northern Ireland assembly Tuesday 18 September 2007 Ministerial Statement: Private Members’ Business: Adjournment: The Assembly met at 10.30 am (Mr Speaker in the Chair). Members observed two minutes’ silence. Mr Speaker: I want to deal with a point of order. At the start of yesterday’s business, Mr Gregory Campbell raised a point of order regarding the Hansard report of last Tuesday’s debate on attacks on Orange Halls. Mr Campbell said that although he made a remark, which could be clearly heard, during the speech of the junior Minister Mr Kelly, it was not reported in the Hansard report. I have reviewed the relevant section of last Tuesday’s proceedings. It is clear that Mr Campbell did indeed make a remark from a sedentary position. It is equally clear that the junior Minister Mr Kelly did not respond or refer to the remark. As Members should be aware, the convention is that Hansard reports remarks made from a sedentary position only if they are referred to by another Member or, indeed, the Speaker. That point is made clear on page 117 of the ‘Northern Ireland Assembly Companion’, where it is pointed out that, on 6 December 1999, the then Speaker stated that: “remarks made from a sedentary position are recorded into Hansard only if they are referred to by the Member who is on his feet at the time.” Given that there was absolutely no reference to Mr Campbell’s remarks, which were made from a sedentary position, Hansard, quite properly, did not record them in the report of that day’s business in the House. I hope that that clarifies the matter. In addition to the ruling this morning, I have written to Mr Campbell to further clarify the point. British-Irish Council Mr Speaker: I have received notice from the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister that the First Minister wishes to make a statement on the British-Irish Council. The First Minister (Rev Dr Ian Paisley): Mr Speaker, in compliance with section 52C(2) of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, we wish to make the following report on the ninth summit meeting of the British-Irish Council, which was held here in Parliament Buildings on 16 July 2007. Each Executive member and junior Minister who attended the meeting has approved the report, which we make on their behalf. The British-Irish Council is a forum for its members to exchange information, and to discuss, consult on and agree, as they see fit, co-operative measures in areas of mutual interest. The Deputy First Minister and I welcomed the heads of delegations. We were accompanied by the Minister of Education; the Minister for Employment and Learning; the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment; the Minister of the Environment; the Minister of Finance and Personnel; the Minister for Regional Development; the Minister for Social Development; and the junior Ministers in the Office of the First and the Deputy First Minister. The Irish and British Government delegations were led by the Taoiseach, Mr Bertie Ahern TD, and the Prime Minister, the right hon Gordon Brown MP, respectively. The Welsh Assembly Government were represented by their Deputy First Minister, Ieuan Wyn Jones, and the Scottish Executive were represented by their First Minister, the right hon Alex Salmond MP MSP. The Bailiwick of Guernsey was represented by its Deputy Chief Minister, Stuart Falla, and the Bailiwick of Jersey was represented by its Chief Minister, Senator Frank Walker. The Isle of Man Government were represented by their Chief Minister, Mr Tony Brown MHK — that means “Member of the House of Keys”. Council members acknowledged the historic nature of the meeting, which was the first summit meeting of the Council since the restoration of the Northern Ireland Assembly in May 2007, and the first Council summit to take place in Northern Ireland. It was also the first occasion on which the eight heads of the Administrations had had the opportunity to meet since recent elections in many of their territories. If I may take the opportunity, Mr Speaker, I wish to thank you and your staff, on the Deputy First Minister’s behalf and my own, for making the splendid facilities of this Building available for the meeting. We received numerous appreciative comments from the other participants about the hospitality that they received. As for what was achieved, the Council reviewed and discussed how it might develop its work, now that all eight members are again properly represented by their respective Administrations. Recognising the Council’s potential to strengthen relations and to develop co-operation further among its members across a range of sectors of mutual interest and benefit, members agreed that it was now opportune to review the Council’s future direction. In that context, Scotland proposed energy as a useful work area for the Council to explore, and offered to lead on the issue. The Council tasked its secretariat, in consultation with the member Administrations, with undertaking a strategic review of the Council’s work programmes, working methods and support arrangements, including arrangements for a standing secretariat. The secretariat will report back with firm proposals as soon as possible. On specific issues, we lead the work of the Council in the transport sector. In that regard, heads of Administrations discussed the current and future state of transport infrastructure links. They recognised that the provision of well-planned infrastructure is critical to the economic and social development of these islands, and that this is particularly the case with transport. Fast, efficient and integrated transport links are important for all the member Administrations to enable the movement of people and goods and the further promotion of investment, trade and tourism between them and the rest of the world. The Council, therefore, agreed to examine the potential for further co-operation and collaboration on transport planning and investment to strengthen further the integration of transport networks across its boundaries and transport modes. The Council also noted the agreement by Scotland and Northern Ireland to examine the case for restoring ferry links between Campbeltown and Ballycastle. The Council concluded that it should continue to build on the valuable progress made in road safety, including a more consistent approach to driver disqualification and lesser offences, and in sharing best practice on sustainable travel and mobility. The Irish Government are leading the Council’s work on the misuse of drugs. At its last ministerial meeting in December 2006, the Council focused on the challenges presented by cocaine use. Ministers found that each Administration is facing similar issues, and that the problem is at various stages of development in the different jurisdictions. Ministers resolved to continue to co-operate and exchange experience, with particular emphasis on initiatives that have led to successful outcomes and that may lend themselves to broader application in other Administrations. The environment sector is led by the British Government and was the focus of the summit held in London in June 2006. At that summit, the focus was on climate change, including work on understanding the impact of unavoidable climate change and on developing adaptation strategies. The Council continues to intensify co-operation and the exchange of information between members on this and other important areas, including understanding extreme weather events, integrated coastal-zone management and managing radioactive waste. The Isle of Man Government are leading work on e-health, which is the remote diagnosis and treatment of patients through the use of telecommunications technology. Work continues on technical issues, such as common technical standards, a relevant clinical governance framework, protocols for the secure exchange of confidential data, and quality standards for e-health on the Internet. The Council is also examining legal, regulatory and ethical issues in the e-health sector. These issues have come to the fore recently and will require firm guidelines to allow the sector to continue its current rapid development. The Bailiwick of Guernsey is taking the lead on the Council’s tourism work sector. That sector has completed several projects, including a model to measure the economic impact of tourism in the regions and training programmes for staff who work in the sector. A review of the future work and direction of that group will be carried out by the date of the next ministerial meeting in the sector. 10.45 am The Bailiwick of Jersey is taking the lead on the Council’s work on the knowledge economy. Work is under way to enhance business continuity planning among small businesses that may be affected by serious threats such as terrorist incidents. Possible preventative measures and business continuity planning are being developed to strengthen business sustainability. An assessment of the readiness of small, medium- and micro-sized businesses has been carried out, and a common set of best-practice guidelines on preventative measures and business continuity planning is being developed. The Welsh Assembly Government are taking the lead in the indigenous, minority and lesser-used languages work sector. The most recent ministerial meeting in October 2006 focused on three areas: language transmission in the family; adult education; and information and communications technology (ICT). Language transmission in the family is recognised as being vital to the process of maintaining a language. Ministers endorsed further work in that area to explore how best to support language transmission in the family, how models could be transferred to other languages, identifying gaps in knowledge and how British-Irish Council Administrations could work together to fill those gaps. Ministers agreed that, although the approach adopted and the support for adult education provision would vary from one Administration to another, there were valuable opportunities to be gained by continuing to share and exchange experiences in that area. The indigenous, minority and lesser-used languages group continues to advance work in those areas. It is also working on two new areas: planning and linguistic considerations; and research, data and language-use surveys. The Scottish Executive and the Welsh Assembly Government are jointly taking the lead on the Council’s work on social inclusion. That group is now examining child poverty, with a focus on lone parents. The work is focused on transition points in people’s lives and the proper provision of support at those times. The British-Irish Council is also examining how Administrations identify, and take account of, the views of parents, young people and children when formulating their policies. Demography is the newest work sector, and it is led by the Scottish Executive. The group has recently commenced work and has agreed to focus its efforts on migration, which has a broad and varied impact on the eight members. I am glad to say that the Minister for Employment and Learning is representing the Northern Ireland Executive’s interests in that sector. Finally, Mr Speaker, I can report that the next British-Irish Council summit meeting will be held in late 2007 and will be hosted by Ireland at a venue to be announced. I think that I should add: here endeth the first lesson. The Chairperson of the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister (Mr Kennedy): I welcome the First Minister’s statement on the British-Irish Council summit meeting that took place on 16 July 2007. However, I am concerned that, although the meeting took place on 16 July, during the summer recess, the statement has been made only today, instead of at the Assembly’s first opportunity, last week. The system appears to have been subject to some delay and slippage. I have a number of questions. Will the First Minister indicate a more precise timescale for the formation of a standing secretariat for the British-Irish Council? I note that the British-Irish Council is examining the issue of child poverty. That matter is of particular interest to the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, which will be considering terms of reference for an inquiry into child poverty at its next meeting. I ask the First Minister to state when we can expect a report on child poverty from the British-Irish Council. If a full report will not be available for some time — as is likely — will the First Minister share the findings of the British-Irish Council with the Committee on a regular and ongoing basis? I ask the First Minister to detail the mechanisms that are in place to communicate and engage with the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister and other Assembly Committees before and after meetings of the British-Irish Council to enable those Committees to uphold their statutory scrutiny functions. Finally, I wish to ask a question in a personal capacity, on behalf of the Ulster Unionist Party. The First Minister will be aware of the recently declared intention of the governing party in the Irish Republic — Fianna Fáil — to organise politically in Northern Ireland. Will the First Minister indicate whether he was consulted in advance of that development by Mr Ahern, and will he — Mr Speaker: The Member must take his seat. I try to give Chairpersons of Committees as much latitude as possible when asking