministerial Council is doing in relation to the implementation of the protocol and the protection of this entire island and why we are waiting until December to have a plenary session of the North/South Ministerial Council, after the deadline for

[Inaudible]

—.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

The Member has asked his question.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

As I said in my introductory remarks, this issue was discussed at the North/South Ministerial Council plenary session. That is not the only forum in which to discuss it, but it certainly is a forum in which to discuss it. If we happen to need other meetings outside the plenary format, we will not be shy in asking for them, particularly given the volatility of the situation that we find ourselves in right now. We want to see an outcome that works for people here. We want to see certainty and the minimisation of any disruption to trade. Those things are all crucially important, but we are clearly in politically volatile times with Brexit and what that means, and we hope that there is an outcome through the Joint Committee. I am happy to keep the Member updated on any discussions that we have on a North/South basis with regard to Brexit.

Rosemary Barton (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Deputy First Minister, in your statement, you affirmed that everything possible would be done in coordination and cooperation between the Northern Ireland Executive and the Government of the Republic of Ireland to tackle the latest outbreak of COVID. I represent a border constituency, and it is often the situation that neighbours from either side of the border find themselves going on the same holiday abroad together. When they return, those living in the Fermanagh/Tyrone area have to self-isolate for two weeks. If this is violated, they suffer the full rigour of the law, while those living in the Cavan/Monaghan area are free to socialise and mix and even come to Enniskillen.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Can the Member to come to her question?

Rosemary Barton (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

They can even come to Enniskillen to socialise. What discussions have there been about cooperation and coordination on issues that could result in the spread of COVID or endanger people?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Thanks. The Member does represent a border constituency and understands the challenges. She understands very well that the virus does not stop just because you move from one constituency to another or from one jurisdiction to another. That is why North/South cooperation on the issue of COVID is absolutely vital if we are going to be successful. I welcome the fact that there has been ongoing engagement at Chief Medical Officer level and at ministerial level, but, as we face into the winter months, we need to seriously ramp that up and work collectively across the island. We live on a very small island, and changes and differences in approach confuse the public, particularly in border constituencies. I think that we have to have an eagle eye to all of that and all the restrictions that are in place and work in tandem as best we can.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

Is the deputy First Minister still committed to an extraordinary British-Irish Council meeting, and who does she believe or consider has been most reluctant to see one take place thus far?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I am very strongly on the record in saying that we need to have a British-Irish Council meeting, and we have asked for that and pushed for it on a number of occasions, even as recently as the weekend, when we had a call with Scotland, Wales and Michael Gove and again mentioned it there. I think that it is important that we have these meetings on a North/South and east-west basis. I am committed to all aspects of the Good Friday Agreement and all its institutions, so I think that that meeting should happen as a matter of urgency.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for making the statement today, and I note the cooperation between the Chief Medical Officers, going right back to 14 March. In the light of the fact that we are seeing very worrying increases in the spread of the virus from Dublin to Derry, that we are also seeing the unequal impact that that is having on working-class communities from Ballymun to Ballymena and that we are seeing postcodes affected here in the North that run along the border, to what extent is there effective cooperation between the Executive and the Government in Dublin in relation to COVID-19?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

As I said, I think that the extent of the ongoing discussion has been happening from the very outset of COVID, but I do think that it is time for us to renew our efforts and our focus, given what we are facing in the weeks and months ahead. You rightly point out border communities, for example Strabane and Lifford, and you can see the pattern of the virus spreading. Those are all worrying developments, so now more than ever I think that we need to be very coherent and joined-up in our approach and continue, through the vehicle of the North/South Ministerial Council sectoral meetings and on an ongoing basis, that regular engagement if we are going to be successful across this island in driving down transmission rates and trying to see our population get to the other side of this coronavirus.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

Deputy First Minister, Brexit looms large as the UK approaches the endgame. Can the First Minister and deputy First Minister assure the House that they jointly share the best interests of people and businesses, given the often conflicting views of their respective parties?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I do not think that it is any secret to the Member that the First Minister and I have different outlooks on Brexit, but we have a commonality on the matter of protecting our people, and we want to see the minimisation of any disruption. I hope that a political outcome is achieved here over the next number of weeks, and I will use my best endeavours to play my part in all of that.

Emma Rogan (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Give the rise in positive cases of COVID-19 in recent days and the challenges that the two Governments face together, can the Minister confirm when the next health sectoral meeting will be?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The next meeting will take place on 2 October. That is very timely given where we are at with the virus' spread. We in the Executive will have big decisions to take on how we manage our way through this crisis, so I think that that meeting on 2 October, only a number of days away, will be really useful and timely.

Justin McNulty (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the deputy First Minister for coming here and making a statement. Minister, given what previous Members who have spoken said about the increasing numbers of COVID cases from Dublin to Derry, do you agree that we should adopt a Fortress Ireland approach, with heightened collaboration, North and South, to ensure that we battle this virus effectively together?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

We live on a very small island with a small population; we are one epidemiological unit, and I think that our best defence against this virus is actually to fight it in an all-island way. Just as we have that Fortress Ireland approach when it comes to animal and plant health, I think that it is obviously important that we apply that also to our people.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Minister, what discussions have you had about higher education in the North/South Ministerial Council? As you are very well aware, New Decade, New Approach includes a commitment for the Northern Ireland Executive to deliver the expansion of Magee to up to 10,000 students, and the Irish Government have made a commitment to support capital investment for the same expansion. It is important that both Governments jointly progress this policy and project.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Thank you to the Member for the question. There will be a sectoral meeting — I think that it is at the very start of November — at which this will get a lot of discussion. The Executive, as you know, have reaffirmed their commitment, which was set out in New Decade, New Approach, to establish the graduate entry medical school on the Magee campus. That commitment is also absolutely in recognition of the fact that this is a transformative project for the North and the north-west region, both for the economic recovery and the wider social benefits that will come with it. The objective is to progress the project to secure a sustainable outcome in the fastest feasible time frame, with the aim of the first intake of 70 students in September 2020-21. This is a complex project, no doubt, involving a number of Departments and external agencies. The Executive Office is working with the Health, Economy and Finance Departments to prepare further advice to the Executive on the issues that need to be addressed to secure sustainability.

The inclusive futures fund will provide some £15 million of funding for three years to provide the platform for the school's long-term success. The Executive have also provided an assurance that they will provide funding for the project going forward, so it is a good news story for the north-west.

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

I have heard a lot of people say that COVID does not respect borders, and I absolutely agree with that: it does not respect borders. Considering the free movement of people on this island and off this island, on the rest of the British Isles, surely the Minister should be arguing for an all-islands approach — as in a British Isles approach — to deal with COVID-19.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I am on the record as saying that we should approach this in a very joined-up way, so I believe that we need an all-island approach. I actually think that we should have an all-islands approach, particularly when it comes to things like travel. There are differences right across the islands and that is very confusing for the public in trying to work out where exactly they take their lead from. So, there is merit in all those things, and I am happy to work across these islands to battle COVID-19. It is about people first in the middle of all of this. It has to be about getting people through the pandemic and about us showing political leadership to get them through.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

In discussing COVID, did the Council discuss the undermining of the public messaging? In that regard, as a token of her sincerity, did she apologise for attending the Storey funeral? Even now, does she yet apologise for attending the Storey funeral?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The North/South Ministerial Council did not discuss that.

Trevor Lunn (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Minister for her statement. The statement references the ongoing work of the north-west strategic growth partnership and indicates some cooperation to unlock the full potential of the economies of both jurisdictions. Therefore, I ask her specifically, has there been any discussion about the N2/A5 project and the Narrow Water bridge?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

We talked about both those issues. The A5, for example, will greatly enhance the connectivity of the north-west, so it is a project that we all want to see finalised. It will reduce journey times and it will improve journey time reliability, road safety and all of that. In New Decade, New Approach, the Irish Government reaffirmed their £75 million funding commitment up to 2022 for the A5.

Following the quashing of the decision to proceed with the scheme in November 2018, the Department for Infrastructure is progressing the necessary work to enable a fresh decision to be taken. I understand that the commissioner's report on the public local inquiry into the 'Environmental Statement Addendum 2019' and related matters has been forwarded to the Department for Infrastructure, so we expect to see some progress being made there.

In terms of Narrow Water bridge, again, we are absolutely committed to progressing that project, which has very strong local support, to link the communities on both sides of Carlingford lough and to take full advantage of the tourism potential. Again, I understand that Minister Mallon visited the project recently and that the work on updating the economic appraisal of options continues in the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport. So, I hope that we will be able to see some progress being made there also.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Members, considerable time remains for this section, so if any Member wishes to ask a further question to the deputy First Minister, I ask them to indicate by rising in their place.

Justin McNulty (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Newry and Armagh)

Minister, was the plight of frontier, cross-border workers raised at the North/South Ministerial Council? As per EU law, as I have been advised by various Ministers, North and South, the responsibility for assisting those people lies with the Minister for Communities. Will you confirm that and confirm whether you have made requests to the Minister for assistance for people who have been left behind or fallen through the gaps in the net of COVID support throughout the pandemic?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I can confirm that, yes, I have raised that issue on numerous occasions and I have written to the Irish Government on the issue. I think that it is a disgrace that those workers have been left behind. There needs to be a resolution. It is in the hands of the Irish Government to find that resolution and to make sure that those workers receive the payment to which they are entitled.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Minister, thank you for your reply to my previous question, but it was not a reply to the question that I asked. I asked what conversations had taken place in the North/South Ministerial Council in relation to the further expansion of the Magee campus to 10,000 students, not about the medical school — that is a separate issue. The question is about the further expansion, the commitment made in the 'New Decade New Approach' document and the commitments made by the Irish Government for capital expenditure and investment in that expansion. So, could you answer that question, please?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I am sorry if I misunderstood your question. The issue was not discussed in detail at the NSMC because, obviously, we had a wide agenda, but there are, as I said, a number of sectoral meetings coming up, and that issue will get a much more detailed hearing. A meeting is due to take place on 6 November, so, hopefully, that will be an opportunity for a fulsome discussion on the issue.

