NORTHERN IRELAND ASSEMBLY Monday 10 September 2007 Ministerial Statement: Committee Business: Private Members’ Business: Oral Answers To Questions: Private Members’ Business: The Assembly met at 12.00 noon (Mr Speaker in the Chair). Members observed two minutes’ silence. Mr Speaker: I welcome all Members back after the summer break. Before we proceed, I wish to say a few words about the future conduct and procedures of the House. I have already advised the Business Committee that I intend to work with the Deputy Speakers to maintain a more orderly approach to business. For example, the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development is to make a statement to the House this morning. It is important that Members be in the Chamber at the start of a ministerial statement. Members who come in immediately after a ministerial statement has been delivered will not be called to ask a question on it. Another matter caused concern before the recess. The Business Committee spends some time deliberating on the public and private business of the House. Timings for business in the House are not set in stone, but are indicative, and it is really up to Members — especially party Whips — to keep a watching brief on business. On at least two occasions before the recess, I witnessed that Members who had their names down to move motions were not in the Chamber to do so, because they were not following the speed of business. If a Member who has tabled a motion is not in the Chamber to move that motion, it will automatically fall. Moreover, if Members who are down either to lead or to speak in debates are not present when it comes to their turn, we will move on to whoever is next on the list to speak. It is important that we protect the reputation of the House and the business before it. The past couple of months have been a learning curve for some Members; however, the period of latitude is now over, and it is up to every Member to know his or her place in, and the procedures of, the House. Foot-and-Mouth Disease Mr Speaker: We shall move on to the next item of business. I have received notice from the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development that she wishes to make a statement on the recent outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in England. The Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development (Ms Gildernew): Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Today is world suicide prevention day, and, before I make my statement, I wish to acknowledge those families who have been bereaved by suicide, which is a huge problem for us. With the Speaker’s permission, I shall make a statement on the recent foot-and-mouth disease outbreak and my response to it. We have a high dependency on external markets, with sales to destinations outside the North valued at approximately £1·6 billion per annum, which represents 64% of total agrifood-processing-sector sales. The outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in Britain, therefore, had the potential to have a significant adverse impact on that trade and on the local economy. It was vital to stop the disease from entering the North; however, I found that my main efforts were focused on protecting our trading status with the rest of Ireland, and with Britain, other EU member states and non-EU countries. That entailed getting the EU to recognise the North’s unique position by citing that we are divided from Britain by a significant body of water, which provides a natural barrier to the spread of animal disease. For disease-control purposes, therefore, the North is treated as a separate entity from Britain. I am particularly grateful to the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister for their support: to the First Minister for personally intervening with the Japanese ambassador in London, after Japan had refused to accept our product; and to the Deputy First Minister, who held important discussions with the US authorities. Furthermore, I thank my Executive colleagues and the Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development for their engagement and support at the time. I wish, too, to pay tribute to our many stakeholders, to the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment and to Invest NI for their very important and valuable contributions. Finally, I thank the staff of the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development for the sustained commitment and support that they showed me during that very difficult time. Officials were mobilised here at Stormont, on farms and at our ports to advise me on policy, to trace animals and to put in place the necessary biosecurity measures. I recognise and appreciate the long hours that they put into their work, and the personal impact that the incident must have had on them and their families, particularly during a holiday period. At the beginning of last month, immediately after a case of foot-and-mouth disease was confirmed in Surrey, England on Friday 3 August, I took action to close the North’s ports to susceptible species, such as sheep, pigs, cattle and goats, from Britain. Moreover, I placed an immediate ban on the import from Britain of fresh meat from susceptible animals and of unpasteurised milk. Biosecurity measures were introduced at the ports and airports that were compatible with those in the South, and I recognise particularly the efforts of the portal staff who mobilised at short notice to put those measures in place, and who continued to work around the clock. I saw evidence of their efforts for myself when I visited the ports during the outbreak. Over that first weekend of the outbreak, my officials traced and examined all consignments of cattle, sheep, goats and pigs that had been imported from Britain, or that had transited Britain since the beginning of July. In total, 128 consignments were traced and examined. All examinations were negative, which gave me assurance that no disease had spread to the North and that no animals had originated from the infected zones in England. Based on our own veterinary risk assessment, I decided to apply no constraints to the operation of abattoirs, shows, markets and assembly centres here, and that access to the countryside would continue to be unrestricted. I did ask that the public, and those in rural areas in particular, introduce appropriate biosecurity measures, and farmers were asked to be vigilant. In my press releases and in interviews with the press, my message was that, as far as I was concerned, it was “business as usual”. I felt that my actions and those of my officials were swift, decisive and proportionate to the foot-and-mouth disease threat that we faced. Thankfully, the situation in Britain is now largely resolved. There were only two confirmed cases with no spread of disease beyond that, as demonstrated by the extensive surveillance undertaken. The Chief Veterinary Officer of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) stated on Friday that foot-and-mouth disease had been eradicated from Britain. From noon on Saturday 8 September 2007, DEFRA lifted the surveillance zone in Surrey, and all restrictions throughout Britain were lifted at the same time. The Standing Committee on Food Chain and Animal Health (SCoFCAH) will meet in Brussels tomorrow to decide whether to revoke all remaining measures that have been applied to Britain during the past month. Returning to the issue of trade, exports of animals and animal products have continued uninterrupted to other member states of the EU. There have been some minor problems, but, in the bigger scale of things, not too many, and we have been taking action to rectify those as soon as we are made aware of them. The safeguard measure brought in by the European Commission (EC) on 6 August 2007 gave our trade legitimacy in EU law, and this was confirmed with the revised decision voted through by SCoFCAH on 8 August and again by an amending EC decision on 23 August. Those decisions have allowed trade to continue to other member states. Although we were able to secure EU recognition of the North as a separate region from Britain, the EU decision on foot-and-mouth disease still required DARD to provide official certificates to accompany consignments for EU trade. As industry representatives had concerns that our certificates could not readily be distinguished from those issued in Britain, some extra polish was added to make them easily distinguishable. This new format was developed in consultation with the industry, and with the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister. The EC accepted that revised approach. The official status of the certificate was emphasised by the inclusion of the DARD logo. A bold statement was added at the start of the certificate indicating that we are free from foot-and-mouth disease, and the exporting country was clearly identified as this region in large, bold print. Those changes were warmly welcomed by the exporters of meat and dairy products. As a result of those actions, our agrifood industry has been able to continue to trade with their customers in Europe. In meetings with the industry, it has said that there are now relatively few problems in the EU and that the official certification is working well. I have also made two pieces of subordinate legislation to enable us to enforce the terms of the EU decisions if required. My objective has been to maintain current trade flows to other EU member states by providing adequate assurance with minimal bureaucracy. At my request, the UK Chief Veterinary Officer wrote to her counterparts in all EU member states, providing assurance that we are free from foot-and-mouth disease and that animals and animal products originating from here pose no risk of foot-and-mouth disease. My officials followed this up with calls to the offices of the Chief Veterinary Officers of six key member states — France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Belgium and the Netherlands — to check that the position was understood. Calls to other countries will be made if specific issues arise. To assist the dairy industry, the DARD Chief Veterinary Officer also provided a letter for each of the local exporters of dairy products, which they could pass on to customers who were nervous about accepting our dairy products. The provision of those letters was welcomed and has helped exporters to iron out problems. The DARD Internet site has also been constantly updated. With regard to controls on imports from Britain, we retained our prohibition on the importation of live animals until 25 August and on fresh meat produced after 15 July until 24 August. 12.15 pm Those imports were permitted again after a unanimous decision that was taken at SCoFCAH on 23 August to lift — subject to veterinary certification — the ban on exporting live animals and fresh meat from outside the surveillance zone in Surrey to the rest of the EU. In line with that relaxation on trade to the rest of the EU, we permitted imports to the North from Britain to resume under conditions that were similar to those that were applied to exports to other member states, including the Twenty-six Counties. The movement of live, susceptible animals from here to Britain has also been gradually eased over the past few weeks: first, for slaughter animals; and secondly, for breeding and production animals. As a precaution, and until the surveillance zone was lifted on 8 September, we continued to operate additional biosecurity controls at the ports. We have also tried to minimise damage to our trade with countries that are outside the EU. We have spared no effort to help the beef and dairy industries in circumstances in which any trading difficulties have arisen; that work continues. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) had banned imports of certain animal product from here that were deemed “prohibited” — fresh product that was derived from foot-and-mouth-disease-susceptible animals — and that arrived at its ports from anywhere in the UK on or after 3 August. My officials and I made immediate contact with the US Administration directly and also through DEFRA and the European Commission. We put a strong case to the Administration that we should be treated separately from Britain. The Deputy First Minister and I also raised our difficulties with senior US politicians in an attempt to get them to expedite matters. I was therefore delighted to hear on 17 August from Robert Curtis, the head of the European division in USDA, that the trading restrictions that had been imposed on product from the North had been lifted totally with immediate effect. Since then, five containers of pork products have been exported to the United States. We have also taken steps to address the ban on the importation of animal product from the UK, which Japan announced on 4 August. That decision primarily affected our trade in pork to the Japanese market. Historically, the Japanese require a high level of reassurance to restore trade, and, post-2001, that reassurance involved a visit by a Japanese delegation to the North. Another visit may be required before any trade is restored this time, but my aim is to help to restore export trade in animal product to Japan as early as possible. After the helpful phone call that the First Minister made in the first few days of the outbreak, and at my request, DEFRA has written on our behalf to the Japanese Embassy through the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO). We are currently awaiting a response to that letter. My officials will follow up with DEFRA on that and on any issues regarding other countries. Similar to the authorities in the USA, those in Canada have accepted the position of the North on the outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in Britain. They recently approved another meat plant here to export to Canada. We are working with DEFRA in its negotiations with the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) to achieve an early restoration of the UK’s official foot-and-mouth-disease-free status. Regaining foot-and-mouth-disease-free status at OIE for the UK is the quickest route to regaining OIE foot-and-mouth-disease-free status for the North, given that Britain contained its outbreak so rapidly. However, the