questions on ministerial statements, but those questions must relate to the statements. The Member’s last question does not, in any way, relate to the First Minister’s statement. That is my ruling. The First Minister: This is the first opportunity to make the statement to the House because it first had to go before the Executive. The Executive must see and approve statements that are a matter for the whole House. That is what we did, and there was no slippage whatsoever, except the slippage of the Member in not knowing that. As for the politics of another country, that is no concern of mine. I will defend our right to have our own political parties, which will do the job that the people of Northern Ireland want them to do. Perhaps I am speaking out of turn, but I want to put that on record. The Member asked about a standing secretariat for the British-Irish Council. We are taking up work that has been the subject of previous consultation. I remind the Member that the St Andrews Agreement states: “Following consultation with its other members, and with a view to giving further impetus to its work, the two Governments would facilitate the establishment of a standing secretariat for the British-Irish Council, if members agree.” The strategic review will examine the arrangements for a standing secretariat. The Council members have agreed on that matter, and that process is under way. I trust that that process will be speedy because the Council deserves such a standing secretariat to address the very large agenda with which it must deal. Recommendations and outcomes that arise from the review will be subject to agreement by all the Administrations concerned. I will write to the Member and bring him up to date on the other matters that he mentioned. Mrs Long: I thank the First Minister for bringing the report to the Assembly. I should like to add to what Mr Kennedy said about the mechanisms whereby his Committee and the other Assembly Committees can feed into the agenda of the British-Irish Council and scrutinise issues on that agenda at an early stage. For example, it will be important for Members to receive feedback on child poverty as we are seeking to carry out an investigation into the matter. If an arrangement could be facilitated, it would be most welcome. I wish to raise two issues. First, the First Minister said that Northern Ireland is taking the lead on transport. Will he clarify whether real connectivity between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland will be on the agenda? Clearly, transport is of strategic importance across the island, but it is particularly important to Northern Ireland as regards connectivity with its closest neighbour. Secondly, sustainability is the responsibility of the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, and a co-ordinated approach to sustainability would be welcomed in these islands. I am interested to know whether the First Minister will state whether he will be putting sustainability on the agenda of future British-Irish Council meetings. The First Minister: The answer to the hon Lady’s first point is yes; we are taking the lead on transport. The British-Irish Council agreed to examine the potential for further co-operation and collaboration on transport planning and investment to strengthen further the integration of transport networks across its boundaries and transport modes. As that work will include all member countries, it is quite clear that we are looking for an integrated transport system that will link all the countries concerned. There will be a meeting in the spring to consider the first steps that will be taken to eradicate child poverty. As regards the involvement of Assembly Committees in the work of the British-Irish Council — an issue that I did not respond to when answering the questions put by the previous Member who spoke — my answer would be yes. I am sure that we would all want the fullest possible agreement on those matters, and the usual channels can be used when meetings of the British-Irish Council are being arranged. Knowing the Council’s work programme, as regards the items that are essential to our meetings here, it would be impossible to consult with every Assembly Committee. Mr Hilditch: My interest is in tourism and the economic impact for the Giant’s Causeway area. Will the First Minister state what progress has been made to reinstate the ferry service between Ballycastle and Campbeltown? The First Minister: Officials from Northern Ireland and the Scottish Executive held a video conference on Friday 20 July 2007. The principal outcomes of that conference were as follows: all previous work — the business case, transport appraisals and the current tendering exercises — needs to be revisited as soon as sufficient time has elapsed from the project commenced and the current position came into play. The Scottish Executive, with whom we have been in touch, will develop new terms of reference for a fresh economic transport appraisal and timetable for delivery. A steering group, on which the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment will be represented, will be created as agreed in the terms of reference, and will manage the review process. I am personally in constant touch with the First Minister of Scotland, and he is, of course, enthusiastic that the project should be completed and the service reinstated. It is also possible that the service could continue further along the Scottish coastline than had been intended in the first proposition. Mr W Clarke: Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I thank the First Minister for his statement. I welcome the fact that the environment has been highlighted as an important issue and that there has been agreement to intensify co-operation and exchange of information. Given that this work sector is being led by the British Government, is it possible that the BIC will examine serious concerns across the island of Ireland about Sellafield and the management of radioactive waste? Furthermore, will the First Minister agree that a roll-out of nuclear power stations across the water will have serious implications for the island of Ireland? The First Minister: The BIC has no regulatory role in respect of Sellafield. Regulatory responsibility rests with HM Nuclear Installations Inspectorate and the Environment Agency. However, I am sure that the BIC will take an interest in those matters, which affect all of us. 11.00 am Mr Durkan: I thank the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister for presenting today’s report on behalf of the Executive. Like other Members, I welcome the fact that the BIC meeting took place. I note that, in the “family photograph” of the leaders of the delegations on 16 July 2007, there was only one Englishman — who happened to be a natural-born Tory named Shaun. People would not have predicted that a number of years ago. More importantly, the British-Irish Council, as the First Minister reflected in the report, allows Administrations to share experiences and challenges in quite a number of areas. The subject matters on which the different member Administrations are leading were established in the last period of devolution. I am glad to see that those areas have stood the test of time and that the work is continuing. Will the emphasis that is now going to be applied to child poverty mean that the previously published Northern Ireland anti-poverty strategy will be re-examined and reconditioned in light of the BIC work that is being carried out on social inclusion? I remind the First Minister that the proposal for a standing secretariat was first made back in 2001 and 2002. I hope that the permanent secretariat will not only service the meetings of the eight Administrations, but will have a specific role of encouraging and monitoring bilateral and multilateral engagement by the member Administrations — all eight of them do not need to work together on everything or to meet at the one time. As Chairperson of the Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment, I encourage the First Minister and his colleagues to support the Scottish Executive’s proposal that the British-Irish Council should examine energy and the overlap between energy and the environment. Obligations regarding renewable energy sources need to be examined at BIC level, because the Whitehall Department has proposed significant changes that could have implications for us and the wider islands, vis-à-vis the single electricity market. The First Minister: I thank the hon Gentleman for his remarks. The review that is commencing will take in the broad sweep of issues that he mentioned. The BIC will return to the matters that have already been discussed and will pursue them in order to find a way forward. I shall write to the Member about some of those matters and assure him that they are on the agenda. I cannot, of course, say what the decisions might be. Mr Easton: Will the First Minister ensure that the British-Irish Council is not merely a talking shop, and will he give an example of practical co-operation? The First Minister: The recent summit demonstrated the commitment of members to develop practical co-operation and arrangements that can make a meaningful impact on people’s lives. The British-Irish Council is most certainly not just a talking shop; it is an extremely valuable forum in which vital aspects of policy in a wide range of sectors are discussed. It is also valuable for ensuring that we in Northern Ireland are aware of, and can share, best practice with our BIC partners and with others across Europe. We want to see more tangible evidence of the impact of that co-operation, and the review will examine how that can be achieved. We also look forward to engaging with the other Administrations in deciding how to make best use of the body, which is unique in Europe. Together with the other institutions, the BIC can have a powerful role in making life better for us all. Mr O’Dowd: Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. One of the areas of practical co-operation that the BIC has concentrated on is the issue of drugs misuse. I welcome the First Minister’s comments about that. I also welcome the programme of work that has been set out, particularly the training and employment for recovering drug misusers and the formal and informal education for young people. Will the First Minister outline any further areas of co-operation in relation to this most serious issue? The First Minister: The BIC secretariat, in consultation with member Administrations, has developed certain programmes on matters such as transport, the misuse of drugs, the environment, and language. The review will address those issues, and decisions will be made on them. I will keep in mind the Member’s comments about his interest in the issue of the misuse of drugs, and I will probably be able to write to him more fully when the review commences. However, I assure him that that matter will certainly be on the agenda. Mr Spratt: What plans are there to develop the work and the future direction of the British-Irish Council? The First Minister: That will depend on the review, on which, of course, we all have to agree. Therefore, if we agree, the BIC will move forward, and if we make no such agreements, it will not move; it really depends on ourselves. However, there is plenty of basis for agreement in many of the areas that have been discussed. Mr Elliott: I thank the First Minister for his report on the British-Irish Council meeting. I also note the participation of high-level delegates from each of the areas. My question relates to the possibility that the Province should receive a financial package, mention of which was absent from the report. Given that the Rt Hon Gordon Brown, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, was present at the meeting, were there any discussions about a special economic package for Northern Ireland? The First Minister: The BIC talks were not about the personal relationships that exist within the United Kingdom. We certainly took the opportunity to probe the Prime Minister as best we could, but his mind was on other matters. The BIC is not a forum in which we extract what we want from the British Government: it is a forum in which, along with other parts of this area, we face up to matters of common interest on which we can all work together if we so desire. Mr O’Loan: I, too, thank the First Minister for his report, and I welcome the substantial workload with which the BIC is proceeding. I note the First Minister’s answer to Mr Hilditch on the Campbeltown-Ballycastle ferry service. At the time of the press announcement, there was specific reference to extending the route to Troon. Given that he represents North Antrim, I know that the First Minister will be as keen as I am to ensure that the project comes about. Is the extension of the service to Troon a significant part of the thinking behind the project? More broadly, given that the project failed previously because the private sector was not willing to become involved, are other specific incentives being considered to encourage that sector to do so? The First Minister: I welcome the hon Gentleman’s comments. Reinstatement of the service is really a Scottish matter, and without breaking any confidences, I can tell him that the First Minister of Scotland has been giving it a sympathetic hearing. Our