We are committed to the full expansion of Magee. We have made that very clear, and it is a commitment in 'New Decade, New Approach'. We will just have to work very hard collectively in actually trying to deliver it.

Matthew O'Toole (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, for letting us all in again. Deputy First Minister, in relation to what we discussed earlier, will you use the North/South Ministerial Council to advance one particular question? All here want to see maximum access for Northern Ireland businesses North/South but also, critically, east-west. Can she advocate, via the North/South Ministerial Council, that businesses here be given access to EU trade deals? That is implicit in the Northern Ireland protocol, and, with goodwill, it should be possible to agree it in Brussels with, hopefully, goodwill from London.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Yes. I am happy take that up and to raise it at the next meeting. I think that, in an ongoing way with our colleagues in Dublin, we use that forum as a way of trying to advance such things, although, outside of that, there are obviously other opportunities, and I am happy to take that up.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

The Minister said that undermining the public message in respect of COVID was not discussed at the meeting. Since then, of course, we had the scandal of the golf dinner in Dublin. Does the Minister think that those who attended that and apologised were right to apologise, and, if they were right, why has she not apologised?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Again, the issue was not discussed at the NSMC.

Trevor Lunn (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

Just to develop the discussion on Narrow Water, Minister, I know that it would have considerable infrastructural effect on the area, but do you agree that the tourism potential will be immense if we join up the Cooley peninsula and Carlingford with the Mournes? Considerable money was spent in the past on tourism development in the Mournes. It seems a pity that this scheme cannot be progressed quickly. It has been going on for about 10 years.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

You are absolutely right. It has been going on for so long, and then people start to lose heart and think that it will not be delivered. We have a restored Assembly and Executive, and we have the NSMC now meeting. I intend to pursue this project because we cannot overstate the tourism potential that it will have for the area. I think that it is immense. It is in all our interests to try to get the project delivered as quickly as possible, given that it has been so long in the making.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

Given what we have heard today about COVID-19 being no respecter of borders, which I fully agree with, and the fact that some of our sporting organisations operate on a cross-border theme, particularly the GAA, does the deputy First Minister have any comments in relation to what has appeared to be a breach of COVID regulations with the mass pitch invasion at Dungannon's GAA game?

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

I remind Members that questions are meant to be about the ministerial statement. I invite the Minister to respond if she wishes to do so.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

It is not related to the NSMC.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

Thank you very much for letting us back in, Deputy Speaker. My question relates to the forthcoming health meeting. As MLAs, we have many emails in our in-boxes around waiting lists and delays because of the reconfiguration from COVID. To what degree will you look at an all-island approach to getting those waiting lists down and sharing capacity?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The detail of that would fall to the Health Minister, so the Member may wish to take that up with him, but there are opportunities for us to work across this island. Our waiting lists were already in a dire situation before COVID, and a lot of things have been put on hold as we try to respond to the pandemic, but we have to find ways to make sure that we look after people's health outside of the COVID situation.

For those people who have been waiting for a long time, I am quite sure that there are avenues for us to be able to work across the island to provide people with the opportunity to get the medical attention that they will require. There will be a need for us all to work really hard to address the waiting lists because we know that they are dire. They were dire before COVID, and they will be in an even worse state on the other side of it.

Martina Anderson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Thank you for letting us in again, Deputy Speaker. Minister, will you elaborate more on your statement when you talked about the all-Ireland economic recovery and what way that was dealt with at the North/South Ministerial Council meeting? Will there be a sectoral meeting on that or did the meeting go into any great detail?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The meeting itself had an understanding of the current situation that we find ourselves in, dealing with a global pandemic, how we are going to build on the other side of that, how we are going to build the economy, how we are going to look after society as a whole. There will be more opportunities to advance the economic recovery work through the sectoral meeting, which I am assuming — I do not have a date in front of me — is coming up shortly. We have to have a serious conversation about the type of society that we want to build on the other side of this. The economic recovery will be very difficult and very challenging, so we need to think outside the box and work collectively across this island.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

Is the Minister aware of why the Justice Minister was absent? Were justice issues discussed?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

No, I cannot remember why the Justice Minister was not available to attend, but there were no issues discussed that fell within her remit that we were not able to deal with.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

That concludes questions on the ministerial statement. I ask Members to take their ease for a few moments.

Committee Business

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Order. Members should resume their seats when they have finished tidying.

Paula Bradley (DUP, Belfast North)

I beg to move

That, in accordance with Standing Order 33(4), the period referred to in Standing Order 33(2) be extended to 29 January 2021, in relation to the Committee Stage of the Pension Schemes Bill [NIA Bill 07/17-22].

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

The Business Committee has agreed that there should be no time limit on the debate. I call the Chairperson of the Committee for Communities to open the debate on the motion.

Paula Bradley (DUP, Belfast North)

As the House will be aware, the Pensions Schemes Bill passed its Second Stage on 7 July 2020, and it was then referred to the Committee for Communities for its Committee Stage. At its last meeting prior to the summer recess on 8 July, the Committee agreed to issue its call for evidence, which went out on 5 August.

Without going into the detail of the Bill, it is worth advising Members that it seeks to introduce a regulatory regime in Northern Ireland for a form of occupational pension schemes called master trusts, in order to address a legislative gap. A similar provision was made for England, Scotland and Wales in the Pension Schemes Act 2017. Following the summer recess, the Committee began its consideration of the Bill, but it still has to undertake a number of tasks.

The Bill is key to ensuring the full regulation of master trusts that operate in Northern Ireland. Therefore, it is essential that the Committee carries out robust scrutiny of the Bill, which contains 45 clauses and three schedules. That means that it needs to extend the Committee Stage.

At its first formal meeting after summer recess on 9 September, the Committee agreed to request an extension to the Committee Stage until 29 January 2021. That will allow the Committee for Communities to complete its scrutiny as fully as it can and within an achievable time frame. I commend the motion to the House.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

No other Member has indicated that they wish to speak on the motion. I will, therefore, put the Question.

Question put and agreed to. Resolved:

That, in accordance with Standing Order 33(4), the period referred to in Standing Order 33(2) be extended to 29 January 2021, in relation to the Committee Stage of the Pension Schemes Bill [NIA Bill 07/17-22].

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

I ask Members to take their ease for a few moments.

Private Members' Business

Martina Anderson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

I beg to move

That this Assembly acknowledges that the majority of citizens voted to reject Brexit; recognises that the departure from the EU gives rise to substantial political and economic challenges for our society; further recognises that while the protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland is imperfect, it guarantees that, whatever the circumstances, there will be no hard border on the island and will protect the Good Friday Agreement in all its dimensions, North/South cooperation and the all-island economy; believes it would be entirely unacceptable if the British Government sought to abandon these safeguards and mitigations, as this would amount to a serious betrayal of an existing international treaty; and calls on the British Government to honour their commitments, and to ensure, now, the rigorous and full implementation of the protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland, prioritise peace and stability, and work to secure a future economic partnership with their EU colleagues now and in the weeks ahead.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

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

Martina Anderson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

There is no doubt that Brexit is an unmitigated disaster. How the British Government treated the Brexit withdrawal agreement and the protocol is no different from any other agreement that they have ever made. Sinn Féin warned the EU not to trust the British Government, and, true to form, after agreeing the withdrawal agreement and the protocol, the British Government immediately reinterpreted it, misinterpreted it, transcribed it incorrectly into domestic law and simply denied it.

EU laws, policies and funding touch on almost every aspect of our daily lives. There are, in fact, 115 areas of EU law that engage the Executive's and the Assembly's competency. As the motion states, it is unacceptable that the British Government would seek to abandon the safeguards and mitigations that are in the withdrawal agreement and the protocol. Brexiteers such as Geoffrey Cox have described what Britain has done with its Internal Market Bill as "unconscionable". The Lord Chief Justice, Declan Morgan, stated that Britain's Brexit plan Bill undermines the rule of law domestically. Scotland's most senior law officer resigned over Britain's Internal Market Bill. Angela Merkel says that Britain has joined the "ranks of despots". All of that speaks volumes.

Even hardened Brexiteers must know that Brexit gives rise to political and economic challenges and that it is damaging, reckless and wrong. The Good Friday Agreement is facing an attack on all fronts. The British Government have eroded the authority of this Assembly — for example, by overriding our budgetary role — and can do so without so much as a nod to the Finance Minister, Conor Murphy, or the wider Executive.

The British Government have also sidelined North/South cooperation. The environment, for instance, is a Good Friday Agreement area of cooperation, but Brexiteers rejected the need for a level playing field that would ensure that EU environmental protections were aligned across the island. Environmental standards in Derry would have remained the same as those in Buncrana, and anyone with a titter of wit knows and understands that pollution does not know any border. The Good Friday Government states that the British and Irish Governments must:

"discuss, consult and use best endeavours to reach agreement on co-operation on matters of mutual interest",

which include EU matters, yet no consultation or discussion took place between the British and Irish Governments, because the British Government completely ignored the role of the Irish Government as a co-guarantor of the agreement.