fact that we were recognised at the outset to be free to trade with the rest of Europe means that some countries may be persuaded to accept our products before that date, just as the United States and Canada have done. We have also worked closely with our industry stakeholders throughout this period. Indeed, in view of the importance of external sales to the local industry, my permanent secretary and his DETI counterpart have been in regular contact with dairy and meat processors and exporters and also with representatives of the retail sector. Those meetings fostered a better understanding of trading issues for us all. They provided a forum in which views on necessary action to assist the industry with exports could be heard and exchanged, and reports on our actions could be brought back. At those meetings, it was clear that that industry was appreciative of DARD’s efforts to minimise the impact on trade. We have also had regular meetings with our other key stakeholders, and I am pleased to say that they have supported my decisions and have congratulated DARD on the actions that have been taken to assist them during the foot-and-mouth-disease crisis. I emphasise that we gained much from our meetings with the industry, and I thank those stakeholders for their positive and constructive engagement. Good communication and liaison with officials and Ministers in Britain and the South have been crucial throughout the process. Consequently, throughout the crisis, I have kept in regular contact with my ministerial counterparts. I spoke to Mary Coughlan in Dublin and Jonathan Shaw in London on the first evening and had ongoing and very helpful contact with them in the days that followed. I pay tribute to UK Chief Veterinary Officer Debby Reynolds and her team for recognising the unique position of the North in their deliberations, particularly with the European Commission, and for their outstanding negotiation skills in securing an early relaxation of the EU restrictions with regard to movement and trade. I would also like to acknowledge the work of Department of Agriculture and Food officials in the South in supporting our case. Together with my officials, I worked on a daily basis with the South to ensure that the fortress Ireland approach was applied immediately. That was crucial in ensuring that the North was excluded from the EU ban on British produce. The support of the South, and our cohesive approach within the island, was important both operationally with regard to biosecurity and border controls and from an external perspective with regard to trade. Unsurprisingly, the issue of Brazilian beef imports has recently been raised again. Questions have been asked in recent weeks as to why I continue to allow the importation of beef from Brazil. I have responded by explaining that the Government of the UK, acting on behalf of England, Scotland, Wales and the North, has agreed in the Treaty of Rome that the EU shall act in matters relating to the common agricultural policy. Consequently, the power to ban meat from countries with which the EU has established trade agreements is governed by EU law. The rules governing the importation of fresh meat and meat products into the North from Brazil are subject to European Union agreements with Brazil, which in turn are based on European Commission scrutiny of the controls that Brazil has in place. Those rules are in the form of Commission decisions and are implemented here in our national legislation. If we were to act unilaterally to ban imports of Brazilian beef, it is highly likely that beef importers and exporters would be in a position to commence legal proceedings against the Department for any loss suffered as a result. It is also quite possible that the Department would be open to the levying of EU fines for interfering with the free movement or trade of a product that has entered Europe legally. In addition, such an action would constitute a failure to adhere to and implement the relevant European legislation. However, I remain concerned about the findings of the Irish Farmers’ Association and the Irish Farmers’ Journal investigation. I will closely monitor the situation as the Commission progresses its investigations. I watched last week’s developments in Brussels closely, particularly the declaration put forward by MEPs calling on the Commission to ban imports of Brazilian beef to the European Union. I also plan to raise the matter of Brazilian beef imports with my ministerial colleagues at our next meeting. As regards the investigations into the source of the outbreak, we will be giving careful consideration to the reports that DEFRA published on Friday, and to that Department’s response. I am aware that the reports have concluded that there is no absolute certainty about how the outbreak occurred. The most likely explanation is a combination of factors, including weakness in the drainage system, heavy rains, and the movement of construction vehicles. There are valuable lessons to be learned from these findings, and we will want to consider what lessons we can draw from the experience in England and apply here. Looking ahead, our focus is on preparation for the next SCoFCAH meeting, which will take place tomorrow. The indications are that the Commission will revoke the existing decision and return Britain to its position prior to 3 August. My priority is to continue to safeguard our ability to export. I have decided, therefore, to retain all existing certification and veterinary check procedures until the SCoFCAH decision tomorrow. I obviously do not want to do anything to undermine the assurance that the present system of certificates offers to receiving countries and companies. Following SCoFCAH’s decision on 23 August, DEFRA initiated an exercise to identify and prioritise the markets outside the EU to which UK companies export, as such countries may be waiting for OIE to restore the UK’s foot-and-mouth-disease-free status. DARD is consulting with the industry to identify such markets for our exporters, and will liaise with DEFRA on that. I have asked my officials to review DARD’s response to identify what went well and any lessons that could be applied in the event of any future outbreak. Our foot-and-mouth-disease contingency plan, which was already in place, will be updated and improved in light of what we have learned from this experience. Finally, I want to pay tribute to our colleagues in Dublin for their support of, and co-operation with, my Department at such a difficult time. That close level of North/South co-operation will continue, given our shared interest in the prevention of outbreaks of serious animal disease on the island of Ireland. Again, I thank all those who have helped me and my Department to deal with the recent foot-and-mouth disease crisis. Go raibh maith agat. Mr Speaker: I call the First Minister, the Rt Hon Dr Paisley. The First Minister (Rev Dr Ian Paisley): The Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development knows that we have all been shocked by the plague of suicide of which she spoke at the beginning of her statement. All of us in this House have a serious responsibility to help to solve this awful tragedy, which seems to be growing in our Province. Will the Minister agree with me that the help from London, Dublin, the USA and the Japanese Government in relation to the foot-and-mouth disease incident was most welcome? I also wish to record the help that I received from the British ambassador in Dublin in making contacts for me with people who had power to help us in those matters. I am sure that all right-thinking people would wish to express thanks to all those mentioned by the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, those who have not been mentioned — although they, and we, know who they are — and, of course, the Minister herself. Ms Gildernew: I thank the First Minister for his comments. From all of this, we have learned that the reaction to the incident could not have happened without a local Minister and Executive in place. The speed with which the Executive met on the morning of Saturday 4 August, and the ongoing contact that my Department had with the First Minister, the Deputy First Minister and Executive colleagues, meant that we were able to give leadership and act decisively. Again, I thank the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister for their most helpful intervention and support. Mr Speaker: I call the Deputy First Minister, Mr Martin McGuinness. The Deputy First Minister (Mr M McGuinness): I concur with the remarks of the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development and the First Minister on the issue of suicide. Does the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development agree that during the period of the ban, between 3 August, when it was introduced, and 17 August, when the ban was lifted, the American authorities moved very speedily, and that that was due in no small part to the considerable work done by the US ambassador to London, Bob Tuttle, and his colleague in Dublin, Tom Foley? I made several phone calls to Paula Dobriansky, who was in Korea and remained in contact with me, and to Congressmen Richard Neal and Jim Walsh, who have been long-standing friends of the peace process. I hope that the Minister will agree that a word of thanks is due to all those whom I have mentioned. Ms Gildernew: Again, I thank the Deputy First Minister for his comments. The interaction with the United States was hugely significant, and when Canada followed, it showed that the rest of the world looks to what the United States does and takes its lead from them. I was amazed at the speed with which USDA responded. Less than a fortnight after foot-and-mouth disease was confirmed in England, USDA had lifted its restrictions. That was hugely important for our agriculture industry given the amount of food that we export, especially dairy products. It was a huge group effort, involving many people in the offices of several Congressmen and Senators; it would take a full hour to thank everyone who helped and responded during the crisis. We are very grateful to have the support of such friends. The Chairperson of the Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development (Dr W McCrea): I thank the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development for its quick and professional response to the crisis and its efforts to secure derogation from the EU to allow our exports to continue. I also want to recognise the positive role played by DEFRA in supporting the arguments for derogation put forward by the Department. I thank the farming community and the farming unions across the United Kingdom for their assistance, and their positive and constructive suggestions during this crisis. 12.30 pm (Mr Deputy Speaker [Mr McClarty] in the Chair) At the heart of the new certification is the identity of Northern Ireland. However, I found it interesting that there was no mention of that in the Minister’s statement. Why was “the North” mentioned in the statement but not “Northern Ireland”, when that is clearly how our produce is identified? The Minister talked about the “fortress Ireland” approach. Is it not important that the identity and independence of Northern Ireland be protected? If, God forbid, there was an outbreak in the Irish Republic, Northern Ireland would have to have independence to be able to trade, as the Irish Republic did with BSE-free Irish beef at the time of the BSE crisis, when the UK was unable to trade its beef. Although there is a working relationship with the Irish Republic, there must be clear identification of and independence for our Northern Ireland produce. Can the Minister tell the House what lessons the Department has learned from the crisis and how those lessons can be applied in Northern Ireland? What risks are there, and is the Department undertaking a review of biosecurity at our own laboratories? Although it is true that we cannot act independently, it is of vital importance that the Minister actively participate in the debate so as to stop Brazilian beef. We must force the hand not only of DEFRA and the Ministers in the rest of the United Kingdom, but of Europe, to protect our product, because it is the best product and it should be able to stand on its own feet across the world. Ms Gildernew: A LeasCheann Comhairle, I will answer the Chairman of the Agriculture and Rural Development Committee’s questions in reverse order. As a member of the European Union, the North is bound by EU law to accept products from countries outside the EU. Therefore, we cannot impose a ban on all Brazilian beef, but we can ban — and have banned — imports of beef from areas of Brazil that are affected by foot-and-mouth disease. The Department has robust controls in place to ensure that imports from countries outside the EU meet the required standards and will seize products that do not adhere to those standards. The European Commission plans a Food and Veterinary Office mission to Brazil later this year as a follow-up to an earlier visit and has said that, unless the situation improves and the Brazilian Government can give assurances on the quality of beef exported to Europe, it will reconsider controls on beef imports to Europe from Brazil. As I said earlier, I will be working with my ministerial colleagues and I will push for action on Brazilian beef similar to that which has been taken in other places. Our Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI) laboratories do not hold stocks of the foot-and-mouth virus. Most of their work is done around bovine tuberculosis and brucellosis, and there have never been any leaks or any biosecurity mishaps or accidents at those laboratories. I spoke to Seán Hogan, the chairman of AFBI, and George McIlroy, the chief executive, on the evening of 3 August and asked those same questions. I am content that we do not have the same risk, as we do not have the live virus in the laboratories here. The public can be reassured by that. The Department has learned lessons from this. It will update and review its foot-and-mouth disease contingency plan. It was good for the Department to be challenged in this way to see how quickly it could respond and put provisions in place. I have spoken to people who came over on