Scottish brethren are discussing the matter, and I trust that they will soon give us some answers in order that we can proceed. [Laughter.] Some fellow Members did not like the word “brethren”; they can call them sheep, goats or whatever they like, but I look upon them as sheep. Mr Ross: I thank the First Minister for his comprehensive statement, and I welcome the fact that east-west relations are being strengthened. Will the First Minister inform the House what the cost of hosting the British-Irish Council summit was to Northern Ireland? The First Minister: As hosts of the summit, Northern Ireland bore the cost, which was in the region of £21,000. Without exaggeration, for that price, we got a good deal as far as publicity was concerned. The effect of that will be that people will look more closely at Northern Ireland and will hopefully bring into our Province those higher-paid jobs that we all know are sorely needed. Mr T Clarke: I congratulate the First Minister on the report. What work is being undertaken to increase east-west activity to make it on a par with North/South arrangements? The First Minister: At last there is agreement that both east-west and North/South co-operation will be equal in our political fields. Neither North/South nor east-west co-operation will take precedence; they will run at the same velocity and will take on board the questions that each needs to discuss and answer. (Mr Deputy Speaker [Mr McClarty] in the Chair) Mr D Bradley: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Ba mhaith liom mo bhuíochas a ghabháil leis an Chéad-Aire as an tuairisc shuimiúil chuimsitheach atá sé i ndiaidh a chur os comhair an Tionóil. Chuir mé suim ar leith sa chuid sin den tuairisc a bhain le mionteangacha dúchasacha, agus baineann mo cheist féin leis an ghné sin den obair. I thank the First Minister for the comprehensive and interesting report that he has delivered to the House. I was particularly interested in that part of the report that deals with minority and indigenous languages. Will the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister consider proposing to its British-Irish Council colleagues the use of immersion in indigenous languages as an educational tool? The aim of that would be to share research, aid development, and exchange experiences between Ireland, North and South; Scotland; the Isle of Man; and Wales. Go raibh míle maith agat. 11.15 am The First Minister: I can reply to the second part of the hon Member’s question. I was not at Pentecost, so I do not have the gift of interpreting languages. The National Assembly for Wales is taking the lead in the indigenous, minority and lesser-used languages group. Its representatives will set up the necessary arrangements, but we will make an input. If any country has had a problem with language, it has been Wales. Therefore, the Welsh know what obstacles to look out for, and they have learned, through experience, how to deal with them. I am sure that the Welsh delegates are the best people to lead this group. However, we will have the right to put our views to them, and I am sure that the hon Gentleman will ensure that his views are heard. Mr McQuillan: What benefits will be derived from the British-Irish Council? The First Minister: There is potential for many helpful improvements to be made. I am particularly worried about the large number of deaths on our roads, and that point was brought out firmly at the BIC meeting on 16 July. All countries and places involved in the BIC need to have a proper disqualification law, because there are many people using our roads who are unaccustomed to them. A young man who attended my church was killed recently by a driver who had arrived in Northern Ireland from another country in Europe only a few days previously. The driver had only a provisional licence. He drove into the car that my friend was in, and my friend was killed. That accident brought the seriousness of the situation home to me. In that area alone, we could make progress. However, there are other areas on which we will have to wait and see. I am biased, of course, but North Antrim ought to have back its ferry service to Scotland. Mr Craig: Will the First Minister inform the House when the review into the workings of the Council will be undertaken? The First Minister: The review is the responsibility of the participating Administrations. We will press for the review to be completed and will report back with firm proposals as soon as possible. I understand that the review will begin in a few days’ time. Mr I McCrea: Will the First Minister inform the House what progress has been made on the mutual recognition of driving disqualifications between the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland? The First Minister: I would like to see a good relationship between both parts of this island without any political claims of jurisdiction by either one. We are not claiming that the South of Ireland should be part of the United Kingdom, and they should not claim that we should be part of the Irish Republic. That should be borne in mind. This is not a place for arguing constitutional positions: it is a place for arguing for the best arrangements for the ordinary people who can benefit from them. Mr Attwood: I welcome the First Minister’s report. A priority work area for the British-Irish Council in its former manifestation was the Irish Sea, and lead responsibility on that — as I understand it — was to be with the Isle of Man and Irish Governments. Will the First Minister check that the priority area of the Irish Sea is still part of the programme of work of the BIC, given his comments on the environment and the nuclear industry and following the comments from my colleague in Sinn Féin? Will the First Minister consider introducing affordable housing and suicide prevention to the work programme of the BIC? Both issues are of concern to Members, and I am sure that a lot can be learned from BIC members about how they are addressing the issues. Finally, will the First Minister, given his well-made comments on traffic offences, comment further on driver disqualification and lesser offences? His colleague, the Deputy First Minister, may have some information that would be useful for the Assembly to hear. The First Minister: I will keep in mind what the hon Member has said, and I will enquire of the BIC whether those items can be included in the review. A question was asked about the mutual recognition of driving disqualifications between the United Kingdom and other parts of these islands. As far as the UK, and Northern and Southern Ireland are concerned, there is an intergovernmental commitment between the UK and Ireland to co-operate as soon as possible in recognising each other’s driving disqualifications. We will have to wait until that comes, and I have been told that there will have to be subordinate legislation if it is recommended. Officials in the United Kingdom and Ireland are working closely to initiate mutual recognition of driving disqualifications as soon as is practicable. I hope that my answer will help the hon Member. Mr Deputy Speaker: That concludes questions on the First Minister’s statement. North/South Ministerial Council Mr Deputy Speaker: I have received notice from the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister that the Deputy First Minister wishes to make a statement on the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC). I call the Deputy First Minister, Mr Martin McGuinness. The Deputy First Minister (Mr M McGuinness): A LeasCheann Comhairle, I wish to make a statement on the fifth plenary meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council, which was held in the Armagh City Hotel, Armagh, on 17 July, 2007. All the Executive Ministers who attended the meeting have approved the statement, and I am presenting it on their behalf. The Executive delegation was led by the First Minister and me, and we jointly chaired the meeting. In addition to the First Minister and myself, our delegation comprised the Minister of Finance and Personnel; the Minister of the Environment; the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure; the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment; the Minister for Regional Development; the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development; the Minister of Education; the Minister for Employment and Learning; the Minister for Social Development; and the junior Ministers in OFMDFM. The Irish Government delegation was led by the Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, and comprised the Táinaiste and Minister for Finance, Brian Cowen TD; the Minister for Transport and the Marine, Noel Dempsey TD; the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Dermot Ahern TD; the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Micheál Martin TD; the Minister for Arts, Sport, and Tourism, Séamus Brennan TD; the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, Éamon Ó Cuív; the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Mary Coughlan TD; the Minister for Education and Science, Mary Hanafin TD; the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, John Gormley TD; and the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Eamon Ryan TD. All Ministers acknowledged the significance of the occasion — the first meeting of the NSMC in plenary sitting since 2002. They welcomed the opportunity to meet on the North/South Ministerial Council to consult on and promote mutually beneficial co-operation and take a number of decisions on a range of issues in the Council’s work programme. With regard to infrastructural matters, the Council noted the Irish Government’s intention to make available a contribution of £400 million — €580 million — to help fund major roads programmes to provide dual-carriageway standard on routes in the North serving the north-west gateway and the eastern-seaboard corridor from Belfast to Larne. The Executive confirmed their acceptance, in principle, to take forward those two major road projects, and the Council noted that the road project from Belfast to Larne would be taken forward by the Executive and their agencies. The North/South Ministerial Council agreed that the route serving the north-west gateway will be taken forward in line with funding and accountability, planning, management and delivery arrangements agreed between the Irish Government and the Executive. It was agreed that the relevant Ministers would take the necessary steps to progress that project, including the early commencement of a route corridor study. The Council agreed to proceed with the restoration of the section of the Ulster Canal between Clones and Upper Lough Erne in the light of the Irish Government’s offer to cover the full capital costs of the project. In line with the relevant legislation, Waterways Ireland, a North/South implementation body, will be responsible for the necessary restoration work and, following restoration, for its management, maintenance and development — principally for recreational purposes. It was agreed that relevant Ministers meeting in the NSMC inland waterways sector would agree plans to take forward that restoration work, including details of funding arrangements, and would report on progress to the NSMC plenary meetings. The Council received a report from the joint secretaries on the work of the NSMC since 2002. It noted that the work of the North/South implementation bodies and Tourism Ireland had continued, and expressed its appreciation to the boards and staff for their contribution. The Council also noted the mutually beneficial co-operation taken forward between Ministers and Departments. The Council agreed to take forward the review provided for in the St Andrews Agreement of the North/South implementation bodies and areas for co-operation. The review will commence in September 2007, and a final report will be presented to the first NSMC plenary meeting in 2008. The review will be undertaken by a group including senior officials and an advisory panel of four expert advisers, two to be nominated by the Executive and two by the Irish Government. The Council noted that the Irish Government would consult their social partners in relation to the North/South consultative forum. It also noted the review of arrangements for consulting civic society here and agreed to consider the matter on completion of that review. The Council noted the provisions of the St Andrews Agreement relating to the North/South parliamentary forum. It recognised that any development of a joint parliamentary forum was a matter for the Assembly and the Oireachtas. Officials from the two Administrations were charged with making contact with the Assembly and the Houses of the Oireachtas, and with reporting back to the NSMC at the earliest opportunity on the prospects for the development of such a forum. The Council considered and approved a schedule of NSMC meetings to take place over the coming months and agreed that its next meeting in plenary format would be held in Dundalk towards the end of the year. Go raibh maith agat. 11.30 am The Chairperson of the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister (Mr Kennedy): As Chairperson of the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, I welcome the statement made on the meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council that took place on 