The British Government are driving a horse and cart through strands one, two and three of the Good Friday Agreement. As Sinn Féin said in 2016 about the Good Friday Agreement, and many others have repeated it, "Britannia waived the rules". The protocol in the withdrawal agreement was not perfect. It was an ugly compromise, but it mitigated the worst impacts of Brexit. It prevented a harder border on the island of Ireland, protected the all-Ireland economy and upheld the Good Friday Agreement in all of its parts.

We have heard lots of comments about where our biggest market is. The fact is that the North's economy is dominated by SMEs, 80% of which trade across Ireland. Here are examples of the breathtaking scale of the damage done to lives and livelihoods by this Brexit mess. One quarter of the milk produced in the North is processed in the South. Chickens in their thousands produced in the South are processed in the North. Some 10,000 pigs come to the North from the South every week.

The production of Guinness necessitates approximately 13,000 crossings in Ireland every year, and, every day, almost 7,000 goods vehicles travel the A1 dual carriageway between Belfast and Dublin. Coca-Cola employs 522 people in Lisburn, and its produce is sold throughout Ireland. Any delays on the island of Ireland, as a result of Brexit, will cost €100 for every lorry, many of which cross the border every day. Bombardier, which is one of the North's largest employers, engages more than 60 suppliers in the South of Ireland. Food, beverages etc account for 49% of the all-Ireland manufacturing trade. Some 10% of the North's GDP comes from the EU, so that would mean that £3·5 million of European funding was gone.

Sinn Féin's position on east-west trade is clear: it must be as frictionless as possible but let us nail the nonsense about not tolerating a border in the Irish Sea. Have you lot been asleep? For many decades, there has been a border in the Irish Sea. Animals and animal produce, food and fertiliser, amongst many other things, have been checked at the border for many years, so that new-found offence does not wash with thinking people. Unfortunately, Brexit will intensify those checks, but we tried to warn Brexiteers that there would never be a good Brexit and that there would be consequences. A lot of focus has rightly been put on trade, goods and farmers in the North losing over £2 billion of European funding payments, while many groups that are losing EU social funds look on in despair and increasing alarm.

Let us not forget another big erosion caused by Brexit: your hard-won rights. Sometimes, we do not know what we have until it is gone. Last week, the Human Rights Commission and the Equality Commission addressed the Executive Office Committee. Both commissions live in hope that the British Government will honour article 2 of the protocol to the withdrawal agreement, which states that there will be no diminution of our rights. Hopes and wishes are for Christmas: British duplicity, on the other hand, is, unfortunately, real and worrying. British Ministers have already expressed an interest in lighting a bonfire under hard-won rights; in fact, they started that fire when Brexit enabled them to bin the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, which prevents discrimination, including disability discrimination, and recognises the rights of people with disabilities to benefit from measures designed to ensure their independence and integration. Given that the North has the lowest level of human rights protections, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights was important for us here. The DUP will not agree to a single equality Bill or to a bill of rights, so do not believe them when they tell us that those rights will be sorted. Maternity leave, workers' rights, consumer rights, equality pay and much more are under threat, and the British Government have already declared their intention to commence a full-frontal attack on rights when they scrap the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Sinn Féin motion calls for the full implementation of the Irish protocol, as agreed. That is in the best interests of all citizens across the island, and I urge parties to recognise that. Sinn Féin also calls on the Dublin Government, the EU and the international community to, again, stand firm in defence of the Irish peace process and in opposition to the increasingly reckless actions of the British Government led by Boris Johnson. The EU Council told us that there is a democratic way back into the EU, and that if, through a democratic process the country is reunited, the whole of Ireland will be in the EU. Those having that sensible, rational and legitimate conversation about constitutional change and how best to share this island in the future are the reasonable people in the room. We are the people who will work to defend the Good Friday Agreement, the all-Ireland economy —

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

So says a bomber.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Order.

Martina Anderson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

— and the peace process from Britain's reckless Brexit agenda.

There is not an MP in Westminster stopping Boris or Brexit, but you, the people, through a democratic process, can stop him and his Cabinet from imposing all this madness on all of us.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Will the Member draw her remarks to a close?

Martina Anderson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Go raibh míle maith agaibh. Thank you.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The Member who introduced the Sinn Féin motion has the reputation of speaking with such grace and poise. She told the former British Prime Minister in the European Parliament to:

"stick it where the sun doesn't shine".

Then we are the ones who are unreasonable because of the position that we take. I have to say to Sinn Féin: if you are going to introduce such controversial motions, have them proposed by somebody who we may take a little bit more seriously than the Member for Foyle.

The motion reveals what it is all about for Sinn Féin. It is all about the North/South; it is all about the all-island agenda and the reunification of this island that the Member spoke of. Nowhere in the motion does it mention east-west. That does not exist in the motion that Sinn Féin have brought. It talks about:

"North/South cooperation and the all-island economy;"

Then, of course, it repeats the debate about Brexit and the "citizens", undefined of where, who rejected Brexit. Let us not repeat that it was a United Kingdom-wide referendum. Let us not go over the ground that constituencies, including my own, voted to leave the European Union. The people of Northern Ireland do not want to go over that debate; we are now dealing with the outworkings of it, whether you agreed or not.

The motion talks about the protocol being "imperfect". There is an understatement. Of course it is imperfect, but ignore the consequences because it delivers the objective that Sinn Féin, the SDLP, and the Alliance Party, which supported the protocol, want to achieve.

When we hear from the Alliance Party, it will be interesting to hear about that. The Alliance Party has joined with Sinn Féin and the SDLP at every opportunity when it has come to the European Union and Brexit, and have always gone against the unionist people's position.

Before the Internal Market Bill was even published —.

A Member

Will the Member give way?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I will not give way. Members were jumping up and down with Matters of the Day, before they knew what was in the Bill. Such is the interest that they have when it comes to the detail of how we work out this protocol and minimise its impact.

The protocol and the barriers that it creates to trade undermines our ability to have the unfettered trade that has been often talked about by not just the United Kingdom but by the European Union. However, when you see that in reality, there is not unfettered access because the protocol is an instrument to punish the people here in Northern Ireland and the United Kingdom. It is an instrument being exploited by the European Union and our predatory neighbour, the Irish Republic, when it comes to commercial activities that are going to flow as the outworking of it.

Those Members in the SDLP, Sinn Féin and the Alliance Party dismiss it. It is no surprise that the Alliance Party dismisses it again, given the position that it has held. The implications on trade should not be diminished by anybody in the House.

Gary Middleton (DUP, Foyle)

Will the Member give way?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I will.

Gary Middleton (DUP, Foyle)

I thank the Member for giving way. Would the Member agree that it is a ludicrous position that some MPs, including the MP for Foyle, Colum Eastwood, are actively campaigning against trade deals with the US, given the significant economic challenges that exist within our constituency?

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

The Member has an extra minute.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Therein, I think, the public will see that not only do we need to agree to the position of the parties opposite when it comes to this, but if you dare go against it, they say, "we will lobby in the United States and seek to punish the people by not having a trade agreement".

Is it not absurd that if you do not get their politically ideological-driven position, you will then penalise the people of Northern Ireland? You will seek to damage our economy, will lobby in the States to try to prevent a trade deal from taking place and then you go on to say that this threatens peace and stability. In Westminster, the Member for Foyle went on to talk about violence.

You will use not only political arguments, and want to use economic leverage, but you follow it up with threats of violence to achieve what you want to achieve. That is implicit when you talk about peace and stability if we do not do what you want. Where is the threat coming from to peace and stability? Where is the violence going to come from?

You use it implicitly to imply, "Do as we say because somewhere out there could be a problem that could then inflict something that damages our peace and stability".

So, whenever I look at the motion, I think that there is no other position that any unionist, certainly, could take but to reject it. Indeed, that is the position that should be taken by those who actually care about the people of Northern Ireland. That is because 65% of purchases come from Great Britain — that is £13·3 billion of purchases — and you want to put up trade barriers, have customs declarations, regulatory burdens and increased costs. Our consumers then pay the price. Then, 53% of external sales from Northern Ireland go into Great Britain, which is £2·3 billion of sales.

The Member for Foyle who moved the motion talked about 80% of SMEs trading on an all-island basis — 90% of SMEs trade with Great Britain, but there is no concern for the implications that there could be for the costs of their business. The motion is politically and ideologically driven in order to advance the only issue that Sinn Féin cares about with Brexit, and that is the reunification of Ireland. Everyone should reject it, but Alliance will still vote with Sinn Féin —

1.15 pm

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Will the Member draw his remarks to a close?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

— and its bedfellows in the SDLP.

Matthew O'Toole (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

I will try to lower the temperature after some tub-thumping there.

It is difficult to take seriously the suggestions from anyone in the DUP that they care about the fettering of trade or trade barriers when this entire process has been driven by Brexit, which, at its core and at first principles, is about increasing trade barriers on the continent of Europe between the United Kingdom and the EU. It is very difficult to be lectured by people like Mr Givan, who were triumphant enthusiasts for Brexit, which will probably mean the biggest increase in trade barriers in the modern era and certainly since the Second World War. It is a remarkably ironic statement; Alanis Morissette could not have written Mr Givan's speech any better, given the level of irony in it.