the boat that evening and who were impressed to see that biosecurity measures had immediately been put in place at the ports. They did not even realise that there had been a foot-and-mouth outbreak in England until they came home and saw the portal staff. Measures such as that help to reassure people that the Department is doing all that it can to keep disease out of Ireland. I understand where the Chairman of the Agriculture Committee is coming from in regard of the Twenty-six Counties. However, I felt sorry for Richard Lochhead, the agriculture Minister in Scotland. He was faced with many challenges, because the outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease was on the island of Britain. Scotland faced automatic restrictions even though the outbreak was geographically closer to France. If there were an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease anywhere in the Twenty-six Counties, the whole island of Ireland would suffer, regardless of what was done in the North. The disease is virulent because it so easily transmitted: it can be airborne, transmitted from the wheels of cars and lorries or carried on people’s feet. It is a serious illness when it gets into a herd. However, I am content with the amount of work that was done with ministerial colleagues such as Mary Coughlan in the South. A stringent policy on animal health and welfare is needed, and that has been on the table for many years. Diseases do not recognise borders, and I am deeply concerned about other diseases in mainland Europe, such as avian influenza and bluetongue. Robust measures must be taken at our ports to try to keep all diseases out of Ireland. Action must be taken on an all-island capacity to eradicate them. I do not want any disease to come from Dublin and affect trade in the Six Counties. It makes sense to treat the island as an epidemiological unit. Lessons have been learnt. It has been a challenging time for the Department and for me. Thankfully, with the support of colleagues — and I have acknowledged the support that the Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development has shown me — our reaction to the outbreak was well handled. We should not be complacent, but we know that we did all in our power to keep Ireland free from foot-and-mouth disease. Go raibh maith agat. Mr Boylan: Go raibh maith agat. I commend the Minister and the Department on their handling of the outbreak. Will the Minister detail her plans to ensure that biosecurity is as effective as possible in guaranteeing freedom from future outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease, and other diseases? Ms Gildernew: Go raibh maith agat. I will continue to ensure that everything possible be done to keep us free of animal diseases that would have serious economic implications. My Department has put in place a system at the ports to ensure that dirty vehicles are not permitted to enter the North. Robust systems ensure that no contaminated soil can enter the North on vehicles from other places. Additional systems, such as the disinfection seen at ports in the past month, can easily be introduced at times of increased risk, and can be stepped up depending on the level of threat. Our procedures for cattle traceability are excellent and form the basis for ensuring that animals are closely monitored and can be easily traced. For example, during the outbreak, my Department traced within 48 hours all 128 consignments of animals that had come from Britain since the start of July. That was fundamental to ensuring that, if the disease had spread, the Department would have picked up on it quickly and dealt with it. My Department has a long-term commitment to education, including the timely implementation of biosecurity measures in response to heightened risk. Education takes the form of leaflets, advertising and posters. Since becoming Minister, I have been invited to disinfect my feet on every farm that I have visited. Biosecurity measures are already in place on farms. There is close co-operation between my Department and the Department of Agriculture and Food in the South on the prevention, surveillance and control of a range of epizootic diseases, some of which I mentioned earlier. That co-operation has included discussions on the assessment of risk; the preventive actions that would be taken in respective jurisdictions, and the importance of those actions being co-ordinated; the alignment of contingency planning; and the control of movement that would be necessary in the event of an outbreak. Given the shared interest in preventing the introduction of serious animal disease to the island of Ireland, that close co-operation between North and South will continue. Mr Elliott: I wish to thank the Minister and the departmental officials for the swiftness with which they dealt with difficulties arising from the outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in England. We did not wish to create any unnecessary alarm among the general public of Northern Ireland, and that was successfully achieved. Identifying and examining all the relevant animals that had come from GB into Northern Ireland since the beginning of July was a huge task, and I am thankful that the disease did not spread beyond the original zone. My aim is to ensure that the general public and farmers with produce from Northern Ireland are protected. As regards the report on the source of the disease, and with the particular reference to Pirbright, there does not appear to be sufficient clarification on the situation there. Part of the site comprises a Government laboratory, and if the source of the disease had been directly from a farmer, there would have been completely different consequences for the farming community. I am very concerned that there may be a cover-up by the Government about the source of the disease. Does the Minister support a Northern Ireland branding and labelling strategy for its meat products, and would that be helpful? Also, regarding the export of our products during the crisis, what actual difference was there between regulations and licensing governing the export of non-fresh food from Northern Ireland and those for non-fresh, or non-live, exports from the rest of GB outside the surveillance zone? Ms Gildernew: I will try to address all of those questions. As regards concerns about Pirbright, the privately-owned laboratory, which is run by Merial, ceased operating from the point at which the outbreak was confirmed, and Merial will be unable to restart its operations until all remedial work has been completed. On the Government side, the Institute for Animal Health has also decreased its workload and is only conducting necessary work in an attempt to ensure that all bioremedial action is implemented to ensure safety. There is still an issue around the sanitation of effluent prior to it leaving the plant. There are concerns and lessons to be learned, and officials are examining the matter in detail to determine what steps we need to take. We wish to have robust systems in place that will ensure that this can never happen again. In answer to the question regarding non-fresh products, I do not have the relevant details and will respond later in writing. As regards labelling, I have been talking to people in the industry and have had some enlightening conversations with them since taking up my post, and not just since 3 August when the foot-and-mouth disease outbreak was confirmed. Some of the people I have spoken to have said that the marketing strategy is important and that we must get it right. I can quote those who have told me in no uncertain terms that labelling produce “Northern Ireland” for export purposes does not work — and those are people who are successfully exporting to the United States on an all-island basis. They are telling me — and I am not making a political comment — that Irish branding works much better when exporting to the United States, and that they will stick with that. My Department will work very closely with the industry to see what works best. We wish to maximise the returns, especially in exporting. Sixty-four percent of our produce is exported. That is no small feat. We will consider carefully what we need to do. I intend to carry out more work on labelling and on marketing our food. I will do what is best for the industry and what gets the best returns elsewhere for our fresh, quality products. 12.45 pm Mr P J Bradley: First, I compliment those who installed the new audio system. We do not have to lip-read in this corner any more, because we can now hear. I thank the Minister for her statement and for her answers to the questions that have been posed. The Minister and her Department were rightly praised for the prompt action taken at the time. I also pay tribute to those who so quickly traced the consignment of imported animals. That traceability worked on that occasion gave great confidence to those who, at times, may have been critical of traceability and of the detail that often goes into it. I cannot name each person involved, but I wish to thank everyone North, South, east and west who helped during the crisis. However, was it an oversight not to include immediately a ban on the importation of non-pasteurised milk and fresh meat? Why was there a 24-hour delay in doing so? In a foot-and-mouth disease crisis, 24 hours can be critical. Ms Gildernew: When I received the telephone call on the evening of Friday 3 August, my instinctive reaction was to close the ports and ban live animals from being imported. We had all learnt lessons from the 2001 outbreak, when we saw the implications of foot-and-mouth disease after it entered the country. I spoke to Jonathan Shaw from DEFRA and to Mary Coughlan in Dublin. I agreed with Mary Coughlan that we would adopt a similar approach. It was Saturday morning before Dublin officials told us that they were taking the step of banning the import of unpasteurised milk and fresh meat. We had said that we would work in tandem with the Department of Agriculture and Food, so we then introduced the same ban. I was not advised on the Friday night that it was necessary to take that step, considering the threat that existed at that time. However, as I have said, we had agreed to take a similar approach, North and South. That is why there was a time lapse in the introduction of that ban. Again, that is something that we would put in our “lessons learned” paper and in the foot-and-mouth disease contingency plan. Every time that we go through a similar crisis, we learn lessons. It does not bode well for the future if we do not learn anything. I might not have gone down the route of banning the import of unpasteurised milk and fresh meat, but I am now glad that I did. With the benefit of hindsight, it was the right thing to do. That is why one decision was taken on Friday night and the other on Saturday morning. We also tried to identify whether any products that arrived on boats on Friday evening would be susceptible, but there were none. I could have turned boats around that Friday had there been live animals on board, and we did that later in the weekend. Obviously, it was a fluid situation, but on Saturday and Sunday we did send shipments of fresh meat and unpasteurised milk products back to England. Mr Ford: I, too, thank the Minister, her ministerial colleagues and, particularly, DARD staff for the efficient, constructive and collective way in which they dealt with the problem. Perhaps lessons can be learned for other issues that will face the Assembly. By Monday 6 August, the Minister reported to a group of MLAs that 128 consignments of animals had already been traced and examined. That is a tribute to the work that staff in Dundonald House and in the local divisional veterinary offices carried out. However, when the Minister refers to the review that her officials are carrying out, what external advice and assistance is being made available to that review? Real issues may be understood by having an external opinion on such a review. That is not a criticism of the officials concerned but merely a statement that those who were so closely involved may not appreciate all the lessons that must be learned, especially as we face not only foot-and-mouth disease in future but other diseases such as bluetongue and avian flu. Ms Gildernew: I thank the Member for his question. There will be a review of how we dealt with the issue, and part of the strength was in the collective approach that was adopted. On the Monday after the outbreak, the Department met industry representatives from between 50 and 60 different organisations and bodies with an interest in the issue. That invitation was extended to Belfast Zoo, the Tourist Board, all the agristakeholders, the Committee members, et cetera. The Department worked very closely throughout with the entire industry, and took its advice and guidance as and when necessary. The Department will want to discuss an external review, and I shall examine the possibility. The Department worked closely with the industry during the latest outbreak, and work was done on a collective basis. That enabled us to make decisions that suited the industry and kept key exports and trade going so that there was no significant downturn in business. Mr Irwin: I record my thanks to the Department and the Minister for the swift action taken during the latest foot-and-mouth crisis to secure Northern Ireland’s position as a foot-and-mouth-free zone. Does the Minister accept that the poultry and pig sectors in Northern Ireland currently face a major financial crisis? If the price of the produce is not immediately increased to a level that reflects the massively increased feed costs, many producers in those sectors face financial ruin. Ms Gildernew: I thank the Member for his question and for the very creative use of his time. As the Member knows, we are supposed to be dealing with foot-and-mouth disease. Obviously, I am exercised by the demands and challenges for the poultry and pig sectors at the moment, so he may get an opportunity to ask that question again later on in ministerial questions. Mr McHugh: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I join other Members in commending the Minister, the Department and all those who worked to prevent the spread of the latest outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease from England. Their speedy approach incorporated the lessons from the last outbreak, and put them into practice to maintain our biosecurity and the stability of the farming industry, and that has been commended by all. I refer to the “fortress Ireland” approach that was adopted during the latest outbreak, and how important that was in ensuring that the scare did not last long. Members know that foot-and-mouth disease can be a very lengthy business for farmers, and we have learned lessons from the previous outbreak. People should take into account that because this is an island, we are entitled to adopt that type of approach. I am sure that the Minister will agree that the shamrock brand has been of enormous benefit to the island of Ireland for produce, and the fact that we were considered separate from England, Scotland and Wales made an enormous difference, particularly in monetary terms, to our farmers. I am sure the Minister will agree that the island approach will always be of vital importance in dealing with any future outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease. Go raibh maith agat. Ms Gildernew: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I congratulate the Member for asking a question that lasted longer than the answer will last. [Laughter.] The “fortress Ireland” approach was crucial in minimising the risk to the island of Ireland during the foot-and-mouth outbreak. My officials and I worked very closely with our counterparts in Dublin to ensure that a consistent approach, which was proportionate to the risk, was adopted throughout the island. The Department already has close links with its counterpart in Dublin, and that close level of North/South co-operation will continue in future. The European Commission recognised the unique position of the North, which meant that we were excluded from the EU ban and therefore allowed to continue to trade with other member states. On the Saturday morning after the foot-and-mouth disease outbreak in England, the First Minister spoke of our need to retain trade with the rest of the island. He mentioned the large quantity of our business that is done on an island-wide basis and the movement of animals to markets and shows. Those comments were important. That the border did not close during the recent outbreak was very important; that we did not implement the same level of spraying and disinfecting that was carried out along the border in 2001 was also important. That was helpful to the industry. I appreciate Mr McHugh’s comments on the marketing of our produce, and, as I said to Mr Elliott earlier, I will be examining how best to market and label our produce to secure the maximum return for our producers. Mr Shannon: I thank the Minister for her response and for the good work of her Department, which is much appreciated. One of the pitfalls during the recent outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease was the movement of farm machinery from the location of the outbreak in England to Northern Ireland. In light of the breakdown of the rules during the recent outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease, what action has the Minister and her Department taken to ensure that any movement of farm machinery from the Republic of Ireland to Northern Ireland or machinery that has been brought here on the ferry from the UK mainland will be monitored? My second question — which the Minister might have already answered, and I apologise if she has — is on what lessons might be learned from the outbreak across the water, which, it seems, arose at a DEFRA laboratory. What lessons can the Department learn from that incident for its own benefit? Ms Gildernew: I am glad that the Member asked about the transport of farm machinery, because there are always robust measures in place at our ports — not only during foot-and-mouth disease outbreaks. Vehicles are routinely checked, and every vehicle that leaves a ferry at one of our ports is examined. If there is evidence of soil, clay, straw, hay or any similar material on a vehicle, it is deemed to be unfit for entry, and it is sent back. Our port staff have carried out those examinations, and they will continue to do so. They have no compunction about sending back a machine that is dirty, because it is not safe to bring it here. A journalist asked me the same question as Mr Shannon, and I said the same thing to the journalist that I will say to Mr Shannon. If he has any information about the transport of tainted farm machinery, I would be interested to hear it, because the Department wants to see an absolute crackdown. Considering the reassurance that I have received from the Department on the stringent measures that are in place, I would be highly surprised if a soiled vehicle were permitted through our ports. If a vehicle is not allowed entry owing to its condition, it is transported back at the exporter’s expense. There is, therefore, a financial inducement to ensure that vehicles are clean enough to be brought here and to be permitted to remain. The Department of Agriculture and Rural Development and I will look carefully at what happened in England and at DEFRA’s response and will be examining what we need to do. There will be implications for all of us from the lessons of the outbreak, and they will be given careful consideration. A contingency plan is being prepared. First, it will be brought to the permanent secretary and the departmental board, and then it will come to me. I will immediately share that plan with the Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development. There will be a joined-up approach. Officials worked well throughout the recent crisis, and we have begun examination of DEFRA’s paper to see what lessons can be learned and what measures we can put in place to strengthen our foot-and-mouth contingency plan for the future. Mr Savage: I will keep my remarks brief. As a member of the Agriculture Committee, I compliment the Minister on a job well done and I thank her for doing everything within her power to protect the agriculture industry in Northern Ireland. As a farmer, I am only too aware of what could have happened this summer. We all remember the disaster of 2001, and I wish to acknowledge and commend the Minister for her swift intervention. 1.00 pm Indeed, it appears that lessons have been learnt from the past. I thank the Minister for keeping members of the Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development informed. It would be remiss of me not to mention — Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Savage, I must ask you to come to your question. Mr Savage: It would be remiss of me not to mention DARD’s permanent secretary, Dr Malcolm McKibbin, who played a pivotal role. I commend the Minister for her comments about Brazilian beef. However, will she consider using the Office of the Northern Ireland Executive in Brussels to encourage the European Parliament to debate the issue of Brazilian beef with a view to banning it or bringing it up to the traceability standards that we have in Great Britain and Northern Ireland? Ms Gildernew: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Member for his question and his comments. I come from a farming background, and I fully appreciate what he is saying. It is all too clear that this disease is rampant. The Member represents Upper Bann, which was the worst-affected constituency in the previous outbreak. The Department will do all it can to keep out this awful disease. I am glad that the Member mentioned Dr McKibbin. I appreciated his valuable support and help in the crisis. He was not found wanting when it came to making difficult decisions and supporting me in carrying them out. I will discuss the Brazilian beef issue with our MEPs and will use Eileen Kelly in the Brussels office, and whatever avenues are available, to try to sort out that problem. Brazilian beef is an emotive issue because of the problems that Brazil has with foot-and-mouth disease and the fact that our farmers are aggrieved that the standards to which they have to produce their livestock are not necessarily mirrored in other parts of the world. Beef, or any product, that is imported should be produced to the same rigorous standards under which our farmers work. We produce one of the best-quality products in the world because, from birth to factory, we take very good care of our animals. Our animal welfare is second to none, and the same standards should also apply in areas that export to us. Mr O’Dowd: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. The Minister has outlined the diplomatic efforts that were made to ensure that our exports were not blocked by the international community. Does the Minister agree that those same contacts can now be used to enhance and improve our exports overseas? Ms Gildernew: Go raibh maith agat. As I have already mentioned, while the First Minister was contacting the Japanese ambassador in London, the Deputy First Minister was making phone calls to the US Administration. At my request, the Department’s Chief Veterinary Officer wrote to other European Chief Veterinary Officers, advising them that we were free from foot-and-mouth disease. In places such as Turkey, there were difficulties concerning hides and skins; that work is ongoing. The Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment and Invest NI were involved in other strategies such as “meet the buyer” events, and letters of comfort were given to exporters who were experiencing difficulties. However, the Member’s question is valid. We want to raise everyone’s boat and want producers to get a better return for their product. Markets are opening up — for example, in China and India — that have potential and have not been tapped into to any extent. I support the Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development, and the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, in trying to expand our markets by looking at other regions and countries into which our products can be exported. We have a high-quality product, and we should be getting a good price for it. We should examine areas into which we have not traditionally exported beef, for example, in order to get the best return for that product. Go raibh maith agat. Lord Morrow: In the Minister’s statement to the House, she said that export sales are valued at £1·6 billion and that that represents some 64% of the total sales of the agrifood processing sector. That is a phenomenal figure by anyone’s standards. Can the Minister tell Members what the financial impact has been on the agrifood industry as a result of the measures that she was forced to take to ensure that foot-and-mouth disease did not spread to Northern Ireland? Ms Gildernew: I cannot give a specific figure, but I will reply to the Member in writing. However, the financial impact was minimal in comparison with what it might have been. Given the fact that we were able to carry on trading with the rest of Europe and, in a very short time, with the United States and other countries, we did our best to minimise damage to the industry. The North is an exporting country, and it could never consume all that it produces. The industry relies on export markets, which are important to our economy. We keep hearing about the importance of export trade and of being able to export products from here. It was important to keep that export trade open, and I am pleased that we were able to do that as it is important to the industry. People will accept the fact that the initial difficulties were ironed out. In the week after 3 August 2007, representatives from the dairy industry met departmental officials every day, and that industry worked closely with those officials to iron out any problems. I spoke to Hugh McReynolds from Grampian Country Pork Ltd about the Japanese issues, and the First Minister was also involved in those discussions. The damage was minimised. However, I will write to the Member with figures, but I imagine that they will be quite low. Mr Deputy Speaker: As there are no further questions for the Minister, we will move on to the next item of business. Mr Ford: On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. Standing Order 18(1) states: “A Member of the Executive Committee shall make statements to the Assembly on matters for which the Executive Committee is responsible.” One must, therefore, logically presume that members of the Executive Committee act collectively on behalf of that Committee, as, for example, when Mr Murphy addressed the House about the flooding in east Belfast. This morning, the Speaker allowed two members of the Executive Committee — the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister — to ask questions of the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development on a statement made — presumably — on behalf of them as members of the Executive. Can you explain this constitutional novelty to the House, or can you pass on a message to the Speaker to allow him to do so at an appropriate time? Mr Deputy Speaker: The First Minister is also the leader of his party and can raise a point in that capacity, which he did this morning. We will move on to — Mr Ford: Further to that point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. The Speaker called Dr Paisley as the First Minister and Mr McGuinness as the Deputy First Minister. The subsequent round of questions started — quite properly — with Dr McCrea as Chairperson of the Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development and Mr Boylan representing the second-largest party in the Assembly. Dr Paisley and Mr McGuinness were given not only an additional status but recognition as Ministers. Therefore, I repeat my request that you discuss the matter with the Speaker. Mr Deputy Speaker: I take your further point of order, Mr Ford. I was not in the Chair at that time. I will refer the matter to the Speaker, and the Speaker will respond appropriately. Committee Membership Mr Deputy Speaker: The next item on the Order Paper is a motion to change the membership of the Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment. As with other similar motions, it will be treated as a business motion. Therefore, there will be no debate. Resolved: That Mr Francis Molloy replace Mr Mitchel McLaughlin as a member of the Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment. — [Ms Ní Chuilín.] Economic Development Task Force Mr Deputy Speaker: The Business Committee has agreed to allow up to one hour and 30 minutes for this debate. The proposer of the motion will have 10 minutes to propose and 10 minutes to make a winding-up speech. All other Members will have five minutes to speak. One amendment has been selected and published on the Marshalled List. The proposer of the amendment will have 10 minutes to propose and five minutes to make a winding-up speech. Mr Gallagher: I beg to move That this Assembly calls on the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment to establish a task force to address urgently the economic development of the west, including the areas covered by Fermanagh, Omagh, Strabane, Dungannon and Cookstown District Councils; and further calls upon the Minister to bring forward a report of the task force by 31st March 2008, to include specific recommendations to tackle neglect, increase investment and maximise opportunities for North-South funding aimed at improving infrastructure and achieving higher levels of employment and employability in these areas. The motion addresses the imbalances that exist between the east and the west in infrastructure, economic development and job opportunities. People everywhere expect that we in Northern Ireland are on a road to a new beginning. The principles of inclusion and equality are embedded in Government policy, and the motion is about making that policy a reality. It is time for the west to have a new start. I will not use the debate to list endless complaints about past neglect in the area, nor will I propose that resources should be diverted from deprived areas elsewhere in Northern Ireland. I will make the case to increase equality of opportunity and to redress the historic underfunding of the west. The appointment of members to the task force is the responsibility of the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, as is the task of overseeing the implementation of proposals. Despite the west’s not being on a level playing field, there is enormous potential in the area. We have a highly skilled workforce, and our young people are well educated. There are successful companies, some of which are household names in Northern Ireland and beyond, and we have excellent natural resources and assets that attract thousands of visitors every year. The Erne-Shannon link is an example of the benefits that can be gained for border areas through the development of North/South links. Nevertheless, Members must recognise that the west suffers as a result of the legacy of neglect and that there are serious disadvantages and past wrongs that we have a responsibility to put right. No railways serve the west; they were all closed down 40 years ago. There is no gas supply, with the result that businesses have to depend entirely on electricity. Access to broadband is limited, and the telecommunications network that serves the area is second rate. When it was being built more than 40 years ago, the motorway that was supposed to replace the railways stopped at Dungannon. There was a promise that it would be extended to Enniskillen. However, it has never been extended. That failure to put in place an important road link started a trend that continues. As a result of a lack of investment in new roads, Enniskillen suffers chronic and serious traffic congestion. Plans for bypasses — such as the southern bypass and the Cherrymount link, which are necessary to divert through-traffic away from the town centre — have been with the roads authorities for more than 20 years. There is still no sign of work starting. The recently completed Omagh bypass was fought for for over 30 years. The failure of Government to provide funding for roads is an ongoing source of frustration and annoyance in Fermanagh and Tyrone. Members must not forget that public transport is poor and that most people have no choice but to rely on their cars. Unemployment statistics that cover many years have documented the lack of both investment and job opportunities in the west. In March 2007, the labour market bulletin from the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment stated that districts in the west of Northern Ireland showed the highest concentration of long-term claimants, with the eastern region showing to be lower. 1.15 pm Without investment and infrastructure, local services are being squeezed, and the people of Strabane, Omagh, Enniskillen and Dungannon know that too well. Even now, every proposed reform, be it the Water Service or in relation to the Review of Public Administration (RPA), is about centralisation. With such centralisation, the east will gain and the west will lose. The Northern Ireland Tourist Board (NITB) produced a strategy for growth in 2007, which was based on the development of what it called signature projects. Those are meant to act as magnets to pull in tourists, help the economy and create jobs. However NITB excluded Fermanagh and Tyrone from the list. Those are only some examples of the very unfair policies being implemented by Government and that serve the west very badly. It is time to put an end to that and begin to remove the historical disadvantage that pertains to the west. To begin that turnaround, I call for the establishment of a task force. However, it will be a task force with a difference — its recommendations will be acted upon and will be grounded in reality. It is time for a task force to examine in detail the measures that are required to level the playing field. Each of the five councils in the west, together with partners in the business and community sectors, has been striving to increase investment and tackle difficulties such as factory closures and job losses in the textile industry. The five councils agreed and launched a western economic strategy in 2006 to encourage enterprise and to lobby for, among other things, better roads. An Assembly-appointed task force will give focus and better cohesion to that work. There are some absolute priorities, such as roads, the decentralisation of Civil Service jobs, inward investment and healthcare, which are all high on the agenda of the people of the west. We need a major transport plan that will take forward speedily the expansion of the two corridors already identified in the development plans of the Northern and Southern Governments. Those are the North/west corridor, linking Derry to Dublin through Omagh, Strabane and Monaghan, and the east/west corridor linking Sligo to Belfast through Enniskillen and Dungannon. We know that the Irish Government has pledged £700 million for such projects, which are in the interest of regional, balanced development, and which will draw down European Union support. I want to make it clear that I am calling for a time-limited task force, as stated in the motion, to bring forward recommendations. It is a reasoned and specific call for action. The amendment, on the other hand, calls for no specific action that would be directed immediately towards solving our obvious problems, which will be highlighted by other Members today. I am calling for a task force, because any serious attempts to develop the west will require the active participation of many bodies, including Departments. It is simply not good enough for the development needs of the west to be taken into account through a general motion. The west needs more than discussions. Due to many years of neglect, neither I nor anyone in the west believe that we will get anywhere by taking things into account. The west cannot continue to be the last item on the agenda of this or any other Assembly. It must not be allowed to slip between the cracks. We need a task force that sets out clearly for the Assembly’s consideration what needs to be done, how much it will cost and how it will be done. As we know, the whole island suffers from regional imbalance. Through North/South co-operation, we have the means to take steps to tackle that, develop new plans and spread benefits to the west. There is no mention of such co-operation in the amendment. This is not simply about the development of two economic corridors. The rural population in the area is dispersed, and many of its roads are third class. Roads Service must step up and make a substantial investment in the repair of those roads. The main factors for business are access to markets and labour. It would be a great pity if, on a motion asking simply for equality of opportunity and fair play, there was a reversion to the sterile politics of the past, with unionist Members combining to defeat a proposal for specific recommendations. I hope that that will not happen. Some people would be surprised if it happened; most would not, and they would not be impressed if it came to pass. I say to the Assembly that if it does, this matter will come back here. Now is the time for a new start in the west. Lord Morrow: I beg to move the following amendment: Leave out all after the first “to” and insert “investigate with relevant Ministers the economic development of the west, including the areas covered by Fermanagh, Omagh, Strabane, Cookstown, and Dungannon District Councils; and to ensure that these matters, including infrastructure, employment and employability, are taken into account in the discussions leading to the Programme for Government, Budget and Comprehensive Spending Review.” Mr Gallagher used a significant phrase: he said that “the sterile politics of the past” would be insufficient. Had he taken that sentiment on board before he drafted his motion, we might have had consensus on something. However, I hope that, as a result of the amendment and the debate, we will be able to achieve that, because both of us are saying the same thing in different ways. Mr Gallagher is as keen as I am to see the west develop. I look forward to Mr Gallagher’s withdrawing his motion and throwing his weight behind the amendment. That would send a powerful message to the Assembly, which he asks to move away from the sterile politics of the past, to Northern Ireland and further afield. I congratulate the authors of the western economic strategy team’s (WEST)‘Strategy and Action Plan 2006-2008’. It is a concise and significant document that will be relied upon greatly in the future as we seek to improve the economy of the west. The plan aims to promote greater co-ordination and cohesion among economic support agencies in the western areas and to position that region as a place in which to do business. For too long there has been a definite line between east and west in Northern Ireland. As I have said previously, with respect to economic development it is almost as though there are two Northern Irelands. If we are to bring the west onto a par with the rest of Northern Ireland, there must be a change in mindset. WEST has laid out structured suggestions for economic development that would greatly enhance the lives of residents and constituents in the area. I recommend that all Members read that document. The strategy embraces the district council areas of Dungannon and South Tyrone, Fermanagh, Cookstown, Omagh and Strabane. The various Government agencies and Departments are left in no doubt as to what is necessary for proper consideration of those areas’ needs and feelings. We do not want to be thrown leftovers from other projects, but rather to be integrated into every strategy, including those for employment, development, tourism and education. Undoubtedly, the west now fares better than it has done previously. The upgrading of the A4 between Dungannon and the Ballygawley roundabout, due to commence next spring, will add significantly to the road infrastructure of the Province and of the west. There is still a lot more to be done. The continued upgrading of County Fermanagh’s roads is important and must be examined sooner rather than later. A distributor road is necessary in Dungannon to deal with congestion in the town centre and to carry that traffic which does not seek to come to Dungannon but to go elsewhere. There has to be a distributor road to take away the traffic that is causing congestion but bringing very little else to Dungannon. The west is blessed with exciting tourism opportunities, but funding to promote them to full capacity is often lacking. Similarly, residents of the west face difficulty in accessing employment, and that is coupled with continuous economic strain in rural communities. The scales of funding must be fairly balanced to ensure that the area flourishes and becomes steadily stronger, instead of being allowed to stagnate. It is vital that every possible avenue to highlight the need for immediate and dramatic change is explored, and that the aim of improving our respective areas is fully supported. On examination, the current picture can sometimes seem grim. A positive change is overdue and will be welcomed. The sooner that happens, the better. The total population in the west is some 224,000, which represents around 13% or 14% of Northern Ireland’s population. By 2017, if trends continue, that figure will increase by around 10%. I doubt that other areas are growing at that rate. The west also has an above-average number of under-16-year-olds in employment with no formal qualifications, particularly in the Strabane District Council area. Such issues need to be tackled head on. A total of 12,800 enterprises are located in the western region, of which a staggering 99% are small businesses employing less than 50 people. There are a mere five large enterprises employing more than 250 people, and all of those are located in or around the Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council area. I ask the Minister of Enterprise ,Trade and Investment to look at those figures, which are significant and worthy of consideration. Gaping differences are noted in the Strabane and Cookstown areas, which respectively boast just 10 and 15 companies that employ more than 50 people. The Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment must give consideration to that fact when job creation is promoted in Northern Ireland in order to ensure that the west will not be forgotten, but will be given its proper