17 July 2007. Will the Deputy First Minister detail the mechanisms in place to communicate and engage with the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister and other Assembly Committees, both before sectoral and other summit meetings of the North/South Ministerial Council and afterwards, to enable the Committees to uphold their statutory scrutiny functions? Will the Deputy First Minister confirm who the Northern Ireland Executive intend to nominate to participate in the advisory panel to take forward the review of the North/South implementation bodies, and the areas for co-operation? Wearing my party-political hat, I ask the Deputy First Minister to provide details of how the North/South consultative forum will operate, outlining its remit and the timescales that will be involved. What preparatory work has been carried out on the proposed North/South parliamentary forum? I almost said paramilitary forum then. [Laughter.] Will he confirm whether officials have commenced work on that body? To whom will those officials report? The Deputy First Minister said that the North/South Ministerial Council considered and approved a schedule of meetings for the coming months. Will Members have access to that schedule, and will it be published and available in the Assembly Library? The Deputy First Minister: Each Committee will consider matters that are relevant to its respective Department. Likewise, on policies on which the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister is designated to lead, we will engage with the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister. The Assembly will be advised of the agenda and attendance list of every NSMC meeting prior to its beginning. Following each meeting, the relevant Ministers will make a full report to the Assembly. The North/South Ministerial Council agreed that a group comprising senior officials drawn from both Administrations and an advisory panel of four expert advisers will undertake a review and report on it to the Council. Two members of the panel will be nominated by the Executive and two by the Irish Government. The First Minister and I are currently considering that issue, and we understand its urgency. The NSMC joint secretariat will, of course, support the review group’s work, which, it has been agreed, will commence in September 2007. A final report will be presented to the first NSMC plenary meeting in 2008. However, interim reports may be presented to the NSMC as the review progresses. The review will objectively examine the efficiency and value for money of existing implementation bodies. It will also consider the case for establishing additional bodies to deal with areas of mutually beneficial co-operation within the existing NSMC framework. The review will not affect the work of existing North/South bodies. At its plenary meeting in June 2002, the NSMC agreed to the establishment of an independent North/South consultative forum. Since then, several changes have taken place in the North. We have agreed that a review will be conducted to examine the arrangements for consulting civic society here. We will await the outcome of that review and consider the impact that that might have on the establishment of a North/South consultative forum. We do not wish to pre-empt the outcome of that review; therefore, the North/South consultative forum will be considered after the review has been completed. We should remember that the Civic Forum was originally established as a consultative mechanism on social, economic, and cultural issues. The First Minister and I have agreed that things in the North have changed significantly since then. Many new people have come to live among us, so there is a need to review the Civic Forum. Therefore, we have commissioned a fresh review to examine fundamentally the structure, membership and role of the Civic Forum and to consider the most appropriate arrangements for engaging with civic society. At the NSMC plenary meeting in Armagh, the Council noted those provisions of the Good Friday Agreement and the St Andrews Agreement that relate to the North/South parliamentary forum. The Council recognised that any development of such a joint forum is a matter for the Assembly and the Houses of the Oireachtas. It was agreed that officials from the two Administrations would contact the Assembly and the Houses of the Oireachtas on the prospects for developing such a forum and would report back to the NSMC at the earliest opportunity. Officials have now written to the Assembly. I am more than willing to place the outline schedule in the Assembly Library. Mrs Long: I thank the Deputy First Minister for his report. All Members are relieved that the British-Irish Council and the North/South Ministerial Council are up and running. We hope that the Assembly’s relationship with both bodies will be productive for Northern Ireland. I raised the issue of infrastructure with the First Minister. I note that expansion of the roads programme was discussed, as were waterways. One issue, which I am sure is quite dear to the hearts of both the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, is that of the rail link to the north-west, which runs through north Antrim. It seems to be continually under review and under threat. Will that matter be addressed at future NSMC meetings? Rail travel is not only a sustainable transport option; it would provide the north-west with a key gateway. There is also the huge tourism potential for the island to be considered, and rail links could be extended into the Republic of Ireland. Could the subject of rail links be put on a future agenda of the NSMC? The Deputy First Minister: Ministers, both North and South, take railways very seriously. We all know and understand the pressure on our roads, and the Assembly has had many debates about the contribution that an improved rail system could make to the quality of everyone’s lives. A sectoral meeting on transport was held last Friday in County Fermanagh. It was attended by Arlene Foster, the Minister of the Environment; Conor Murphy, the Minister for Regional Development, and Noel Dempsey, the Minister for Transport in the South. I noted that they talked about increasing the frequency of the Belfast-Dublin train service, with the prospect of an hourly service between the two cities. I have no doubt that that important issue will be the subject of intense discussion in the NSMC in the near future. Mr S Wilson: I welcome the Deputy First Minister’s announcement about the injection of funds from the Irish Republic into the Northern Ireland economy. However, many people in Northern Ireland would say that it is a belated contribution by a country that harboured those who destroyed our economy for a long time. Compared to the destruction carried out by IRA units based in the Irish Republic over the past 30 years, the contribution does not even scratch the tip of Northern Ireland’s economic iceberg. However, will the Deputy First Minister tell us how much of the funds that have been allocated will be made available for upgrading the A8? What contribution is expected from the Northern Ireland Executive? Is there a time limit in which those funds must be spent, and is the Deputy First Minister convinced that the Executive will bring forward proposals to ensure that the funds are spent in that period? The Deputy First Minister: That matter is the responsibility of the Minister for Regional Development, Conor Murphy. There can be no doubt that, as a result of the decisions taken by the NSMC, Ministers are now charged with the responsibility to proceed and to expedite those matters. Principally, the responsibility to articulate a view on that issue lies with the Minister for Regional Development, who will make a statement to the House shortly. He will provide a comprehensive report on the meeting that was held last Friday in County Fermanagh. Mr Boylan: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I welcome the Deputy First Minister’s report on the North/South Ministerial Council meeting. I also welcome the Deputy First Minister and the First Minister to Armagh at any time. The commitment of the Irish Government to provide €400 million to support the development of roads infrastructure is to be welcomed, particularly the upgrading of the main arterial route in the north-west, and that of the M14, A5 and N2. That is something that Sinn Féin, and, in particular, my colleague Pat Doherty, MP for West Tyrone, has campaigned for for some considerable time. Will the Deputy First Minister please outline what progress has been made in bringing forward this project, which is vital to the future of the entire north-west region? Go raibh maith agat. The Deputy First Minister: As I reported to the Assembly, the NSMC met in its transport sectoral format on Friday 14 September 2007, and Ministers discussed arrangements for taking forward those important roads projects. As I also said, the Minister for Regional Development, Conor Murphy, will be making a full report on that meeting to the Assembly in due course. The Irish Government’s contribution, and the Chancellor’s package that was announced on 26 March 2007, will help to fund a major roads programme to upgrade roads to dual carriageway standard on routes in the North that serve the north-west gateway and the eastern seaboard from Belfast to Larne. Those schemes are on two of the five key transport corridors in the North, as identified in the regional transportation strategy. Both schemes received positive support from a public consultation process, which was undertaken last year, on proposals to expand the strategic road improvement programme. The issue of the road from Belfast to Larne will be taken forward by the Executive and their agencies, and that of the north-west gateway will be taken forward in line with funding and accountability, planning management, and delivery arrangements agreed between the Executive and the Irish Government. The Irish Government are providing part funding to improve the road infrastructure to the north-west gateway, and to the port of Larne. That funding will provide mutual benefits for both jurisdictions and will assist in opening up the north-west region to further economic growth and development. The upgrading of the remainder of the Belfast to Larne route will improve journey times to the port of Larne. It normally takes at least six years to progress major works projects through the statutory procedures concerned with the environment, planning approval and land acquisition. For a very large project, such as that on the A5 — that is, the Aughnacloy/north-west gateway — construction could take a further four years. However, officials are considering alternative delivery arrangements that may shorten those timescales, and that is something that we would all very much welcome. Mr Attwood: I welcome the Deputy First Minister’s report on behalf of his office. It was particularly thoughtful of the First Minister, after the meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council, to confirm his agreement to the establishment of the North/South parliamentary forum — a matter that was detailed in that report. Will the Deputy First Minister confirm that, as far as he and his office are concerned, it should now be full speed ahead with the establishment of the North/South parliamentary forum? Although the establishment of that body is in the gift of the Assembly and the Oireachtas, it would, nonetheless, be desirable to see that happening in a period of months. I noted the Deputy First Minister’s comments regarding the St Andrews Agreement review of North/South implementation bodies. Is he in a position to confirm who the four experts and advisers might be? I noted that he said that there are conversations taking place with the First Minister regarding the matter. However, from recent experience, we know that conservations about people being appointed to fulfil public duties — such as the victims’ commissioner — can result in no decision being taken for a long time. I want a reassurance from the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister that people will be appointed, and appointed quickly, and that the review will commence in September, as has been committed to, even though the SDLP has grave doubts about the value and validity of such a review. It is particularly welcome that the Irish Government have offered to cover the full capital costs of the restoration of a section of the Ulster Canal between Clones and Upper Lough Erne. Will the Deputy First Minister confirm that there are no hiccups in respect of the Northern Ireland Executive’s and the relevant Ministers’ acceptance of that money, and that no issues will be raised over contributions to future maintenance? Difficulties over those issues might impede this valuable project. 