My party and I support the motion. I agree with the sentiment in it, which is that no one should be in any doubt that the protocol is an imperfect document. Let us be absolutely clear: I am sure that, five years ago, my party, others in the Chamber and I would not have selected the protocol as a framework for Northern Ireland, this island or commerce across these islands. We would not, but we are presented with a position where successive United Kingdom Governments, reaching their zenith under Boris Johnson and the ideologues around him, have decided that they want to break from the European Union in the sharpest, most dramatic way possible. That presents people in Northern Ireland with a dilemma. It is the same dilemma that was there in 2016. I sometimes talk about this in the Chamber. I used to be a civil servant, and I worked in Number 10 Downing Street before the referendum in 2016 and subsequent to it. I have since left. A large part of the reason for that is a deep and abiding frustration with the recklessness towards Northern Ireland, including to not only our post-conflict society but to our economy and people. It has been deeply frustrating, and, unfortunately, it has got only worse. I

Is the protocol perfect? No, it absolutely is not. Let me first be really clear about what the protocol is. It is a limited set of protections against the creation of a hard border, largely for goods, on the island of Ireland, so Northern Ireland will remain in the single market for goods and subject to the European Union's customs code. Effectively, that means that Northern Ireland will be in the EU customs union. But it does not mean that there will not be a hardening of the border in a whole range of other areas.

There are certain Members on the opposite Benches who probably quite gleefully like the idea of divergence between the two jurisdictions on this island. They will get it, unfortunately, in many areas, because there will be divergence in the services economy. It will be more difficult for people who are involved in services to do business across the border on the island of Ireland. If that is what you sought from Brexit, well done, because you are going to get it. We are going to have divergent regimes for immigration, and that is going to throw up all sorts of challenges. There are innumerable other areas for which there will be a hardened border on the island of Ireland, but specifically for goods, we have protection from a hardening of the border, and there are certain other protections as a result of the protocol. So, yes, we absolutely need to see those protections delivered upon.

It is also the case that the protections in the Ireland/Northern Ireland protocol were agreed by the British Government less than a year ago. It is important for people to reflect on what it means for the reputation of the United Kingdom Government when a Minister stands at the Dispatch Box and says, "The UK is going to breach international law". There are some people here who perhaps have long-standing reasons to distrust what is said at a Dispatch Box in the House of Commons. There are others who do not. Nobody here should take lightly the idea that a British Government are gleefully walking away from their obligations under international law. Even if it is a stunt — a negotiating tactic to escalate tensions — we in this part of the world should be deeply angry at being used to escalate tensions in a negotiation between the UK and the EU.

The UK Government have, throughout the process — even before these institutions returned — called for the Northern Ireland Executive and Assembly to have their say. We had our say in June, but they did not listen. We asked for an extension to the transition period. I do not know how any right-thinking person, in the context of a pandemic, would not want the transition period to be extended. I reiterate that call today, but we have not heard a single acknowledgement of it from the British Government. Let us hope that, if we pass this motion today and a further private Members' motion that we are bringing tomorrow on the Internal Market Bill, finally, the —

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Will the Member draw his remarks to a close?

Matthew O'Toole (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

— Westminster Government will listen. We need the protocol to be delivered, not because it is an ideal situation, but because it is a base level of protection. I urge Members opposite to think hard about the kind of society that they want to live in and how we move our economy forward in a way that serves everyone in our society.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

The Ulster Unionist Party will not support this one-sided motion.

It should come as no surprise to Members that neither Boris Johnson nor the European Union seem to have the interests of the people of Northern Ireland at heart. Anybody who has kept a close eye on the current negotiations between the United Kingdom and the European Union will have heard numerous pronouncements about putting the people of Northern Ireland and the Belfast Agreement to the fore, and they will wonder whether some people will bother to read that document. Some of them should consider the implications of putting a border down the middle of the Irish Sea for the whole of Northern Ireland and these islands.

In my previous role as chief executive of the British Irish Chamber of Commerce, I was fully cognisant of the importance of the €1 billion, or £1 billion — there is not a lot of difference today — of trade that went back and forth across the Irish Sea every single week. That trade — North/South and east-west — is a circular trade. The very implication of putting a border down the Irish Sea, which many people seem to profess to do without realising the implications on trade for everybody, including businesses across these islands, has to be considered.

Matthew O'Toole (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

Will the Member give way?

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

No, not just at the moment. I will give way in a moment.

The key question for us, as Members of the Assembly, is this: what does it mean for the people of Northern Ireland when we look at issues in the future such as state aid rules, the role of the European Court of Justice, and how the Assembly will legislate for issues that apply directly to the people of Northern Ireland whilst at the same time dealing with the considerable number of issues that will be brought about by North/South and east-west borders being built?

The really significant issue that we have to deal with is the fact that time is running out. Come 1 January, we could be in a position where, despite what Simon Coveney says, food coming from the rest of our nation is deemed to be unacceptable. We have heard Michel Barnier and Simon Coveney say that that is a ridiculous statement. However, when given the opportunity in the Joint Committee to say that that will not be the case, guess what? They said nothing.

For the people of Northern Ireland — for our electorate, and for the consumers we all are — we need to get some degree of clarity about what is going on. That should be the issue in front of the House. That should be the issue for all of us. That is the question that we should be asking. We should be asking Boris Johnson. I am no friend of his. There are lots of questions to be asked of the political parties in the House that decided on 3 October last year that tariff and regulation boundaries down the middle of the Irish Sea were a good idea. The question facing us is about what is going to happen on 1 January. That is something that we, as an Assembly, should be concentrating on; we should not be looking at motions like this, which do not really ask specific questions. I must admit that I found it really surprising that the Member for Foyle mentioned checks on fertilisers going back and forth across the border. Anybody who is even remotely aware of what the circumstances were would know that, of course, there had to be checks on fertiliser because most of it was not being used for the appropriate purpose.

I do not think that anybody would believe that this motion is balanced. We need to be asking questions both of the United Kingdom Government and the European Union. We should all be asking those questions together. We should be doing that in such a manner that raises the appropriate issues for the people of Northern Ireland, namely what is going to happen to us on 1 January 2021?

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

I support the motion. The turbulent issue of Brexit overhangs our future. The protocol that was agreed less than a year ago and is now international law is, as Members have heard from around the Chamber today, an imperfect solution to the border issue for Northern Ireland, but it is a response to the potential barriers that a hard Brexit could construct. As a basic structure to protect the institutions which maintain our economic, political and social lives, it does have merit. It is an insurance policy, although clearly the original backstop, negotiated by a previous Prime Minister, was a better deal for Northern Ireland with fewer barriers and incorporated the whole of the United Kingdom in the single customs market. However, nothing is ever settled when it comes to Brexit or this Prime Minister.

Matthew O'Toole (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

Will the Member give way?

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

No, you are fine thanks. Sorry; apologies. I was in a different zone. I will give way.

Matthew O'Toole (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

I am really very grateful to the Member for giving way. This is a point that I did not get to make. Would he acknowledge that a large part of the reason why Theresa May's backstop, which would have largely avoided a border in the Irish Sea, did not pass was the kind interventions of the party opposite, the Democratic Unionist Party, which refused to support it and so, in many ways, they are the creators of the border in the Irish Sea that they now rail against?

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

The Member has an extra minute.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

Apologies again. Yes, of course I wholeheartedly agree. The amateur dramatics of the DUP in the last Parliament are clear for all to see.

Nothing is ever settled when it comes to Brexit or this Prime Minister. We now have an Internal Market Bill, which basically empowers the Government to override elements of an international treaty signed only months ago. This must be of profound concern to Members of Parliament who have been invited to participate, and have participated, in votes which break the law. It has also shamed the United Kingdom Government around the world. Let us be clear about that: the United Kingdom Government have been shamed by its Prime Minister and by its Cabinet.

It is hard to discern what this Government are doing or trying to achieve. Even if this is just a simple negotiating tactic, it undermines the United Kingdom's international reputation and the ability to strike further trade deals. Indeed, they have apparently lauded a trade deal with Japan, not a word of it different from what had already existed between Japan and the European Union.

The United Kingdom was admired as a member of the European Union for its influence, often by smaller member states for which the United Kingdom was often a reasoned voice. What sort of future will the United Kingdom have if it cannot and will not keep its word? Who would you deal with? Is this the global Britain that we want to be part of? One of the key prizes of Brexit is supposed to be the US trade deal; Mr Givan and others made reference to it. However, not just representatives of the House in America but democratic and republican senators have made it clear that they are concerned and disturbed by its effect on the Good Friday Agreement and the harm that it would cause.

There is also a clear risk to British/Irish relations, which have, it must be acknowledged, reached a high point over the last number of years. The cooperation and mutual respect between the United Kingdom and Ireland has been a key building block of the peace process and in building trust between both parts of this island.

A general election was won on the deal that included the protocol, but now we are told that we have to default on it and that no deal would be a good outcome. What a massive failure of politics it would be if we have no deal, an indication of a Government who do not know what they are doing and a blatant act of self-harm by a Prime Minister who does not care, exactly at a time when we need someone who is competent.

Brexit also brings friction. We need to mitigate that and protect the Good Friday Agreement. The United Kingdom seems determined to self-isolate from the world's biggest trading blocs and deny Northern Ireland the safety net that the withdrawal agreement included. Locally, we need our Ministers to get on with their job and implement the elements of the protocol. I fear that not only is time running out for Northern Ireland and its Ministers to get the job done but we will be in the business of further destroying livelihoods and businesses. Business needs certainty. It needs rules and a future in which trade barriers are low and not increasing.