place among the other regions. There have been areas of significant growth in both the manufacturing and construction sectors. However, there is ongoing below-average employment in education across the region, perhaps with the exception of Omagh, and below-average employment in the public administration sector. I agree with Mr Gallagher’s comments on that important point. The average weekly earnings across the region are below the Northern Ireland average, with employees in Cookstown the worst affected. In 2004-05, 16% of redundancies in Northern Ireland were in the west — a jump of 7% on the previous year. That translates as 782 job losses in two years, of which 60% were in Strabane. Those are significant figures and I am delighted to see the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment in the Chamber. The Minister will be responding to the debate, and I know that he will take seriously Members’ concerns that something must be done. I look forward to the future and his heading up of the Department, because it is true to say that his roots are in the west too, so he has an interest in the area not falling behind, and I have no doubt that he will not allow that to happen. Statistics show that the combined local government districts of the west fall within the 40% most deprived in Northern Ireland. Shockingly, Strabane ranks as not only the most deprived area in the subregion, but in Northern Ireland as a whole. That is extremely worrying given that the definition of the word “deprivation” includes housing, general facilities, fuel, and environmental, educational, working and social conditions. Therefore, it can be argued that the affected areas, particularly Strabane, lack all of those elements, which are nothing more than basic requirements that should be expected in today’s society. The day-to-day living that most of us take for granted has been denied to most of those who are affected by that situation. Although Strabane has earned the unpleasant reputation as the most deprived district in the Province, its neighbours do not fall far behind. Omagh, Cookstown and Dungannon have been designated among the six most disadvantaged council areas in Northern Ireland — a fact of which the Department must take cognisance, and to which it must give proper consideration. Strabane, Dungannon and Omagh are well below the Northern Ireland average for economic activity. Why should that be? The number of people who claim unemployment benefit in western areas is higher than the Northern Ireland average. That is not acceptable. There must be the same opportunities for all. 1.30 pm The west must not be an afterthought: the place that is thought about only when there are leftovers to be given out. I do not subscribe to that at all. I trust that the House and the Department do not either. That is why I have moved an amendment that focuses directly on the issues and will take politics out of the equation altogether. Members are not here to play politics with such matters. There will be plenty of opportunity to do that with less important issues. In my estimation, to do that in the current situation would be unforgivable. I strongly commend the amendment to the House. I ask the House to unite behind it and send out a powerful message that, in future, the west must be treated like the rest and also that it demands the best. Mr Molloy: I congratulate Mr Gallagher for moving this important motion, which seeks to deal with the infrastructural neglect of the west over the past years. I want to declare an interest as a member of Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council. I also congratulate the Minister for his presence at the debate to listen to the calls from the west. I am aware that he has roots there and certainly has a particular interest in the area. I ask Members to support the motion rather than the amendment — not on any party-political grounds — simply because Ministers can already come together to discuss and deal with such issues as the neglect of the west and how to improve its infrastructure and environment for job creation: indeed, Members expect them to do so. However, as Mr Gallagher’s motion says, what is needed is a task force for the west that is charged with compiling a time-limited report on the progress that is being made and which will set the pace for the way forward. WEST has put together its plan, and I congratulate the councils in the west for banding together to start to put together a programme to tackle the area’s needs. A similar approach worked in the Derry area when demands were made for infrastructure and support for the second city, the benefits of which can be seen. There has been a decentralisation of Departments into Derry. However, there has not been any decentralisation of Departments into western council areas, with the possible exception of Omagh, to which some Departments have moved from other council areas. A task force for the west must be a focus for the new Administration. It must start to build a future for the west by identifying the area’s needs and developing a programme to deal with them. A task force and its report are important factors in that. I call upon Invest NI to adopt a new approach to the west. There has been no drive to bring industry into the west. Historically, any industry in the west has come about through the entrepreneurial skills of local people. Those industries have been successful; indeed, they have become world leaders. For example, 80% of quarry machinery for the rest of the world is manufactured in the west, particularly in the Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council area. That demonstrates how local people have recognised the neglect, lack of jobs and infrastructure in the area and have banded together and brought forward their own programme to develop world-leading industry. Those entrepreneurial skills must be developed and supported. Although there are many small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the area, those businesses have developed as far as they can. A drive is required to turn those businesses into exporters and to put them into the international market. Invest NI can perform a major task by encouraging those businesses to develop in such a way that we do not simply end up with good family businesses, albeit with an increase in jobs, but in a way that develops those businesses as exporters. Mr B McCrea: I am interested to hear the Member talk about people banding together in the west of the Province. Will he consider all the manufacturing companies that have come together under the industrial derating campaign? Those companies would tell the Member that they hope that he and his party will support all possible measures to keep industrial rates down as a means of securing the future of those companies in the west of the Province that currently export goods. Mr Molloy: That is a discussion for another motion. My party’s support for derating has certainly been forthcoming. This matter is not framed by the west whingeing about what it has not got, but is about the development of skills to show what it can achieve in the future. The motion is concerned with the development of the west and how it can foster the necessary skills to achieve that aim. At a conference in Dungannon last week, as part of the Flight of the Earls festival, we were told that a programme is urgently needed to address the skills issue if we want to reap the benefits in, perhaps, eight to 10 years time. We need a programme that will ensure that the skills exist to develop future industry. We must start to shift the manufacturing base into an export role, and we must start to develop the current InterTradeIreland programme, expanding it to ensure that we have a better future. Mr Cree: Having lived west of the Bann for several years, I have considerable sympathy with the motives behind Mr Gallagher’s motion. We are told that more people are in work and that fewer are unemployed, but economic inactivity remains high. Historically, earnings in the west are below the Northern Ireland average and 16% of all recent redundancies have occurred in the west. Those are quite alarming figures. I was interested to be reminded of the strong manufacturing base that exists in the west. In Cookstown, 23% of the workforce is involved in manufacturing. In Dungannon, that figure is 29%; in Fermanagh, it is 18%; in Omagh, it is 12%; and in Strabane, it is 29%. We have taken an ambiguous attitude towards derating in the manufacturing industry, as illustrated in the Assembly debate in June 2006, of which Members have a record, and in the motion that I proposed in June this year. I sincerely hope that the Assembly will decide to support our manufacturers in a practical way on industrial rates. That seems to me, perhaps, to be more relevant to manufacturing than chasing the Varney Review on the reduction of corporation tax. I recognise that a study has been undertaken by WEST. That has already been referred to, and the report, covering the period 2006-08, is very good. Other initiatives are ongoing. The seasonally adjusted unemployment rate in Northern Ireland is 3·7%, which is the lowest rate on record. That is lower than the rate for the UK, which is 5·4%, and it is the lowest of all the UK regions. Despite that, we have clear evidence that the UK regional policy is not working. Two days ago, I received a copy of ‘Institute of Directors Northern Ireland News’, from which I quote Professor Mike Smyth of the University of Ulster on policy fault lines: “The ongoing discussions with HM Treasury (the Varney Review) have highlighted a number of serious fault lines in government policy. For me, the biggest fault line is the inescapable conclusion that UK regional policy is not working. Real economic convergence among the UK’s lagging regions (Northern Ireland, Wales, the North of England, Scotland, etc) is not happening. In fact, GVA per head over the past 15 years has been diverging from the UK average in most regions. Surprise, surprise, the only regions not diverging from UK average living standards are London, the South East and the South West.” I am concerned for the future of the economy for all of us. The economy will continue to be a difficult issue with very low growth — as low as 1%, some have predicted. There are bound to be considerable pressures on our economy, and the much-publicised economic package has failed to materialise. However, we must continue to tackle the problems of deprivation and social exclusion in our most disadvantaged areas, and that certainly includes west of the Bann. However, it is essential that DETI continues to improve jobs and opportunities for employment throughout Northern Ireland. More needs to be done. The best task force that we could muster at this time would comprise our Ministers. For that reason, I support the amendment. Dr Deeny: Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank you for allowing me to speak on this important motion. Perhaps I have some authority to speak on this, having spent the past 21 years of my life living in the west — without giving my age away, I spent the first 30 years living in the east. I cannot recommend the amendment because it has been proposed for two reasons only: to remove the words “task force”, and to remove the words “North-South”. I agree with Lord Morrow that he and Tommy Gallagher are singing from the same hymn sheet. However, the word “investigate” is not strong enough. We need something solid here, and a task force seems right to me. Therefore, I support the motion but cannot accept the amendment. I commend Mr Gallagher for two reasons: first, for proposing this important motion for debate; and, secondly, for including the whole of the west in the motion. Lord Morrow said that some 200,000 people live in the west. Last time I looked west of the Bann, 404,000 people were living there. That is a significant number. It is good that Mr Gallagher included the two large counties of Tyrone and Fermanagh. When I refer to the west, I include Derry, but I will focus a little on the two counties of Tyrone and Fermanagh. Do not forget that Tyrone is the largest and most deprived of the six counties. The establishment of an economic development task force for our region would help to bring the two counties, Tyrone and Fermanagh, together, and they would both benefit from each other. Such a task force would promote economic development on all fronts in both counties and would, therefore, greatly benefit everyone across the North. People often ask what we in the west have to offer. Tourism has been mentioned already, and it remains, and will remain, a major contributor to the economy in Northern Ireland — I am thinking of the Sperrins, the Fermanagh lakes and, of course, our wonderful Ulster American Folk Park. Economic development is measured in terms of jobs, members and income. It results in improvements in human development, education, health, choice and environmental sustainability. I have to say — coming not so much from Belfast, but even further east than that — that it is quite obvious to me that many things are Belfast-centred. It has been said in the past that Northern Ireland stops at Dungannon, and Mr Gallagher mentioned that the motorway to Dungannon, which was built 40 years ago, has not been extended beyond Dungannon as promised. Some people would be certain that Northern Ireland stops at Lisburn. Everything is centred on the periphery, which is a contradiction. The west has been neglected for far too long, and it is time that that was put right. There is a lack of public-sector jobs in the west. It has been noted by a former Minister and many others that many people in Omagh work in the Civil Service but have to travel to Belfast to do their jobs. There is no reason for not moving those jobs to the west. Strabane has lost hundreds of jobs in recent years, and no agencies have moved in to replace that lost employment. It is now official that many people are travelling out of — and even moving out of — the counties of Fermanagh and Tyrone because of that. Indeed, there is a brain drain in the south-west. 1.45 pm There are no universities in the west except, of course, in the Maiden City, although the development of local colleges is very important, and I am thankful