11.45 am The Deputy First Minister: The Member referred to the comments made by the First Minister in the aftermath of the North/South Ministerial Council plenary meeting in Armagh; all the remarks made by the First Minister were helpful and very much in the spirit and mood of that important occasion. The North/South parliamentary forum was discussed. I have attended previous meetings of the NSMC — and, indeed, the British-Irish Council — and this meeting was important in that there was free-ranging debate and discussion. All the Ministers present contributed, and not just through scripted contributions put before them by civil servants. There was a valuable and progressive discussion which will hold us all in good stead as we move forward. As to the processes that we have to take forward, it was agreed that officials from the two Administrations would make contact, and I have reported to the Assembly this morning that that is happening. We will see what progress can be made, but it will primarily be a matter for the Oireachtas and the Assembly. I accept the importance of making speedy appointments vis-à-vis the review. The decisions that need to be taken are eagerly awaited, because it is important work and we are committed to furthering it with all speed. The Ulster Canal is a matter for Minister Poots, since it is the responsibility of his Department. A meeting of the Waterways Ireland sector is planned, and the issue will be taken forward from that point. Now that decisions have been taken on the important infrastructural projects — the roads and the canal — the NSMC understands the need to expedite all of those matters as quickly as possible. Mr Hamilton: I noted the reference in the Deputy First Minister’s statement to the North/South consultative forum and the North/South parliamentary forum. Can he confirm that the genesis of both those proposed bodies was the Belfast Agreement, and that any decision on their future is a matter to be decided on both sides of this Chamber? The Deputy First Minister: I agree absolutely. It is vital that we get agreement on the work of the NSMC and all the areas of responsibility with which we are charged. All the participants in the NSMC are presently in that mode. We must move forward with the recognition that we have a responsibility to heal the divisions of the past, and to do so in a way that does not threaten the political views or aspirations of any Member. Mr McHugh: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I also welcome the Deputy First Minister’s statement. In both the roads infrastructure and the upgrading of the main arterial route to the north-west, I hope that there will be a specific benefit to Enniskillen, or perhaps the bypass question in Enniskillen, as the gateway to the north-west of Ireland. My question is about the Ulster Canal. Sinn Féin has been involved for a considerable time in efforts to bring about the restoration of the Clones to Upper Lough Erne section of the Ulster Canal. Will the Deputy First Minister outline the next step in bringing the project to completion and what further consideration is being given to restore the Ulster Canal, given its huge potential for the economy and tourism in general? The Deputy First Minister: I noted the remark about the Enniskillen bypass, but that is not principally a matter for the NSMC, the First Minister or myself, but rather for the Minster for Regional Development, Mr Conor Murphy. No doubt Mr McHugh and other Members from Fermanagh will take the opportunity to have that conversation with him. The Irish Government have offered to cover the full capital costs of the restoration of the Clones to Upper Lough Erne section of the Ulster Canal. In light of that offer, the Executive have agreed to engage with the Irish Government to progress that restoration and share the ensuing costs of the restored and re-opened section, when it is complete. However, that decision does not confer any commitment on the Irish Government or the Executive to fund further restoration of the Ulster Canal. Both Administrations will keep the issue under constant review. Waterways Ireland will be responsible for restoring the section of the Ulster Canal between Clones and Upper Lough Erne, and following the restoration, will be responsible for the management, maintenance and development of that section, principally for recreational purposes. The relevant Ministers in the NSMC’s inland waterways sectoral format will agree plans for the restoration work, which will include forwarding details of funding arrangements and progress reports to NSMC plenary meetings. Recently, when I opened the Scariff Harbour Festival in County Clare, I received a tour of the amazing facilities at the canal there, and I saw first-hand the benefits of having an effective canal system. The restoration project for the Ulster Canal will provide mutual benefits for both jurisdictions. On the basis of the Irish Government’s offer, the Executive have agreed to engage with them on the restoration, and, once completed, in the ensuing shared and recurrent costs of the restored and reopened section. There have been many debates about the Ulster Canal in the House over the years. The former leader of the Ulster Unionist Party, David Trimble, was an enthusiastic fan of the restoration of the canal. Those Members who appreciate the benefits of having an effective canal system, particularly for recreational use and tourism, will understand that it is an important project. However, the difficulty with all important projects is having adequate funds to proceed with the speed that most Members would like to see. Mr Newton: I am sure that the Deputy First Minister is aware of the high level of concern on this side of the House about religious imbalance in the staff of Waterways Ireland. Will he assure this side of the House that employment in Waterways Ireland will be based on merit alone? What actions will he take to ensure that selection and employment in Waterways Ireland will be based on applications being considered on merit alone? The Deputy First Minister: I am speaking for the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, and I am sure that the First Minister will agree with me that nobody is interested in seeing anyone discriminated against because of his or her religion. As political leaders, we have a duty and a responsibility to ensure that we move forward on the basis of fairness and equality. All issues that may arise from the employment levels of religious groupings in any of the North/South Ministerial Council sectors will be kept under review, not just by the sectors, but by the NSMC itself. Mr Elliott: I thank the Deputy First Minister for his report. I have noted that, in his responses to a few questions on roads infrastructure, he has thrown the matter back to the Minister for Regional Development. Clearly, however, that matter is dealt with in the report. Therefore, I must press him on an issue that Mr McHugh mentioned, namely that of providing infrastructure finance to the Fermanagh area. Although the areas that have been referred to, such as those that surround the north-east gateway and the eastern seaboard, are important to the infrastructural position of Northern Ireland, County Fermanagh takes a significant volume of traffic from North and South in both directions, particularly from Donegal to Dublin and from Sligo to Belfast and Larne, and vice versa. I am disappointed that the report does not refer to either of those corridors. Can the Deputy First Minister tell me whether those matters have been discussed at NSMC level? The Deputy First Minister: As a frequent traveller through County Fermanagh, I appreciate that it has difficulties with regard to roads. However, I must reiterate — and it is not a cop-out — that that is principally a matter for the Minister for Regional Development, Conor Murphy. Obviously, he works with a limited budget, and does a fine job, in my opinion. The NSMC’s ability to resolve all the roads problems that exist, whether they are in the North or the South, is limited. The responsibility of the NSMC is to consult and to agree on mutually beneficial projects. I readily agree that the infrastructure of border areas, such as Fermanagh, must be kept under review and account taken of them by the Council. I have no doubt whatsoever that the people who are charged with taking forward the Council’s work will listen carefully to Mr Elliott’s remarks. Mr Durkan: I welcome the statement from the First Minster and the Deputy First Minister. Members have placed a particular emphasis on infrastructure. Will the Deputy First Minister tell the House whether consideration might be given to a future approach whereby money that is available from the Irish Government is not simply used on a project-by-project basis, but that a dedicated North/South fund could instead be created — an all-Ireland version of European structural funds, which would provide a much better context for the type of bids that have been mentioned in the Chamber to be advanced? Will the Deputy First Minister tell the House whether, in the future, the NSMC will be used to recognise whether the Irish Government’s national development plan has unallocated reserves, not only for infrastructure, but across its other key areas for investment? Perhaps the NSMC should be used to ensure that the North’s structures and spending systems can mesh better with those of the national development plan in order to make the most of that money, rather than jockeying on a project-by-project basis. Will the Deputy First Minster also tell the House whether the future work programme of the NSMC might include a return to the study on obstacles to mobility that it previously commissioned? That study may need to be updated or, perhaps, an entirely new study may need to be carried out, not least because of issues that have come to attention recently; for example, when people who have rightly, properly and naturally moved across the border to live, they have found that they and service providers are being put in an invidious position because of the anomalies and absurdities of cross-border life. If that study were to take place, it would help to improve service planning and would make people who live and work in border areas much more comfortable in planning their lives. 12.00 noon The Deputy First Minister: I thank the Member for his questions. He mentioned the Irish Government’s national development plan. Through their interest in contributing to important road projects in the North, the Irish Government have demonstrated that they are willing to review continually the work that they and the Assembly will carry out on mutually beneficial projects. This is an important time for the Assembly. It is making progress, in that a Programme for Government is being developed. We are also dealing with the comprehensive spending review and the impact that that will have. We have a 10-year investment strategy to which large sums of money have been committed. All of that will decide how we prioritise and make progress on future projects. Therefore, we must consider seriously Mr Durkan’s remarks. The North/South Ministerial Council has implemented procedures under which such matters must be considered. As we move forward, our attention must turn to how we can make better use of the resources that are available in order to deal with the difficult matter of ensuring that we begin work on infrastructure projects that will bring the benefits that all our people clearly deserve. Since 2002, work has continued on implementing the recommendations of the report ‘Study of Obstacles to Mobility’. Following extensive consultation with Departments North and South regarding the report’s 50 recommendations, 27 have been implemented, and work is ongoing on 15 of those that relate mainly to mutuality on qualifications and pensions. As the Member said, those are complex issues, and work continues with the relevant Departments to resolve them. However, the NSMC agreed in June 2002 that no action should be taken on the remaining eight recommendations. A website that is dedicated to providing information on cross-border mobility is currently being developed, and it will become operational in the autumn. Increased mobility means that many people live in border areas, North and South. They cross the border regularly, and that creates particular difficulties for some families. We all have a duty and responsibility to work together. The Irish Government and this Executive, through the North/South Ministerial Council, have made a commitment to tackle those issues head-on. Mr McElduff: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Cuirim fáilte roimh an tuairisc seo, nó is maith an rud go bhfuil muid ar an aon bhóthar amháin le chéile agus ag obair in aon treo le chéile. I welcome the Deputy First Minister’s statement. I also welcome the renewed focus on removing obstacles to cross-border mobility, as both the Member for Foyle Mr Durkan and the Deputy First Minister discussed. It struck me in the past week that a great deal of work needs to be done on cross-border mobility, not least on postal services. This week, I was told about a lady in Strabane who has moved just one mile inside the border to Donegal. Her letters arrive one week late and are stamped par avion. I would like the NSMC to discuss why that should happen. Such letters have included a young girl’s A-level results. Will the Deputy First Minister reassure me about the standard of the North/South Ministerial Council secretariat’s accommodation? Having visited those offices, I have seen they are not fit for purpose. I want a commitment that suitable office accommodation will be made available without delay so that those people can be housed properly and can carry on with their vital work, Go raibh maith agat a LeasCheann Comhairle. The Deputy First Minister: As regards postal services, I am sure that all those