The protocol is not perfect, but the apparent alternative is much worse. We need to get on with implementing it. It is in the United Kingdom Government's power to reach a deal with the EU that ensures that goods and services can flow and trade freely through these islands. We should build bridges, not borders.

Gary Middleton (DUP, Foyle)

The key line for me in the motion, which we will vote against, says "whatever the circumstances". That, in itself, nails the real motive for the motion. Whatever the circumstances — no matter how bad it is for Northern Ireland; no matter what effect it has on businesses or the constituents whom we represent — we must support the protocol.

Matthew O'Toole (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

Will the Member give way?

Gary Middleton (DUP, Foyle)

No, I will not.

That is a completely unacceptable position for anybody to take. Of course, it is no surprise that Sinn Féin would take that position, because it takes that position on a united Ireland: it does not matter if communities are divided or our businesses would be decimated, whatever the circumstances, we should support it. Again, that is an unacceptable position. I raised it with the EU ambassador when he came to Londonderry on Friday. I made the point that not one unionist party or, for that matter, not one unionist in this country supports the protocol. It is disastrous for the United Kingdom and for business, and it is important that they hear that message.

My colleague touched on this: for some parties in the Chamber, their priority is ensuring that connections with Dublin and the EU are retained, but, again, whatever the circumstances, they want us to support the protocol. Our MP for Foyle, Colum Eastwood, and other MPs were tripping over themselves to get on to the air waves to support the position taken by some US politicians on a US/UK trade deal. A constituency like mine of Foyle is devastated not only by the COVID pandemic but by years of issues and lack of infrastructure and investment, yet political parties are actively encouraging no US/UK trade deal. That is a crazy position to take. I ask Members to reflect on that. Members who go through the Lobby today are making it clear that, whatever the circumstances, they want to support the protocol. I ask Members to reflect on that.

As for the issues with the protocol, our party has been clear that we do not support it. At every opportunity, our Ministers, MPs and MLAs have actively campaigned to address some of its flaws, of which there are many. There are key concerns around the protocol. One that has been touched on and, again, was raised with the EU ambassador is the GB to NI trade tariffs and the risk there, with the fact that the EU was using Northern Ireland as leverage and risking a food blockade on Northern Ireland. The paperwork, the regulatory checks, the issues for our fisheries, VAT and state aid — all those issues are very much a concern to local businesses.

Much has been made of the Good Friday Agreement — the Belfast Agreement. The Belfast Agreement contains one substantive mention of the Republic of Ireland border, and that relates to demilitarisation, which has already happened. I know of no one who is calling for the army to rebuild those installations on the border. The Belfast Agreement, however, was about respecting —.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Gary Middleton (DUP, Foyle)

Yes, go ahead.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Is the Member aware that one of the people from the United States who have been calling for these arrangements, Representative Peter King, not only said that he supports the breaking of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) but wants walls and reinforcement of the border with Mexico and, I understand, Canada as well? How can that case be quoted as an example?

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

The Member has an extra minute.

Gary Middleton (DUP, Foyle)

I thank the Member for his intervention. That points out the hypocrisy. I take all those comments with a pinch of salt, because there are question marks over the motives of all the individuals who have commented. Those who will support the motion, whatever the circumstances, need to explain to our communities — our business community and our citizens — how making it easier for business to trade with its biggest market within the United Kingdom is a breach of the Belfast Agreement.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

Will the Member give way?

Gary Middleton (DUP, Foyle)

Yes, go ahead.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

Will the Member agree that, far from anyone talking about extra measures on the border, the then Prime Minister of the Irish Republic, who is the current Deputy Prime Minister of the Irish Republic, said that he could deploy his army on the border with Northern Ireland?

Gary Middleton (DUP, Foyle)

That was crazy. I agree with the Member; he is absolutely right.

In closing, I urge Members in the Chamber today to listen to the business community —

[Interruption.]

They laugh, but the people who are laughing are actually laughing at the business community, which is being —

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Order.

Gary Middleton (DUP, Foyle)

— decimated through the current pandemic and with potential borders going up in the Irish Sea. Those are the people to whom they will have to be answerable, and I urge Members to reflect on the fact that, whatever —

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Will the Member draw his remarks to a close?

Gary Middleton (DUP, Foyle)

— the circumstances, they should not support the motion.

Maolíosa McHugh (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

At the outset, I have to say that, if self-interest requires a U-turn, Boris Johnson is capable of that. We all know that, and Members on the other Benches know that only too well. He has U-turned on them many times, and, yet and all, like the obedient lapdog, they still lick his toes and wait for the crumbs off his table.

The EU withdrawal agreement protocol was a compromise, and built within that compromise is an arbitration system to allow the parties to deal with any disputes that may arise over certain issues. Many Members have touched on that but have not explained that, through that arbitration system, in the event of there being disputes on particular products or the likes of it, it could have been worked out between the parties that signed up to the agreement. However, by introducing his Internal Market Bill, Johnson is totally undermining the protocol. The protocol defends not only the interests of the people of the Six Counties but the Good Friday Agreement. It has been stoutly defended by member states of the EU and, more significantly, by the United States of America, guarantors of the Good Friday Agreement.

Let us not kid ourselves: the Internal Market Bill is about Boris Johnson and England and what is best for them. If truth be told, it is about fisheries to a lesser degree but, more significantly, about state aid, as the leader of the unionist party said, and the rules governing state aid to industry. It also gives the Tory Government the power to impose rules and regulations on the Assembly that can undermine our agriculture industry, particularly by compelling the Assembly to accept lower environmental, food safety and animal welfare standards. Boris Johnson, to whom we all listened recently, hides behind the defence of the Good Friday Agreement. He did not mention it when signing up to the protocol, but the European Union negotiators always had the Good Friday Agreement uppermost in their sights and its defence as the central plank from day one. Johnson went so far as to suggest — some people here have nearly touched on the same issue — that we in the North of Ireland might even be starved by the European Union, which would limit the import of food products to this island. It is ironic that a representative of the class and party who oversaw the starvation of millions of our people in the 19th century whilst exporting food from Ireland is telling us that the European Union will do the same because of limitations on the importation of food to this island. How ironic. I ask you: whom do you trust? Michel Barnier, chief negotiator for the European Union —

Some Members

No.

Maolíosa McHugh (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Ursula von der Leyen, head of the European Commission —

Some Members

No.

Maolíosa McHugh (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House of Representatives —

Some Members

No.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Order.

Maolíosa McHugh (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

— and many of our politicians from all parties in the North of Ireland and throughout the Republic of Ireland. Whom do you trust when it comes to defending our interests and our rights? Do you trust Boris Johnson, who shows no respect for this agreement and no respect for international treaties? Some Members were shouting "No", but the Lord Chief Justice, Declan Morgan, stated:

"International law is grounded on trust and confidence between nations".

When that is totally ignored, it seeps down and corrupts even our domestic law as well. Johnson is incapable of identifying with the age-old proverb of Na Fianna, "De réir mo bhriathair" , which means "According to my word". A more direct English translation into a cornerstone of the business community is, "My word is my bond". We must be seen to oppose this departure in every way through the motion proposed by Ms Anderson.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Will the Member bring his remarks to a close?

Maolíosa McHugh (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

It is a departure from basic law and from respect for law within nations and between nations. We must be much more principled in every respect in how we deal with our affairs.

Pat Catney (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Lagan Valley)

Like many in the Chamber, I was shocked and appalled when the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland admitted that the Internal Market Bill broke international law. For me, it showed that the current Tory Government could not care less about the Good Friday Agreement or the people of Northern Ireland.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Pat Catney (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Lagan Valley)

Absolutely.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Member very much for giving way. When talking about the breaching of international law, the most disappointing thing about the United Kingdom Government planning to do so is that it would take them down to the same level as the European Union and exactly the same level as the United States. The United Kingdom has a much higher standard to adhere to.

Pat Catney (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Lagan Valley)

I do not know whether I can agree with everything that you said, but I will tell you this: I am not a lawbreaker, and I would not like to think that you were either in some of the posts that you held before.

I have spoken many times of the need to protect the all-island economy, North/South and east-west. I have used the examples before, but a hard border on this island would have such a profound economic impact that I have to use every ounce of my breath to highlight the issue until someone, somewhere listens. Our whiskey industry is entirely integrated, with County Antrim producing single malt for the entire island and bottling whiskies for distillers in the Republic. In my constituency, Coca-Cola, which was mentioned earlier, bottles produce — syrup — that comes up from County Mayo, in the Republic, to Lisburn. The products are made in Lisburn, packaged and distributed throughout the whole island of Ireland. That is the unique business arrangement that that company has for this island. Those are just two large examples. Countless small and medium-sized enterprises that rely on products, services and buyers from across this island have no idea what is to come at the end of the year.

The impact is not felt just by current businesses; it is also preventing new businesses from opening. There is a unique craft whisky industry booming on the island, and this is becoming one of the most significant times for the product. Many distillers have opened in the North, but the uncertainty of Brexit has severely impacted on their money and trade. The UK Government tearing up international agreements on a whim only adds to that uncertainty, and I hear every day of more and more businesses that are giving up on the place that I call home and the place that I love: Northern Ireland. That is fundamentally wrong.

If we do not fight now, the situation will become terminal. Let us be clear, our people are the ones who will suffer from the protectionism and the policies of the Tory Government. I do not know if any Members got the opportunity to watch some of the events from culture night that were online at the weekend. The participants highlighted the strong artistic and cultural traditions that there are across the island, from Derry to Cork. John Hume understood that cultural connection, Martin McGuinness understood that cultural connection and the Reverend Ian Paisley understood that cultural connection. The Tory Government will never understand it; they will never understand the all-island make-up of our economy and our health and energy sectors. They do not even understand where the border is. In the face of Tory ignorance, it is on us to protest that failure of our citizens. I urge all Members to support the motion.