for the one in Omagh. Members know my views on the plans for healthcare provision. They do not cater for everyone in Tyrone and Fermanagh, and there has been the unacceptable closure of three acute hospitals that served the people of Tyrone: three, not one. The Mid-Ulster Hospital in Magherafelt looks after the people in Cookstown. We must have adequate, modern healthcare facilities to cover all medical eventualities in both counties, and not just for our people — we need them for tourists as well. Roads and railways have been mentioned. There is no motorway network in the west at all. We do not even have a dual carriageway — Mr Gallagher can correct me, if there is one in Fermanagh — except for one small one in Tyrone, just outside Cookstown. The roads are shocking, and there is no railway network. Multinational companies must be encouraged to come to the west. An economic development task force would ensure that Tyrone and Fermanagh attracted important developments in line with what is happening in other areas of Northern Ireland. This is a new era for Northern Ireland, and we all want a modern Northern Ireland in a modern Europe. That means investing in, developing and modernising all of Northern Ireland, and that includes the west. I support the motion. Mr Hamilton: I welcome the opportunity to discuss economic development matters today. I wish that we had many more such opportunities, because — and I think that we all accept this — the economy is the biggest challenge facing the new Executive. We must ensure that nowhere — and nobody — is left out of what we hope are going to be years of prosperity ahead. We also want to ensure that every social class and every part of Northern Ireland benefit from a boost in the economy. That is a huge challenge for all of us, and that is why I support the amendment. It is much better to investigate rather than create a task force that would mark out the west as the sick man of Northern Ireland. That would not be good for the west, especially when it is not an entirely accurate perception. I read with interest the action plan developed by WEST and noted that it has found that research has identified the region to be characterised by, among other things: an entrepreneurial spirit; regional diversity; a spirit of collaboration; a strong economic mix; a sustainable rural economy; and a high level of skills. Those are some positive points for the west. We all accept that there are problems. All Members who have spoken in the debate mentioned accessibility, and there is no doubt that it is a problem. Investment in the roads infrastructure is sound investment and gives good value. We have only to look at our neighbours in the South to see the economic benefits that it can bring. Economic inactivity is also a problem. It is worse than the Northern Ireland average. Coming from the Ards Borough Council area, where 29,000 people are economically inactive at present — the fourth highest figure in Northern Ireland — I have considerable sympathy with the west. I note that in the past there has been a lack of available industrial land, particularly in the Strabane District Council area. However, if we create a task force, as called for in the motion, there will be a case for a task force for every area of Northern Ireland. I could make a case for my Strangford constituency where the economy has been decimated in recent years by a huge downturn in the traditional textile industries, and I am sure that colleagues from Belfast and elsewhere could make similar cases. We have all been badly affected, and we all suffer from disadvantages, and, to carry on with Leslie Cree’s theme, perhaps the best task force would be the Executive itself, of which the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment is a part. There is another case to be made against a task force. We all have experience of task forces that build up expectations and deliver nothing. There are any number of task force reports simply gathering dust and not being acted upon. It is essential that we place this important role in the proper context. All areas of Northern Ireland have issues that prevent them from participating in the upturn in the economy, and those must be overcome. I support the investigation called for in the amendment. It is right that such an investigation be placed in the proper context, as outlined in the amendment, which is that of the Programme for Government, the Budget and the comprehensive spending review. There it would receive better attention, as well as the appropriate resources, in the context of the Executive’s aim to lift the Northern Ireland economy for everyone. Mr Doherty: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I speak in favour of the motion, and express some disappointment at the amendment. Listening to Lord Morrow’s contribution, I felt that, in many ways, he supported the motion. However, he appeared to rule out the establishment of a task force, as if that were some challenge to the Minister’s authority. Although the motion is a challenge to the Minister, it recognises his authority to put together a task force and to implement its findings. If the DUP were to reflect on that point, I believe that it would support the motion. The four district councils of Strabane, Omagh, Cookstown and Fermanagh, along with Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council, make up the counties of Tyrone and Fermanagh. It is a vast, rural area, with a diverse, rural population and some major towns. Those counties suffer from an appalling lack of infrastructure. There are no railway lines at all. People there do not even have a railway to complain about, never mind late trains or bad timekeeping. Put simply, there is no rail network in those counties. They have no motorway and no dual carriageway. There is no regional airport, and the recent debates about Shannon and Belfast airports showed how crucial a regional airport is to the development of any geographical area. There are no gas pipelines, and no potential for bringing gas into the west. I am concerned that, if recent reports of the potential gas find on the Fermanagh-Cavan border come to fruition, the only pipeline will be one to take gas out of the area. The water and sewerage infrastructure is not sufficiently progressed to allow for ongoing development of the area. Furthermore, there is very limited broadband access. The economic indicators — employment, unemployment and poverty — clearly show that the area needs attention. It needs a task force to focus attention on the area, and that task force’s findings should be implemented. The potential that existed for there to be decentralisation of Departments and agencies has not been delivered on. Unfortunately, the amendment — although those speaking to it almost speak in favour of the motion — misses the key point, which is that a task force would bring with it clarity, and an indication that, at last, the neglected infrastructure and all other areas of neglect in the west would be challenged. I urge the DUP to rethink the content of its amendment. In many ways, that party is going along with Tommy Gallagher’s thoughts. However, it misses the key point, which is the establishment of a task force. As I have said, the motion is not a challenge to the Minister. It recognises that he has the authority to put a task force together and to bring its findings to fruition. I urge all Members to support the motion. Mr McFarland: Although I represent North Down, I am originally from, and my wider family still live in, and, indeed, at, the centre of the universe — Plumbridge, in the heart of the Sperrins. I have therefore an ongoing interest in the issues involved in the debate. Mr McElduff: Does the Member accept that he is widely regarded in west Tyrone as an honorary west Tyrone man? Mr McFarland: I thank the Member for that. For many years, the councils’ economic development units have been doing sterling work. They have come together in teams and produced many glossy and expensive brochures, some of which I have here. However, that work has never quite led to a proper plan that would allow the area west of the Bann to sort itself out and to get up there in the serious economic stakes. Perhaps the time has come for the Executive to co-ordinate those issues and finally produce a plan for success. I draw Members’ attention to the excellent regional development strategy that appeared during the time of the first Assembly. It took a long time to develop, but we seem to have lost sight of it. At the time, it was the envy of England, Scotland and the Republic. It produced a plan for Northern Ireland that cut across all kinds of issues. Let us remind ourselves of some of them. It noted that farming would become more difficult as the money from Europe dried up and that farmers would need to diversify, and not just on the farms: some of them, or their children, might have to take part-time employment in local towns and villages. Consequently, there would be a need to develop SMEs in those towns and villages to cater for those in the local population seeking work and for farmers looking for part-time jobs. Transport, and the transport networks, was a major issue. Recently, I had cause to travel from Omagh to Enniskillen, and I do not want to reopen the dreaded hospital debate, but, my goodness, you would not want to be taken poorly in Greencastle or Cranagh on a winter’s night, when Roads Service is unable to grit the roads and it is icy, and to be heading for a hospital in Enniskillen. Chances are that you would be long gone before you reached Omagh. There is a major issue about the infrastructure in that mountainous area that goes right down into Fermanagh and right through Tyrone. It does not affect only medical situations; if people need to transport goods or to meet business colleagues, they face the same difficulties. Everything takes ages. The Strabane and Omagh area has the fastest-growing population in Northern Ireland. How are we to meet the education needs of young people and provide them with the skills that employers require? How do we encourage young people to stay in the area? We need to create jobs, which will probably be provided by SMEs rather than by major companies coming into the area — home-grown businesses are better as a rule. In order to keep young people there, we need to allow them to live there. On one level, I am quite encouraged that Planning Policy Statement 14 (PPS 14) has gone back to the drawing board. However, that is not to say that there is not a need to protect the countryside. I was in Donegal recently, and it is just appalling. I spent a lot of my childhood there, and what has been done there is iniquitous. I do not want Tyrone and Fermanagh to follow suit, with bungalows shoved in everywhere. There must be some sort of planning policy, but what I do not understand is why those who say that they are interested in rural planning do not want to allow people to rebuild on the sites of existing houses. Finally, I call on the Minister to revisit the regional development strategy and to produce a cross-cutting plan to establish economic development in the west. I support the amendment. Mr McGlone: In speaking to my colleague Mr Gallagher’s motion, I do not want to rehash or repeat his points. 2.00 pm However, in this new politically stable atmosphere, we want economic growth, so we must facilitate and support that growth. Investment in job creation and infrastructure is necessary if we are to realise the work of the task force that Tommy Gallagher has proposed. Our Civil Service jobs must be decentralised, and economic advantages will result from the regeneration of our district council towns through that decentralisation. Many of those towns have been totally denuded in recent years as a result of the loss of vital Civil Service jobs, and that has had a ripple effect on local economies. However, as well as the economic advantages, decentralisation has clear social advantages. For example, people with young families are forced to travel day and daily to Belfast to work, getting stuck in traffic jams in so doing, and decentralisation would mean that that would no longer be the case. Decentralisation would also bring environmental advantages. Urban congestion and fuel consumption would be reduced, as would the cost of travel. Many people who face those costs are on low incomes. Mr McFarland has just absented himself from the Chamber, but he — and Mr Hamilton — referred to planning, which is crucial in order to make land available. For example, the introduction of PPS 14 — although I am not sure how to describe it now — has meant that long-established family, local and rural businesses have suffered. In a particular case that readily springs to mind, one businessman could not expand his business, which was established in a rural area, to create an extra seven jobs. PPS 14 has had detrimental effects. Recently, it has also placed an obstacle in the way of the creation of potentially 150 to 300 jobs. A job-creation scheme is available, but people have to wait two and a half years for a refusal under that package. Businessmen and investors simply will not put up with that type of behaviour. Instead of presenting obstacles and reasons for not creating jobs, Invest Northern Ireland should be facilitating job creation and doing what it can, within reason, to enable developers to create jobs in those areas that have suffered for many years as a result of economic disadvantage, high levels of unemployment and deprivation. The task force must tackle those planning obstacles at the pre-planning application stage to iron out infrastructural problems, such as difficulties with roads and water. Other planning policy issues and problems with departmental matters such as Department of Agriculture and Rural Development food manufacturing schemes could be smoothed out at that stage, as could cases in which Invest Northern Ireland should be facilitating job creation but is delaying it by making negative comments to the Planning Service. If the task force tackles those problems, we can arrive at a situation in which we, as Members of a new Assembly can, through the new Executive, create jobs for those who have elected us. If those problems are tackled, a developer who is interested in