charged with responsibility for the NSMC will note the Member’s remarks and try to make progress for fear that the Member might end up on ‘The Stephen Nolan Show’, criticising the NSMC over postal services in border areas. [Laughter.] The Member asked about permanent accommodation for the NSMC. As everyone knows, the NSMC joint secretariat is currently located in temporary accommodation in Armagh. That accommodation is considered unsuitable from both health and safety and operational perspectives. I have visited that facility down the years, and I was very interested to hear during a visit as Minister of Education that serious consideration was being given to turning Armagh jail into the NSMC headquarters. I suppose that a certain Member for East Antrim would think that that might be a good idea, particularly given this morning’s photograph in ‘The Irish News’ of the junior Minister Mr Kelly behind bars in Crumlin Road jail yesterday. A Member: Did he escape? The Deputy First Minister: I think he did escape, yes. In June 2002, the NSMC asked officials North and South to examine options for permanent accommodation and to report back in the future. Since then, a business case recommending that the secretariat lease suitable accommodation has been approved by officials in both Administrations, subject to political and financial considerations. A procurement exercise yielded seven expressions of interest; these are under consideration, and a report will be made to a future NSMC meeting. Mr Shannon: The Waterways Ireland restoration of the Ulster Canal is a fantastic scheme. However, it looks as if it will benefit only one constituency, Fermanagh and South Tyrone. That is wonderful for the people there, of course, and I would not take that away from them. However, what will be the direct or indirect benefits of that scheme for the rest of the Province? The Deputy First Minister: It is obvious that the opening of any new section of the Ulster Canal raises the potential for further development in this area. There is popular support in the House for as much progress as possible to be made to ensure that every area through which the Ulster Canal originally passed can benefit in terms of recreation, sporting facilities and, not least, tourism. As we all know, there has been a huge increase in tourism in the North in the last few years. We want to build on that for the future, but we will be able to do so only if we can provide the facilities that tourists would like to visit. As someone who saw the beginnings of the development of the canals in the South, particularly around the Carrick-on-Shannon area of County Leitrim, I find it incredible to see how much development has taken place. Thirty years ago, Carrick-on-Shannon had just one or two boats, but today it looks almost like Monte Carlo. That is what is ahead of us. Such development will not only make a further incredible contribution to the success of our tourism industry, but provide important recreational facilities for our own people. The quicker we can progress this matter to ensure that we all share in the benefits, the better it will be for all of us. Ms Ní Chuilín: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Sinn Féin has consistently argued for an increase in the number of North/South implementation bodies and areas of co-operation. For example, I would like mental health and suicide prevention to be included. Can the Deputy First Minister assure this House that the review of the North/South Ministerial Council will also consider the case for additional all-island bodies and areas of greater co-operation? Go raibh maith agat. The Deputy First Minister: Obviously, we are all very conscious that that matter lies within the remit of the review that was authorised by the St Andrews Agreement and taken up by the NSMC. I have no doubt whatsoever that those who will be considering these matters will recognise the importance of our all working for everyone’s mutual benefit. The issue of mental health affects everybody living on the island, as do many other matters. I am as interested as anybody else in the outcome of the review. Mr McCallister: Infrastructure is a matter for the NSMC and not just for the Minister for Regional Development. Will the Deputy First Minister agree that the proper provision of a Southern relief road would be of great advantage to the economy, particularly in the South Down constituency, and would also provide a vital link to the port of Warrenpoint? We should not, as some people in the Republic were pressing for, pursue the no-brain idea of a bridge at Narrow Water. Will the Deputy First Minister also confirm that the new inter-parliamentary forum has been agreed not only by the two Governments but by him and his right hon Friend, the First Minister? The Deputy First Minister: I do not need to refer again to the issue of the inter-parliamentary forum, except to say that the First Minister and I always endeavour to get agreement on how we progress. That is essential, and the First Minister and I will be sensible about moving that situation forward. The state of the roads in South Down is, I am afraid, a matter for the Minister for Regional Development. However, I accept that because County Down is a border county, we must consider the most effective use of the available resources to ensure that we have a proper roads network. That applies equally to Fermanagh and South Tyrone and to South Down. All of those matters will be considered by the Ministers responsible, and any schemes that they wish to bring forward will be decided upon in plenary sessions of the NSMC. Mr A Maginness: In his statement, the Deputy First Minister said that all Ministers acknowledged the significance of the meeting of the NSMC, given the fact that it was the first meeting since 2002. It was truly significant, and everybody involved, including the First Minister, the Deputy First Minister and all other parties should be congratulated on that event; it was of historic importance. Let us fast-forward to the situation in which policing and justice are devolved. The Deputy First Minister will be aware that there is a British-Irish agreement on justice matters, which involves the exchange of law agency personnel from North to South and vice versa. Will the Deputy First Minister give an assurance that in the event of devolution of criminal justice and policing powers, there will be a commitment by the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to the continuance of that agreement, and that a new North/South agreement on justice matters will be arrived at so that related issues can be pursued vigorously in the future? The Deputy First Minister: Criminal justice and policing matters are currently outside the remit of the NSMC. There is no doubt that in the event of the transfer of policing and justice powers to the Assembly and the Executive, the NSMC, the Executive and the Irish Government will have to decide how to develop our approach to criminal justice and policing on the island. That will have to be agreed between the major parties in the Assembly and, through the Executive, with the Irish Government. All of the other parties have an interest in the issue, and have contributed immensely to the debate in recent times. However, my report is solely concerned with the first meeting of the NSMC since 2002. Criminal justice and policing powers, and the surrounding issues referred to in the Member’s question, were outside the remit of that meeting, but in speculating about what the future might bring, those matters will have to be resolved. The Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister will have to look afresh at that matter, but it will principally be a matter for the Executive. The Executive will have to reach agreement and they will have to agree with the Irish Government on how progress can be made on that issue. 12.15 pm Criminality on this island does not respect borders of any description. We all have a duty to work together to defeat criminals on this island. I have no doubt that if progress is made on the transfer of policing and justice powers, as suggested in the St Andrews Agreement, the Irish Government and the Executive will face up to their responsibilities to ensure that they have the best possible processes to combat criminality. Mr P Maskey: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Can the Deputy First Minister outline what steps have been taken to address the obstacles to mobility across the island of Ireland, particularly the issue of mutual recognition of qualifications and pensions? Go raibh maith agat. The Deputy First Minister: In response to the contribution of the Member for Foyle Mr Durkan, OFMDFM’s approach to that matter was made clear. Following extensive consultations with Government Departments North and South, OFMDFM is moving forward on the basis of the recommendations that have been made in the report of the study on obstacles to mobility. There are complex issues to consider. As a result of working in two jurisdictions, there are important issues in dealing with the mutuality of qualifications, pensions and many other matters. There has been much controversy in the past few weeks about education in border areas. It must be recognised that such problems will not be resolved overnight or in one fell swoop, but there is a commitment to understand the difficulties that individual families have experienced as a result of relocation, whether to the South or to the North. The Executive and the Irish Government have a duty to work under the auspices of the NSMC to try to resolve the difficulties that those families face. Mr McNarry: I welcome the joint report of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, delivered by the Deputy First Minister. It will no doubt have dawned on the Minister that the promised money that the Irish Government wish to invest through their national development plan concentrates on nationalist-majority areas. One of the Irish Government’s parties has now declared those areas as an obvious electoral target for the future. Can the Minister return a focus on investment in my constituency of Strangford, and other similar constituencies, for legitimate funding to offset the money-for-votes funding that the Irish are putting forward for their declared political interests? The Deputy First Minister: I do not accept for one minute that the motivation of the Irish Government is related to seeking votes. Mr McNarry: You are very foolish. The Deputy First Minister: I am not foolish at all; I am very wise in this matter. In the course of the processes that we have been through in recent times, which led to the re-establishment of these institutions, people recognised the critical importance of all of us working together for the mutual benefit of everyone who lives on the island. That is done without fear or favour. If there are particular difficulties in Strangford, it is the duty of the Executive to try to resolve those through our Departments. It is not my view that the reason for the Irish Government’s contribution of huge sums of money to resolve the infrastructural difficulties in some areas of the North is related to seeking votes in County Donegal. When one meets people and sees that they have a real empathy for the North and a wish to contribute in a meaningful way to making life better for all of us, one recognises that we have a duty and responsibility to work together. The Member’s suggestion of an electoral motivation is rather silly. Mr P J Bradley: I thank the Deputy First Minister for his statement on behalf of OFMDFM. The Narrow Water bridge project — and I want my colleague from South Down to listen carefully — was included in the Programme for Government that was announced in June this year and in the Republic’s national development plan announced on 13 January 2007. Louth County Council was initially allocated almost €400,000 to carry out a feasibility study in the area. As mentioned earlier, at a meeting last weekend in Enniskillen, the Republic’s Minister for Transport, Noel Dempsey, endorsed the project. Therefore, I am disappointed that it has been omitted from today’s statement. What is the reason for that omission? The Deputy First Minister: The House will receive a full report of the transport sectoral meeting that took place last Friday in County Fermanagh, which Noel Dempsey, Conor Murphy and Arlene Foster attended. Those of us who have attended all sorts of important meetings recently have not failed to notice the contributions that various Members of this House have made to that project. However, the priorities are to make progress on the Belfast to Larne road and the north-west gateway initiative. Any further expansion must be subject to a decision by the NSMC. Members should wait for the Minister for Regional Development to present a report to the House in the coming days, after which the Assembly can further discuss all those matters. At the end of the day, whatever the Minister reports to the House, the Narrow Water bridge project has been raised as an issue. It will be taken forward by agreement — or not — and I have no doubt that those who have a legitimate interest, particularly those who live in the County Down area, will continue to canvass for that project. Mr Deputy Speaker: That concludes questions on the statement. As Members know, the Business Committee has arranged to meet as soon as the Assembly suspends for lunch. I propose, therefore, by leave of the Assembly, to suspend the sitting until 2.00 pm. The sitting was suspended at 12.22 pm. On resuming (Mr Deputy Speaker [Mr Molloy] in the Chair) — 2.00 pm Fuel Poverty Mr Deputy Speaker: The Business Committee has agreed to allow up to one hour and 30 minutes for the debate. The proposer of the motion will have 10 minutes to propose and 10 minutes for the winding-up speech. All other Members will have five minutes. 