Philip McGuigan (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

I welcome the motion tabled by my colleagues and the opportunity to speak on a subject that is vital to my constituents in North Antrim, to many businesses big and small across the North and the all-island economy, to the hard-fought and hard-won gains of the Good Friday Agreement and to peace and stability on the island.

There is no good Brexit for the people of Ireland, which is why the majority of people in the North voted against it. Nobody wanted then, nor do they want now, barriers to trade or the movement of goods or people. That is why Sinn Féin did not support Brexit. All of the potential issues that are being discussed today, even some that are being discussed by the DUP and the Ulster Unionist Party, emanate from Brexit.

I hear Members on the other side of the House talking about the consequences of Brexit; a Brexit that they supported. Brexit is the problem. The Irish protocol is designed to mitigate against the worst impacts of Brexit on citizens, businesses and communities in the North. It should not need to be pointed out, but the protocol was an agreement that was reached between the EU and the current British Government. Yet, last week, we had the Internal Market Bill tabled by that same British Government to thwart an agreement and the commitments that they made.

Am I surprised that a British Government would make a deal, sign an agreement and then try to undo it or circumvent it in a way that breaks international law to suit its own narrow political interests? Am I surprised that the British Government would display little knowledge, and in some cases no knowledge, of the impact of their decisions on the people of this island? Am I surprised that, even when they are aware of the implications of their actions because they have been made clear to them, they care little about the impact of their decisions on the people on the island of Ireland, even when we are talking about something as important as the Good Friday Agreement and the peace process? You will not be surprised to hear that I am not surprised by anything that is done by this particular British Government.

It is important, though, that the Assembly, which is representative of the people and interests of the North, has its voice heard and registered. The Internal Market Bill and its implications for the Irish protocol are totally unacceptable. Indeed, they are very dangerous. There can be no damage to the Good Friday Agreement and no hardening of the border on the island of Ireland. We in Ireland cannot be collateral damage to a British Tory Brexit. If Brexit is to proceed, the Irish protocol must be implemented.

I sit on the Assembly's Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee, and on a weekly basis we discuss the potential negative impacts of Brexit and the uncertainty for our business community. There will be 25,000 front-line farming families affected. Obviously, a large percentage of the North's exports goes east but a far greater number of businesses — mainly small and medium enterprises — export largely or solely to the South. Fifty per cent more businesses here sell to the South than export to Britain. The vast majority of that trade is, as I said, carried out by SMEs, which are the backbone of our economy.

Eighty per cent of microbusinesses and 70% of small businesses export solely to the South. The agri-food sector, which is hugely important to the Northern economy, is no different. While east-west trading is undeniably hugely important, the production of the goods that we export is inextricably integrated North and South. Annually, over 400,000 pigs are exported from the South to the North for processing and the same number of lambs are exported North/South. Over 800 million litres of milk are exported to the North to be processed and then exported from the South. East-west trade, as I have said, is vital but in order for us to even produce the goods that are exported east, North/South trade must be seamless.

In the Agriculture Committee, we are told that 200 lorries a day come across the water to stock our shelves. Whilst that is obviously vital, anywhere from 6,000 to 12,000 heavy and light goods vehicles cross the border every day. In our Committee deliberations, we have also shared the concerns of those in the environmental sector about the impact on current EU legislation and on environmental protection. Regardless of political allegiances, we are an island nation with our own unique environment. Living on an island, it would be completely and utterly ridiculous for us to have different environmental standards and practices North and South. Birds and fish, rivers and hedgerows and the very air that we breathe are not bound by borders.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Will the Member bring his remarks to a close?

Philip McGuigan (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

The EU has some of the highest environmental standards in the world and without binding standards of the same or higher levels, we risk a race to the bottom for environmental standards and protections.

John Stewart (UUP, East Antrim)

I support my party colleague, Steve Aiken, who has already spoken in the debate, in saying that we will not be supporting the motion. I am pro-business and pro-Union and it is for those two fundamental reasons that I did not support Brexit. We firmly believe that it would not only, potentially, have an impact on the Union but would have massive consequences for business and trade. As democrats, we accepted the result when it came but it is barriers that are the biggest restrictions on trade. The protocol puts in place very difficult circumstances in which businesses will be able to trade east-west.

The motion refers to trade North/South and, obviously, that is important; there is no doubt that there is an all-island economy. However, fundamentally, Northern Ireland's biggest market is east-west, given its relationship with the rest of the United Kingdom. Any impediments to that would be deeply regrettable and would have a deep impact on existing businesses here. I know of one business in my constituency that reckons that it will cost it up to £1 million a year to implement some of the measures, red tape and bureaucracy that will be required just to have the protocol in place. That will be deeply damaging. I do not want to see any barriers in place but we do not want paperwork to be introduced that will prevent companies from doing the business that goes across every day. My party colleague mentioned the £1 billion in trade each week. Any impediments to that will be deeply damaging to our economy. It is regrettable, then, that that is not mentioned anywhere in the motion.

I also fear that, more and more, we will see in adverts and on TV that products that are sold online and elsewhere will not be available in Northern Ireland because so many companies here and across the United Kingdom will not want to do the paperwork or pay the additional costs that will be required to bring in those products, further diminishing Northern Ireland's economic impact. It is regrettable that that is not included in the wording of the motion. We have also talked about the impact on the potential for state aid and the impact of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in relation to any additional legislative burden that would be borne here by businesses and on their ability to trade.

The motion calls for the protection of the Good Friday Agreement in all its dimensions so that it is not diminished. That is somewhat ironic, given that it was just a couple of months ago that the Sinn Féin MP for Mid Ulster said in relation to the Good Friday Agreement that nationalists had been sold a pup. I am trying to figure out whether Sinn Féin supports the Good Friday Agreement or whether it is, as the Francie Molloy MP said, a pup that had been sold to the nationalist community. My party supported the Good Friday Agreement in all its parts —.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

John Stewart (UUP, East Antrim)

I am pushed for time, but I will give way briefly.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

On the subject of being sold a pup, does the Member agree that the Prime Minister sold the nation a pup when it came to the protocol and winning his election?

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

The Member has an extra minute.

John Stewart (UUP, East Antrim)

Indeed. Thank you for that intervention.

The Ulster Unionist Party supported the Good Friday Agreement throughout. When I spoke to my party colleague Reg Empey about this recently, he highlighted Sinn Féin's role in the agreement and said that it did not participate in any negotiations on strand one issues and, in fact, did not even endorse it at the end. It feels as if Sinn Féin found the protection of the agreement and all its entities quite recently and conveniently, as it did the relationship with the European Union, which is, again, a recent marriage of convenience.

I acknowledge the fact that some parties here have been dedicated and supported the European Union throughout. I refer to the SDLP, which was consistent in its message, for which I give it credit. However, Sinn Féin's continuous support and idolisation of the European Union in all its forms seems to have come quite late to the party.

From a unionist point of view, the Good Friday Agreement is clear:

"the present wish of a majority of the people of Northern Ireland, freely exercised and legitimate, is to maintain the Union and, accordingly, that Northern Ireland’s status as part of the United Kingdom reflects and relies upon that wish; and that it would be wrong to make any change in the status of Northern Ireland save with the consent of a majority of its people".

Quite how a border of any type in the Irish Sea is compatible with the Good Friday Agreement in that respect is, quite frankly, beyond me.

The Belfast Agreement removed articles 2 and 3 and enshrined the principle of consent, meaning that the Northern Ireland people, and they alone, would decide their future. Surely any impediment to trade in either direction, North/South, which is identified in the motion, or east-west, is a clear breach of the agreement. How can there be an argument against that? It cannot simply be a claim that barriers between Northern Ireland and the Republic are a breach of the agreement but any restriction on trade barriers going east-west is not. The two cannot be mutually exclusive. It does not seem to stack up.

With regard to the economic impacts, Northern Ireland's biggest market is Great Britain. Any impediments to that would be deeply damaging to trade here. The focus should be on getting to 1 January and constructively trying to carve out together a workable solution so that we can protect our businesses.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Members, Question Time is due to commence at 2.00 pm, and I suggest that the House takes its ease until then. The debate will continue after Question Time, and the next Member scheduled to make a contribution is Andrew Muir.

(Mr Speaker in the Chair)

Oral Answers to Questions — Health

Jemma Dolan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

1. Ms Dolan asked the Minister of Health whether he is considering measures to assist parents at test centres that require help in administering COVID-19 tests to children under five. (AQO 679/17-22)

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

I recognise that for young children, including children under five, testing may be an unpleasant and uncomfortable experience. Parents may find it easier to apply the swab in the home environment using the home testing kit that can be ordered through the digital portal or by calling the 119 helpline. There is a video available on the Public Health Agency (PHA) website to show parents how to take the swab. I am advised that health and social care colleagues are again looking at how best to support COVID swabs being taken on the rare occasions where parents or carers may not be able to obtain a sample at a national testing centre.

Jemma Dolan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for his answer. The process of parents administering tests to under-fives can be difficult and cause anxiety. There is also a deep concern among parents that they are not doing the test properly. Does the Minister agree that it is important that parents in those circumstances are provided with professional advice, or the necessary assistance, to ensure that the tests are administered correctly?