creating jobs will not be left for two or two and a half years waiting to hear nothing but the refusal of his planning application. Difficulties must be ironed out well before then. We must move into the twenty-first century. The bureaucrats in Invest Northern Ireland who are hindering the process must note that they are there to do a job: to help developers to boost the economy and create jobs. We cannot have those bureaucrats giving developers reasons not to invest. People want encouragement and support, and a “why not?” approach and a professionalism should be there for all to see. We, as elected representatives, demand that type of approach. I support my colleague’s proposal to establish a task force. As a representative of what is referred to as the rural west, I have related some of my experiences to the House. I hope that we can learn from some of those experiences, and I hope that in future we will be in a position to help to create jobs with maximum efficiency. Mr Deputy Speaker: The Member’s time is up. Mrs McGill: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I wholeheartedly welcome the motion and thank the Member for Fermanagh and South Tyrone for proposing it. I also welcome the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment to the House today. It is important that the economic deficit in West Tyrone be discussed on the first day of this new session; again, I commend Mr Gallagher for bringing it to the House. We, in the west, are living with an economic deficit. The Assembly and the Executive have a great responsibility to redress the inequality that exists, particularly between east and west. One of the earlier Members who spoke said that that case could be made for practically any area. I disagree. In August, the Department for Social Development published a report — ‘Households Below Average Income 2005/06’. A key finding of that report, which is relevant to the debate, was that: “Individuals living in the West of the Province were most at risk of being in low income. Those living in the East of the Province were least at risk.” Why is that? I am going to whinge and complain about it. It is because there are no jobs, a lack of investment and poor infrastructure. All those points have been made, but I want to emphasise the case: there is a difference between east and west. Mr Gallagher mentioned tourism signature projects. There is a route in my area that the hon Member for West Tyrone will recognise. It starts in Strabane and goes over Ligfordrum into Plumbridge, up the Glenelly Valley and into County Derry. I guarantee that it is one of the most beautiful routes in this country, equal to anything in the Mournes, on the Causeway or in the glens. Where is our signature project? It does not exist. Mr Gallagher made an important point, and I support him fully. These days I often pass the Titanic Quarter. Fair play to the people who are working on that project. In May, the Executive gave — how much was it? — £25 million to that project. Fair play to whoever is responsible for the project. There are loads more millions available for it, according to the report on the website. [Interruption.] It does not matter which party a Minister comes from. I am speaking for the west. Whatever Ministers happen to be in the Executive, it is for all of them to make those decisions. In discussing this matter, several Members have spoken of WEST — the western economic strategy team. I must say right away that I sat on that body, as did my council colleague on the other side of the House, Councillor Allan Bresland, who is now also a Member for West Tyrone. I have great respect for that group’s work. If we are to implement the task force — and I support the motion and the establishment of such an employment task force — that group will make a good reference point. Go raibh míle maith agat. Mr Armstrong: I am pleased that the motion is being debated today, coming as I do from Stewartstown on the western shores of Lough Neagh and representing Mid Ulster. I am well placed to discuss the economic difficulties in the west of the Province. The economic recovery in Northern Ireland since 1998 has been remarkable, but hardly surprising. The IRA campaign of terror was designed to bring Ulster to its knees economically, and to that end, we had numerous bomb attacks on town centres, hotels and restaurants. Such activity was designed to destroy our economy and to ensure that local investment dried up, while potential outside investment stayed away. Thankfully, those days appear to be behind us. Although the whole country suffered economic depression due to IRA terrorist attacks over 30 years, I contend that the particular circumstances of the west of the Province meant that the impact of that depression was even more pronounced in that region. The lack of a modern transport infrastructure is a huge issue. There is no railway line throughout a huge swathe of the west, barring that which runs from Belfast to Londonderry to the far north. Promises that were made back in 1960, when the west’s railway lines were torn up, were not delivered upon, and, to this day, we still have no motorway except that which begins at the outskirts of Dungannon. The west of the Province suffers from the traditional Belfast-based mentality that civilisation ends at Glengormley and Lisburn. To put it another way, if something is not within 10 miles of Belfast, it is not worth going to. I have no doubt that such thinking, even subconsciously, has clouded the opinions and decisions of policy makers in the past and continues to do so to this day. Even given a benign interpretation of events, Belfast has seen a great deal of development, such as the Titanic Quarter, the Waterfront Hall, the Odyssey Arena and Victoria Square. The Belfast lobby is not content with those; look at the outcry there was when John Lewis dared to try to move as far west as the city of Lisburn. Belfast obviously needs its share of development, but so do the rest of us. Belfast’s traffic congestion will only get worse if more and more people are forced to leave the west of the Province to commute to Belfast for work, or move to fuel the already crazy property market in the city. The west of the Province has traditionally had pockets of extremely high unemployment, such as used to be found in Strabane. However, problems have also arisen from the traditional reliance on agriculture and related industries for employment opportunities. The agriculture industry has been beset with problems in recent years due to foot-and-mouth disease, BSE, low farm income and high feed prices. Those factors have compounded an already difficult situation, and many farmers and businesses in the textile industries are at their wit’s end, laying off staff, and, in many cases, giving up altogether. I have no doubt that the west of the Province could benefit from a task force, but we have seen task force initiatives on several occasions in the past — talk is cheap, and nothing is done. We require the political will to ensure that real action will follow any recommendations for the establishment of a task force. The Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment (Mr Dodds): I congratulate Mr Gallagher for securing the debate. As the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, I share Mr Gallagher’s desire to see the west of Northern Ireland continuing to benefit from a steady improvement in the economy. References have been made to my grass roots in Fermanagh. Although I was born in Londonderry, I was brought up in Fermanagh, and I am all too aware of the issues in the west of the Province. However, I do not think that we should set false confrontations in this Assembly. The issue is not about east versus west; it is about raising all of Northern Ireland’s economy so that everybody can benefit, paying absolute regard to the particular challenges and disadvantages that affect particular areas, whether in the west, the north-west, the south or certain parts of Belfast. All Assembly Members could, can, and do, rightly, bring issues of particular concern to me and other Ministers. It is important that we take all of those into account while developing for Northern Ireland — as a whole — an economic strategy that lifts the entire economy and drives it forward. Mr Campbell: The Minister mentioned a matter that is of concern to me and other Members as regards the wording of the motion. The geographical location stated is quite prescriptive — if it went any further west, it would be in Nova Scotia — and western areas such as Limavady and Londonderry have been excluded. Mr Dodds: The Member has drawn attention to a point that was mentioned in the debate. Perhaps those who tabled the debate will explain during the winding-up speech why they have defined the west in such a way and why some areas have been excluded. I am simply making the point that there are particular challenges and issues in all parts of the Province, some of which are more exaggerated and emphasised in some areas than others. I welcome the opportunity to discuss the particular challenges and issues that affect the west of the Province, as defined by Mr Gallagher. 2.15 pm Overall, Northern Ireland has enjoyed sustained economic growth over the past 15 years. The economy continues to perform well in historic terms. Employment levels are higher than ever, and we are benefiting from lower unemployment. As Members have said, the Northern Ireland unemployment rate has remained below the 5% mark for over two years. The current unemployment rate of 2·3% is one of the lowest in the United Kingdom. However, stating those figures does not underestimate the challenges that remain, not just for the west, but for all of Northern Ireland. That includes the need to address lower levels of productivity and private sector earnings, the high levels of economic inactivity and the relatively small private sector, compared with the public sector. A number of Government strategies are in place, including the regional innovation strategy, the regional development strategy, the Department for Employment and Learning’s skills strategy and the investment strategy for Northern Ireland. However, it is important that the new devolved Administration builds on those measures to make the economy more sustainable and create the wealth that will enable us to pursue the level and quality of provision that we want across Northern Ireland. That is why the Executive are highlighting the economy for special attention in the Programme for Government and comprehensive spending review process. No one in the House or outside it could fail to have noticed the emphasis that has been placed by all parties in the Executive on the need to drive forward the economy. All parties have recognised that a healthy, growing, vibrant economy is essential to move forward, not only on the standard of living, but on the provision of healthcare, education services and world-class environmental and housing provision. It is not a question of the economy versus social provision; it is a matter of the economy being central in order to provide the wherewithal to make progress on the other issues. A number of Members, not least the proposer of the motion, have referred to roads, decentralisation, health matters, transportation, railways, airports, planning, and several other matters. Those are legitimate issues to raise when considering the development of the west. The motion, however, calls on the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment to take action to assist the economic development of the west. Those matters are outside my remit but they are matters for the Executive as a whole. That is why it is important that a cross-cutting and collective approach is taken. There is considerable merit in the amendment that has been tabled. I am happy to deal with the issues that fall within my responsibilities, but it is worth noting that the employment and unemployment statistics for the western region are broadly similar to the Northern Ireland average. There are pockets where that is not the case, just as there are areas in any set of statistics that do not carry the broad thrust of those figures. However, the latest figures demonstrate that, in the areas that are mentioned in the motion, the overall positions in claimant-count unemployment, percentage decrease in unemployment and increases in employee jobs are almost identical to the Northern Ireland average. The one area where there is a marked difference is the economic inactivity rate, which includes people on incapacity benefit, students and older people. I will deal with that point shortly. I shall explain what my Department and its agencies are doing, in partnership with other Departments, to support economic development in the areas covered by Fermanagh, Omagh, Strabane, Dungannon and Cookstown councils. DETI policy already recognises the problems that are faced by a number of council areas in the west. The Department has disadvantaged-area maps, which are based on the income and employment indicators of deprivation from the 2005 Northern Ireland measure of multiple deprivation, and they designate Strabane, Omagh, Cookstown and Dungannon as disadvantaged areas. Those areas are already designated. In practice, that means that the Department and its agencies are committed to paying particular attention to such areas when delivering policies and programmes. I have ensured that that is the case. For example, Invest Northern Ireland has targets to attract 75% of all first-time inward investment projects to locate in disadvantaged areas and to secure at least 40% of new business starts there. The latest figures show that those targets are being met; indeed, the figure for investment projects is some 80%. People talk about neglect, and so forth. It is a question of balance and ensuring that we know what is happening and what measures are already in place. Of course, there is room for improvement and certain factors must be taken into account as the areas develop. Invest Northern Ireland can also offer an enhanced incentives package to companies wishing to locate projects in disadvantaged areas. The size of that package is determined by the merits and scale of the project and the number and quality of jobs available. An important role fo |