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 for the winding-up speech. Mr Beggs: I beg to move That this Assembly calls on the Minister for Social Development to review the strategy for the eradication of fuel poverty, particularly amongst pensioner households and households with children. I am pleased that this subject has been selected for debate again. Some Members have questioned why my colleague and I have decided to bring the subject back to the House as it was debated in May 2007. I hope that my address will make the reasons clear. I will not repeat everything that I said in May, but I must state that no one should have to choose between food and heat, which can happen. There is clear evidence that a warm, dry home can improve life expectancy, and, of course, the opposite is true: a cold, damp home can reduce life expectancy and increase the need for intervention from the Health Service. From a financial perspective, it is important to invest in eradicating fuel poverty at an early stage to avoid the future costs that will incur if it goes unaddressed. Apart from the personal issues and terrible circumstances that some people endure, there are sound financial reasons to right this wrong. Which of the following would be the best use of taxpayers’ money: dealing with fuel poverty by removing energy-inefficient homes as a one-off cost investment, or dealing with the ill-health consequences of fuel poverty amongst families, children and older people, which would be an ongoing drain on the public purse? It is the old story: early intervention is the most effective way of saving money. One of the triggers for the motion was a report which came to me from Mr Cobain, who is a member of the Committee for Social Development. Mr Cobain noted a complacent comment from the permanent secretary of the Department for Social Development, who stated that the Department is on target to eradicate fuel poverty as set out in ‘Ending Fuel Poverty: A Strategy for Northern Ireland’. In other words, by 2010, fuel poverty in vulnerable groups such as children and older people would be eradicated, and by 2016, fuel poverty would be entirely eradicated. I was astounded, when I heard this. Mr Cobain asked the permanent secretary to repeat the claim, and he reiterated that he was confident that the target would be achieved. I believe that this will be a very difficult task: it is difficult to identify all those who are in the vulnerable category and difficult to get assistance to them. It is not something that anyone should be complacent about. It would be great if the target were met, but there is a lot of work to be done if it is to be achieved. There are a number of reasons why it is important to have this debate again. First, the Assembly has entered a new term, and I want the matter to be fresh in Members’ minds. Winter is approaching, and last night, frost was reported in Northern Ireland for the first time this season. Mr F McCann: Following on from what the Member said about Mr Cobain, I am also a member of the Committee for Social Development. I, too, was shocked by the, admittedly, very commendable statement that fuel poverty will be eradicated by 2010. After questioning, a number of Committee members felt that there may be some doubt about how that could be achieved. Does the Member agree that, if there is a new strategy, the Minister should explain to the House what it is, and how fuel poverty will be eradicated by 2010? Mr Beggs: I thank the Member for his intervention. Indeed, that is the purpose of the debate: we want to know what has happened since we last debated this motion, to pick up the pieces and to learn any lessons that members of the Committee or any other sources have presented to the Department. As I said, we have now entered the first cold spell of the winter, and it is more meaningful for most people to talk about this subject not as we enter summer, but as we enter winter. Our constituents will face harsh weather. More importantly, we are entering the budgetary process. I was concerned that, as we had debated this motion in May, it might not be fresh in everyone’s mind. I hope, by having the debate once more, to put the matter on everyone’s list of priorities and to raise it where appropriate, so that it gets the support that it deserves. If it is necessary to have additional resources to achieve that objective — and I suspect that it will be necessary — I hope that those resources will be available. Incidentally, I first learned that this debate had been scheduled when I received a phone call from Pat Austin, director of National Energy Action Northern Ireland. She was delighted to see the motion on the agenda again. Perhaps those who wish that this debate would not happen could explain themselves to the charities concerned. Ms Austin has also written to me to say that she has serious concerns that the objectives of eradicating fuel poverty in vulnerable households by 2010, and in non-vulnerable households by 2016, will be missed. Those who work in that area are also concerned. I had a look at the Department for Social Development’s website to identify what was happening on this issue. I do not serve on the Social Development Committee, and have not been following it at that level. I came across many documents, some of which were very dated. The last motion on fuel poverty was about reviewing the policy to see what additions were needed to achieve improvement in the area. I did not find anything particularly new and refreshing there. I did note that the Minister had, in the course of the summer, reminded everyone who might have to apply for winter fuel cash to do so — which is commendable — and that there had been a meeting of the Northern Ireland Fuel Poverty Advisory Group. I did not, however, see a range of issues emerging from that meeting to give me confidence that the permanent secretary’s complacency should not be an area of concern. In the course of that meeting, the warm homes scheme was discussed, as was benefit uptake — those are very pertinent issues — and research into the whole area of the working poor and those on low incomes. That research is just starting. How long will that research take? How long will it take to develop policies to address the research? I am still concerned about the time frame and the complacency of the permanent secretary. What has actually changed since the Assembly last met to debate the subject? Has a review of the strategy occurred? Who here believes that the situations of 100% of those in vulnerable groups will be addressed before 2010? Will all those entitled to a winter heating allowance receive it? What efforts will be made to trace those who have not applied? Is there sufficient money in the Department for the warm homes scheme? When will the insulation and heating systems in all social housing be brought up to date? I have come across constituents, living in upstairs flats, who are spending £20 a week on coal to heat their homes. We have to provide appropriate heating systems and insulation in social housing. Is there sufficient money in the Department’s budget to address that by 2010? Mr K Robinson: Does the Member agree that there is a generational and cultural resistance to entering into some of the schemes that have been devised to help people to have warm homes? That in itself will be a barrier to 100% take-up. Mr Beggs: I agree with the Member; it is difficult to achieve a 100% take-up in any scheme. All possible routes must be followed in an effort to encompass everyone who is entitled to assistance. I have explained the purpose of the motion. I now turn to the amendment, which I believe is helpful because it states that the elimination of fuel poverty should be given priority in the Programme for Government. Such a move may create savings in the health budget in the long term. As such, I find the amendment helpful, and it may assist the Department for Social Development in achieving some of its objectives. Therefore, I am happy to accept the amendment, and I hope that Members will do likewise in an effort to continue the unanimity of the House on this matter. I hope that Members will advance this issue in the relevant Committees as we try to get more funding to end fuel poverty. Mr A Maginness: I beg to move the following amendment: Leave out all after “Assembly” and insert “notes the debate on fuel poverty which took place on 29th May 2007 and the resolution adopted; and calls on the Executive to prioritise the elimination of fuel poverty in the forthcoming Programme for Government.” I thank my friend the Member for East Antrim for accepting the thrust of my amendment. The purpose of the amendment is to ensure that the Executive make a total commitment to the elimination of fuel poverty in our society. That must be regarded as a top priority of any Programme for Government. It is very important that the amendment be accepted by the whole House to send a straight and clear message to the Executive that the elimination of fuel poverty must be a top priority for everyone in Northern Ireland. I listened carefully to the Member for East Antrim, who explained the circumstances surrounding the introduction of the motion. However, I am not absolutely convinced that the arguments that he advanced are as clear as he has represented them. It seems to me that the Minister, in her address to the House on 29 May 2007, made it very clear that she was totally committed to the previous Administration’s targets of 2010 for the elimination of fuel poverty in vulnerable groups, and 2016 for the elimination of fuel poverty in the rest of our society. I do not fully understand the misgivings and concerns that have been presented. I was going to reiterate what the Minister for Social Development said by referral to pages 20-21 of the Hansard report of 29 May. I shall not repeat her words, but she made very firm commitments. Of course, the Minister is a member of the Social Democratic and Labour Party, and, as a lifelong social democrat, she is committed to social democracy and to the elimination of social problems that affect the most vulnerable in our society. I am certain that the Minister is firmly committed to those social democratic principles in the pursuit of policy on this matter. It would be wrong to attempt to repeat all the arguments, facts and figures that were advanced on 29 May, but it is safe to say that considerable progress has been made in dealing with the problem, not just by the current Administration, but by the previous direct rule Ministers. However, we must guarantee that that approach will continue. I become a little concerned when I hear rumours about cost-cutting and economies that must be made in the forthcoming Budget and in the Programme for Government. It is important that, at least in the area of fuel poverty, funding is ring-fenced. There should be no reduction in funding to deal with the problem. We all support the efforts that have been made to introduce economies and efficiencies in households across Northern Ireland through various measures such as the warm homes scheme, the work of the Northern Ireland Housing Executive (NIHE), and the promotion of grants for home improvements. All those efforts have been important in bringing about efficiencies in the home, and they are part and parcel of the measures to tackle fuel inefficiency and fuel poverty. 