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

The Member makes a valid point because an accurate swab is critical no matter who it is from, whether a child, a pensioner or someone in a care home. The ability to take the swabs accurately and to ensure their validity is important. That is why there are people available in the test centres who can provide guidance. They will not actually take the physical swab, but they will provide guidance and help. As I said, there is a video online that is accessible to guide parents through the process.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his answers so far. Obviously, the testing of young children is naturally going to be very challenging, particularly if it is a self-testing kit. Is the Department of Health looking at what assistance could be made available by GPs in the COVID screening of the under fives through the COVID centres?

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

That is not an area that has been progressed. We are using the national testing site, and, as I said, we guide parents to use the home testing kits where they are available. I would definitely advise that, where parents are guided to get their child tested, they should. My colleagues in the Public Health Agency have advised that the testing data shows that, up until last Thursday, over 10,000 children under the age of 10 have been tested via the national testing initiative in Northern Ireland. It shows that that avenue is working and is accessible. That includes over 4,500 children under five, and the majority of those have been tested in the past three to four weeks. The avenue of testing and testing accessibility is working for us, but I will take the Member's comments away and see whether they are of an advantage somewhere.

Maolíosa McHugh (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

2. Mr McHugh asked the Minister of Health what actions he has taken to improve pillar 2 COVID-19 testing. (AQO 680/17-22)

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Member for his question. Pillar 2 testing is delivered through the participation in the national testing programme managed by the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) in London. I have discussed the importance of pillar 2 testing capacity directly with my ministerial counterpart in London on a number of occasions. My officials are in daily contact with officials in DHSC to ensure that Northern Ireland capacity is optimised through our participation in the national programme. Currently, in Northern Ireland, we have four drive-through fixed testing sites and six operational mobile testing units (MTU), with two more MTUs due to be operational shortly. The mobile testing units are deployed in towns and villages across Northern Ireland in response to local need. There is also the home-test option delivered directly to a person's home via postal order and/or the satellite test-kit option. That is being used to support a regular programme of testing in our care homes.

Demand for testing has increased significantly across the UK in recent weeks, and I am aware that the national testing programme is experiencing an exceptionally high demand. Overall, however, testing capacity is continually reviewed by my Department, and active discussions are under way to further enhance capacity across all aspects of our testing programme, because optimising available testing capacity will continue to be, for my officials and me, a key priority in the weeks and months ahead.

Maolíosa McHugh (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

On testing, we have seen increased problems and growing public frustration in accessing COVID-19 test centres, with people being directed in some cases to Scotland and even to Wales. Does the Minister accept that we need a locally based, accessible testing programme?

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Member for that point. When the Chair of the Health Committee asked a question for urgent oral answer last week, I addressed a number of those points. I highlighted the importance of our pillar 1 and pillar 2 systems. Pillar 1 is managed by my Department. Pillar 2, the national programme that we rely on heavily, is supported by access through the national testing programme, which has worked well for us in Northern Ireland. We have had difficulties in accessing, but, as I said last week in answer to the question for urgent oral answer, those were due to the computer-based booking programme that looked at who was booking a test and the closest test site but did not take into consideration the Irish Sea. My Welsh counterpart, Vaughan Gething, was having the same problem with the Bristol Channel. The programme was looking for the closest testing site rather than at one that was actually accessible.

Many of those problems and issues have been worked through, and we are not seeing the same challenges or problems with accessing a test. It was, I think, 'The Times' that ran a poll on five postcodes in every local authority by testing them once an hour every hour for 24 hours. Out of the local districts in Northern Ireland, only one did not hit 100% accessibility for testing, and that was Armagh, Banbridge and Craigavon, which was shown an 80% rise. However, it was a great poll, as it demonstrated our accessibility to the national testing programme. However, I caution those who go on to the portal simply to see where tests are without needing one: please think of the system's capacity.

Sinéad Bradley (Social Democratic and Labour Party, South Down)

If extra capacity is to go into any system, will the Minister consider the people in Kilkeel and the Mournes, who are still, despite the technical errors in the system having been ironed out, being requested to make unreasonable journeys, given that those people may be symptomatic?

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

As I think I said in my answer to the substantive question, when we see the increase of prevalence in COVID-19 in a specific area, we assign the mobile testing units to make sure that we can support the people in that area. That is how we target where the units access. We have four national testing sites across Northern Ireland to make sure that we can get access to the most central locations that we have for those fixed sites. However, we use and maximise the mobile testing units where appropriate.

Alan Chambers (UUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his response. Once again, it is worth noting that, without access to the United Kingdom's pillar 2 network, our ability to test the consistently large numbers that we are testing would be severely restrained. Can the Minister comment on whether he is considering expanding our own domestic pillar 1 capacity?

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Member. As I said in the substantive answer, that work is always ongoing, and we do it through our partners in C-TRIC in the west, through the Almac Group, through the universities, and even through the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute and the Department of Agriculture, where we look to see where the capacity is in lab availability and access and also to ensure that we can continue to enhance and increase that capacity in pillar 1. That is vital for us; it is what we use for our health service testing programmes. It is also the pillar that we use for residents and staff in our care homes and through which we have identified outbreaks.

Gordon Dunne (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for all his efforts to date on COVID; we appreciate all the work that he has done. Can he give us some assurance on the quality of the COVID test in order to give the public real confidence that it is effective and accurate? The accuracy of the test is an issue of concern among the public. What quality assurance systems are in place, Minister?

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

The tests are all accredited through the appropriate channels before they are utilised in any of our testing sites, as is the case across the United Kingdom. There have been calls for the introduction of the new rapid 90-minute or two-hour testing kits, but we are waiting on accreditation to make sure that those tests are accurate in terms of quality and reproducibility to make sure that we reduce, as far as possible, the number of false positives. We know that there are false positives in the system, but I would rather err on the side of caution and have somebody work under the assumption that they are positive than send somebody who is positive out under the assumption that they are negative.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

In relation to pillar 2, the Minister has acknowledged that there have been difficulties in booking tests. Is he aware that there are increasing difficulties with the return of test results and the time involved in that? That appears to be impacting on children's tests more heavily, which is making more people more anxious and concerned. Is the Minister aware of that? Does he receive information back from the centre on it?

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Member for his question. I have had conversations about the timeliness of the return of results with my counterparts across the United Kingdom, because that is crucial. It also feeds into our test, trace and protect system, because the sooner that we can identify a positive case, the better those systems can fully interact to make sure that we get on top of alerting the contacts of an individual who has tested positive.

As the Member rightly identifies, the timely return of a test is crucial for parents who are looking for reassurance for their child. I know that the Member raised a specific case with the BBC yesterday. If he wants to pass on the specific details of that to me, I would be happy to look into it for him.

Colin McGrath (Social Democratic and Labour Party, South Down)

3. Mr McGrath asked the Minister of Health for an update on the development of a COVID-19 track and trace app for under-18s. (AQO 681/17-22)

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Member for his question. The Department of Health is launching a new version of the app for under-18s before the end of September. That will help schools, further education colleges and universities to provide additional protection to their students and staff.

Colin McGrath (Social Democratic and Labour Party, South Down)

Most MLAs will have had contact from concerned constituents about young people gathering in groups in the community, not least in areas such as the Holylands. What action is the Minister and, indeed, the Executive taking to try to address the issue with young people?

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

In regard to the actions of young people, what I will say — I have said this before — is that what we are seeing in the Holylands is not reflective of the entirety of young people across Northern Ireland, who I think have sacrificed quite a bit during the first lockdown of Northern Ireland, so it is unfair and unjust to target and label everyone in the same way. A very small cohort of individuals in the Holylands is showing a blatant disregard for not just their safety, if they were to contract COVID and take it home, but that of their friends, family and older relatives.

The Executive Office has established a cross-departmental working group to look at compliance with and enforcement of COVID regulations. That has met twice specifically on the work in the Holylands. The meetings included the Department for Communities, the Executive Office, my Department, the police and both universities. The working group has shown a positive, coordinated response for, I think, the first time to antisocial behaviour in the Holylands. COVID has really given it that added impetus.

From what I am led to believe in the last update, 55 COVID notices have been issued by the PSNI, 31 of which were issued in one house. That shows the disregard for the messaging that the universities are putting out. In that same period of time, there were also two arrests: one for drug abuse and one for assault. There is not just a breach of COVID regulations; there is also antisocial behaviour that is now being tackled, and that is for the greater benefit of Holylands residents.

Rosemary Barton (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Given the spike in COVID-19 cases in the border counties of the Republic of Ireland, which is leading to a spillover into Northern Ireland, how valuable is it that the Northern Ireland app is interoperable with the Republic of Ireland version?

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

The app that we launched a few weeks ago is working well for us in Northern Ireland. We have had quite a number of downloads and activations, with 352,000 individuals downloading it. Nearly 2,000 notifications have gone out to people saying that they have been in contact with someone who has now tested positive. That works, and it is an advantage of the app. One of the working premises that we had, since starting to explore the app, was to make sure that, no matter what we developed in Northern Ireland, it was able to talk to the same app in the Republic of Ireland. Not just North/South but east-west: I welcome the fact that Scotland has now produced its app on the same platform and with the same set-up as ours. All three should eventually be able to talk. It works, and it gives us the reassurance that, for anyone crossing the border, when necessary, if they have the app, they will talk to each other.

Catherine Kelly (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Minister, with pupils back at school, can you outline the steps being taken to minimise the spread of COVID-19 in schools?

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

That question would be more specifically directed to the Minister of Education. The Chief Medical Officer and the Chief Scientific Adviser regularly met Department of Education officials and the Education Authority officials to make sure that we gave as much input into the guidance for schools as was necessary to support principals, teachers and all workers across the school sector — from caretakers to canteen workers — to make sure they got the advice and guidance that, we thought, they needed to support the school cohort. The Department of Health, over the last number of weeks, has established a direct line in the Public Health Agency for school principals. They can ring the Public Health Agency if they have a specific enquiry and get that answered directly to provide reassurance for them, their staff and parents.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

I just want to come back to the issue of the Holylands. Minister, you mentioned the house that 35 people came out of: that has been going on since June. House parties have been going on for months and months. Will you bring forward guidance for houses in multiple occupation, given the unique circumstances, where you could have nine people in one house from different parts of the country?

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

It is not only from June that the parties and antisocial behaviour have been going on in the Holylands from the universities, and houses of multiple occupancy has expanded there. There is work going on through the Executive's enforcement working group to see what other avenues, legislation or regulations can be brought forward, and the Justice Minister may be — I am not sure — involved in that.

With regard to the specifics of houses in multiple occupancy, there needs to be care and caution that any regulation based solely on houses of multiple occupancy is equitable across the entirety of Northern Ireland and anybody who is a resident in a house of multiple occupancy, not just students in the Holylands but those in such housing because of social need or a lack of housing in certain areas. They cannot be penalised adversely by any regulation or guidance brought in specifically to deal with antisocial behaviour in the Holylands.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

4. Mr Carroll asked the Minister of Health whether he has any plans to reconsider the car-parking charges healthcare staff pay currently in hospital settings. (AQO 682/17-22)

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

First, I want to say that I fully support our Health and Social Care staff. Again, I want to put on record my thanks for the magnificent job that they did during the initial COVID-19 surge and continue to do to provide the best care for the people of Northern Ireland in such challenging and pressurised circumstances.

You will be aware that I secured financial support of £2 million back in March for the provision of free car-parking for Health and Social Care staff for a three-month period. That ended on 30 June. That was in recognition of the commitment that our staff were making to keep the health service going during the initial COVID-19 surge. Although the initial free car parking period has concluded, I will keep the position under review in the context of the evolving position as regards the prevalence and impact of COVID-19. The current policy was set in 2012, and decisions on how it is applied are for each health and social care trust to determine. Charging is an important mechanism on sites where space is limited, such as the Royal Victoria Hospital, for example, to control demand and encourage the regular turnover of spaces so as to provide sufficient spaces for patients and visitors. I am aware that the Belfast Trust is currently conducting a review of its car parking charges and, in the context of its review, the trust has recently agreed with relevant stakeholders a set of car parking access criteria for staff that will prioritise the limited parking that is available on the basis of business need and the availability of alternative travel options. The trust is also seeking to harmonise parking fees across its hospital sites.

It is worth noting that it costs £9 million to cover the cost of parking, and we currently recover £8 million through income. Even if I was able to find the funding to cover the loss of the income generated from staff car parking, there is still not sufficient space to provide free car parking for all our staff, particularly at sites such as the Royal Victoria Hospital where space is limited. Doing so would not only create significant accessibility issues for patients and visitors but require significant capital investment to address the capacity issues, whether through the construction of new car parks or the putting in place of park-and-ride facilities for staff at locations adjacent to hospitals.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

Does the Minister agree that the latest move to remove free car parking from healthcare workers is a further kick in the teeth for the people who kept us safe during the pandemic and that it is extra insulting considering that it occurred at around the time that MLAs' expenses were increased?

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

I will not comment on the point on MLAs' expenses; that was not a decision taken by my Department. I say to the Member that it is only the Belfast Trust and the South Eastern Trust that charge staff for parking. The Northern, Southern and Western Trusts do not routinely charge staff for car parking. There are, however, voluntary pay schemes in the Northern and Southern Trusts whereby some staff have chosen to pay £30 a month for a designated parking space. There is not the same application across all the trusts, and that is why I wait to see what the Belfast Trust's consultation with stakeholders and staff produces.

Robbie Butler (UUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Minister for his recognition of the sterling work of the staff and his constant support for them throughout the pandemic.

With regard to car parking, many of our sites are shrinking, as he rightly pointed out — the South Eastern Trust's Lagan Valley Hospital and the Royal Victoria Hospital in Belfast, in particular. Will the Minister agree with me and commit himself to some work with his Executive colleagues, particularly the Department for Infrastructure, with regard to sustainable transport, which would, in fact, improve the environment and improve mental and physical health?

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

The Member's question gets to the crux: it is about the accessibility of parking and the mode of how people go to work. I welcome the commitments made and the steps already taken by the Minister for Infrastructure in supporting a wide number of workers across the health and social care system with regard to access to public transport. That provision is an example that shows that, during the pandemic and up to now, the Department of Health and the Department for Infrastructure have worked hand in hand to support our staff in getting to and from work.

Sean Lynch (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

The Minister will be aware that my party colleague Fra McCann is bringing forward a private Member's Bill. Doe he agree that car parking charges for staff disproportionately affect those living in rural areas, because of lack of transport?

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

I am aware that the Member's colleague is bringing forward a Bill on the subject, and that is why it is important to highlight the fact that it is up to each trust how it implements those staffing charges. As I said to Mr Carroll, there is a divergence across our trusts.

We have known for a long time that access to public transport in rural areas needs to be addressed. That accessibility is crucial, especially when it comes to staff working at specific shift times and people who want to visit loved ones in hospital but have no accessible public transport system to support them. It is important that, as I mentioned in the answer to Mr Butler, we have seen good working between our Department and the Department for Infrastructure. It is also important that we see that work continue and develop in the public transport system to support our health and care workers and our health and care facilities. It is also important that the Executive give my colleague in Infrastructure the support that she needs with rural transport.

Matthew O'Toole (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

5. Mr O'Toole asked the Minister of Health for an update, including timescales, on the implementation of 'Reshaping Stroke Care'. (AQO 683/17-22)

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

As a consequence of the need to prioritise the response to the coronavirus pandemic over the past few months, work on a range of projects, including 'Reshaping Stroke Care', has been paused. While I believe that that was the right thing to do, I appreciate the wider impact that it will have had for stroke patients across Northern Ireland. I assure you that reshaping stroke care remains a key priority, and I recognise the urgent need for the reform of stroke services in Northern Ireland. Over 19,000 people responded to the consultation on 'Reshaping Stroke Care', and my officials have completed an analysis of responses. I have asked for further analysis to be undertaken regarding the staffing requirements for the hyper-acute stroke network proposed in the consultation, and that work is currently under way. I intend to consider that analysis alongside the consultation analysis and the evidence base for reform in reaching my decision, and I will update the House accordingly.

Matthew O'Toole (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

Understandably, the attention of the Department has been reoriented towards COVID-19 for the past six months, but 'Reshaping Stroke Care' focused on several things, particularly the absolute need for early intervention and the importance of in-community care around rehabilitation. We can be sure that both of those things, unfortunately, will have been devastated over the past six months and that people will be receiving much worse outcomes. Is his Department or the trusts looking at how to make interventions now to compensate, where possible, people who have suffered strokes and have had, unfortunately, very poor care outcomes over the past six months?

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

Again, the Member makes a vital point when he takes into consideration the approach that we have taken to re-engaging and rebuilding our services. We have done it in that three-month block to make sure that the patients who need that additional support receive it, that it is done in a safe manner and that our staff are supported in the provision of those services. That three-monthly interaction and re-engagement of our trusts has been timely in the way that we have approached this, and it is about making sure that we can provide that support, especially to those who have suffered stroke. One of the messages that we continued to put out through the worst of the pandemic was that anyone who needed that assistance or thought that they were having stroke or cardiac symptoms should present to our emergency departments and to our GPs to make sure that they could get onto that care pathway as soon as possible.

Sinéad Ennis (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Minister, transformation is a critical piece of work, and we have had consultations on the reassessment of stroke services and breast assessment services. Can the Minister explain why he has not yet published and refuses to publish the new criteria for transforming services?

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

I do not accept the Member's premise that I am refusing to do it, and I do not think that she meant it in that form, because I have received support from the Member's party and her party colleagues in the Executive on the work that we have brought forward. The Health Minister was from her party when the work started.

One of the things that Bengoa indicated was that any transformation in our health service would involve running a transformation health service alongside the current health service, so there would be a significant need for input not just of finance but of resource in the shape of people working in the service. That was going to be challenging pre-COVID, and, in my Department and across the health and social care trusts, we are trying not just to run a parallel health service where we are trying to get our key services back on track while we support the COVID services but to look at transformation, although that is coming forward at a slower pace than we would like. It is still going on, so it is not that it has stopped or that I am refusing; it is just that we are now trying to run three health services in Northern Ireland, where, in January, running one was challenging enough.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

That ends the period for listed questions.

Clare Bailey (Green, Belfast South)

T1. Ms Bailey asked the Minister of Health whether the Holylands working group has visited the area or, indeed, whether the group plans, at any stage, to be on the ground to see at first-hand the dire state of the area and the multi-systemic problems that need to be addressed therein. (AQT 381/17-22)

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Member because I know that it is an issue that she has genuinely and seriously campaigned on during her time in elected office. It is not just because it is now popular to do so; it is an issue that she has worked very closely on. I have not been to the Holylands, but the working group has representation from both the universities, the PSNI and the local council, whose representatives are able to report on a night-to-night basis on what they have seen and the interactions that they have had.