2.15 pm There has been progress in other areas. For example, 97% of homes in Northern Ireland now have some form of central heating. That is a positive development, and it should continue to be encouraged. However, some people live on poor incomes, and that major source of fuel poverty must be tackled. The Minister made it clear in several announcements that she is committed to ensuring that the Social Security Agency will redouble its efforts to encourage people to take up their rightful benefit entitlement. One third of those who are entitled to benefits for fuel poverty do not take them up. Were they to do so, consider the significant impact that that would have on those who suffer because of low incomes. The Department for Social Department, in its attack on the problem, which affects communities throughout Northern Ireland, must continue to encourage uptake of benefit. The Department should carefully scrutinise particular problems; for example, the message of home energy efficiency has not reached those who live in rural areas, where isolation means that the problem of fuel poverty is worse than in urban areas. Moreover, there is a divergence between those who live in social housing and owner-occupiers. In the social housing sector, there has been significant and substantial success in assisting tenants to improve their housing conditions. That is to be welcomed and must be further pursued. However, owner-occupiers — many of whom are elderly and without the wherewithal to deal with the problem — do not keep pace with those living in social housing, and I emphasise to the Minister that that gap must be narrowed. I hope that the Department will place even greater emphasis on that problem. The Assembly has no control over winter fuel payments; they are under the control of Westminster, and I hope that the Minister will continue to put pressure on Westminster to improve the fuel grant. That grant is important in ameliorating the conditions for many people in Northern Ireland, and, because of the disproportionate decrease in its value, it is wrong that the grant has remained at £200 since 2000. Over recent years, there has been an increase of 70% to 100% in fuel prices. Therefore, there is absolutely no justification for the static winter fuel payment. I hope that the Minister for Social Development, with the full backing of the Executive, can take our case to Westminster and explain that winter fuel payments must be greatly improved. I have one word of caution: because of the current volatility of international energy prices, we must act carefully. At any stage, price increases could undermine the substantial work that the Department for Social Development has undertaken, to which the Minister is forthrightly committed. The Chairperson of the Committee for Social Development (Mr Campbell): I welcome the motion and the fact that its proposer has accepted the amendment. I hope, and suspect, that such an issue will attract cross-party support. Some Members may make the case that not much has changed since the previous debate on fuel poverty on 29 May 2007. Nonetheless, it was an important topic in May, and it is still an important topic. I will start with the proverbial good news and will get to the bad news later. The proposer of the amendment, Mr Maginness, has already mentioned the good news: recent surveys of house conditions indicate that there has been a year-on-year improvement in the social housing stock. Over the years, I have crossed swords with the NIHE on several issues. However, the NIHE must be commended, because, over the past 15 to 20 years, the quality of housing stock has improved significantly. Despite that improvement, there is still some way to go in the private-rented sector. The fuel poverty strategy, which targets families that are in need, is having some effect, and the quality of homes is improving, particularly in the social-housing sector. In recent house conditions surveys, it is unclear whether there is universality in fuel poverty. A survey covering Belfast indicates that the level of fuel poverty is quite low: the percentages in west Belfast and east Belfast are almost identical — 4·2% in east Belfast and 4% in west Belfast. Those low levels of fuel poverty are to be welcomed. However, it is likely that such surveys do not get to the root of the problem, because the household sample is not wide enough to target those areas where fuel poverty exists. Data collection must be improved in order to target the areas that are most in need of help. Once again, I wish to commend the warm homes scheme. That scheme is aimed at those in the private-rented sector and homeowners; people must be in receipt of certain benefits in order to qualify. The Minister supports that successful scheme. However, because of its very success, and the fact that Members continue to encourage people to take it up, the Minister may have to bid for additional funding for the scheme. Of course, I and, I suspect, the Committee for Social Development, will gladly support the Minister’s bid for additional funding, because initiatives such as the warm homes scheme will help to alleviate fuel poverty in Northern Ireland. However, we need to target areas, particularly those in rural parts of Northern Ireland, where although people know that they are entitled under the scheme, they feel that it is a form of charity that they do not wish to avail of. We need to dispel that notion. We need to ensure that people are aware of the scheme; know their entitlement; know that they should apply, and, that if they qualify, that they will receive assistance. In that way, increasing the amount of money available and ensuring that there is a more widespread knowledge of the warm homes scheme will help to address fuel poverty. Whether fuel poverty can be totally eliminated by 2010 — as indicated a couple of weeks ago during a meeting of my Committee — is open to question. Mr Brady: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I support the motion as amended. The strategy for ending fuel poverty was developed by the Department for Social Development following a consultation process that took place at the end of 2003. That strategy was stated to be an important element of the policy of targeting social need, which covers the period up to 2016, with a focus on 2010 as a key date for the eradication of fuel poverty. That is not an attainable target. As has been mentioned, Alan Shannon, the permanent secretary of the Department for Social Development, stated that the Department is on target to meet the 2010 deadline, but I reiterate that it is not attainable. The strategy identifies the main causes of fuel poverty as low income, poor energy efficiency and high energy costs. Households whose occupants are particularly vulnerable to the effects of the cold weather on their health and social well-being — and it is worth reminding Members about those who are directly affected — contain an elderly person, someone with a disability or long-term illness, or a family with at least one child under 16. Approximately 200 older people die here every year from cold-related illnesses, which is an appalling statistic. Households headed by older people are much more likely to be living in fuel poverty; 39% of people aged 60 to 74, and 42% of those aged 75 and over, are more likely to be suffering from fuel poverty than younger age groups. Older people are more likely to live in older houses, which are less likely to be energy efficient. The Housing Executive’s ‘Interim House Condition Survey 2004’, clearly demonstrates that a large proportion of older people live in accommodation that is in an unfit state of repair, or below the decent homes standard. That is something that must be addressed, urgently and effectively. Statistics produced by the Child Poverty Action Group for 2003-06, indicate that 25% of children in the North are at risk of living in poverty. Indeed, a recent report from Save the Children indicates that 7,000 children in my constituency are living in poverty. Fuel poverty has an impact on the health of both the old and young in society, which impacts directly on healthcare provisions. There are many schemes in operation to help relieve fuel poverty, such as the warm homes scheme. In 2006, 6,000 homes had insulation measures installed, at a total cost of £11 million, and 320,000 people received winter fuel payments. However, the continuing rise in the cost of oil, gas and electricity leaves many people, who are on low and fixed incomes, at risk of fuel poverty. A home is in fuel poverty if, in order to maintain an acceptable temperature throughout the house, occupants have to spend more than 10% of their income. Low income has been clearly shown to be a significant cause of fuel poverty. In 2004, 68% of households with an annual income of under £7,000 were in fuel poverty. Realistic benefit and pension rates need to be implemented to enable people to enjoy an acceptable standard of living. Prior to 1988 — under the old supplementary benefits scheme — heating costs were included as part of benefits, and there were central heating additions. Those were abolished in 1988 with the advent of income support, and people now rely on the Social Fund, which is budget limited and does not cater for heating costs. Other benefits such as tax credits have been introduced to supplement low wages and encourage people back to work. That scheme is a shambles, and it has resulted in some people owing more than they receive. Fuel poverty is a scourge on society, and its eradication requires a concerted effort from all Departments, particularly DSD. Only when that happens will fuel poverty be alleviated to any degree. Go raibh maith agat. 2.30 pm Mrs Long: Fuel poverty is a serious issue, which not only affects many households in East Belfast, but households across the Province. The importance that the Assembly attaches to this issue is evidenced by the fact that it was debated on only the fourth sitting week following restoration of the devolved institutions. Some Members: Hear, hear. Mrs Long: Although the Alliance Party welcomes any opportunity to advance practical actions and proposals to address the blight of fuel poverty, I am disappointed that today’s motion does not progress the issue beyond what the House agreed on 29 May. That does not do justice to the seriousness of this issue — rather, today’s motion is a verbatim copy of the motion on fuel poverty that the Assembly debated and agreed unanimously on 29 May 2007 — only 13 sitting days ago and six sitting weeks ago. The wording of today’s motion is identical to the motion that was debated on 29 May, and it is clear that it was resubmitted by the UUP in error after the recess. However, when that fact was highlighted, the proposer tried to justify the unaltered motion’s resubmission after such a short time, as if it were intentional. He would not admit that it was a mistake. Mr Kennedy: Will the Member give way? Mr Beggs: Will the Member give way? Mrs Long: No. To say that the resubmission of an unaltered motion is normal parliamentary procedure in order to keep an issue on the agenda is nonsense. It is neither normal practice, nor good practice. There is no rule barring the return of a motion, but one would reasonably expect — as the Business Committee obviously did — that Members who have serious concerns about important issues such as fuel poverty would take the time and effort to progress the debate or develop its arguments, rather than regurgitate the same wording, parrot-fashion, only weeks after its initial airing. There are many ways of monitoring progress on fuel poverty since the previous debate. For instance, the submission of questions for oral and written answers and follow-up through the Committee for Social Development would more effectively hold the Minister and her Department to account, and such measures would serve to keep such critical issues high on the Assembly’s agenda. Deciding that the best form of defence is attack, the proposer made a number of serious criticisms in the media about the alleged complacency of officials in the Department for Social Development and about the Minister’s failure to undertake the review that was agreed. However, the motion does not contain any reference to that departmental complacency or any criticism — explicit or implicit — of the Minister or her departmental officials. Neither does the motion request an update on progress or use the word “again” to emphasise that the motion represents a repeat call on the Minister. Any of those alterations would have prompted the Minister to address those concerns in her response and afford her the opportunity to answer such criticism. I wonder why those alterations were not made. One wonders if those criticisms were the drivers for the motion returning to the House, or were they simply half-baked excuses concocted in the light of the Ulster Unionists’ oversight. In fact, the proposer indicated that he became aware of the motion returning to the Chamber only when a representative from an outside body informed him of it. As a member of an opposing party, I am not in the habit of defending any Minister, or his or her performance. I do, however, believe in fair play, so I draw Members’ attention to the debate on 29 May. The Minister said that a full house-condition survey was carried out last year, but that the full results would not be available until October of this year. I imagine that the results of that survey will be critical to any comprehensive review of fuel poverty strategy as it will provide a measure of progress to date, and it will be a basis for the assessment of the effectiveness of the current strategy. It is possible for anyone to make a mistake, but, for some, it is probable. However, what has been objectionable in this instance is that, rather than seeking to correct his party’s mistake via an amendment to update the motion or a withdrawal and resubmission of wording that would reflect current concerns, the proposer has, instead, made an effort to discredit the Minister and the Department’s efforts in an attempt to justify and deflect attention from the error. I thank Alban Maginness for tabling the amendment, which moves the debate on in the context of the Programme for Government and the Budget process. Some Members have mischievously suggested that my objection to the motion’s being rehashed, word for word, is due to my disinterest in fuel poverty. That is unfounded and offensive. I have worked closely with the warm homes scheme and the Warm Start project in my constituency. Take-up of the schemes has been low compared to other areas, but I have promoted them in the press, as well as signposting them in hundreds of thousands of leaflets, which I have circulated. Many Members have quoted statistics, but I am going to finish with the case of an elderly constituent, because it highlights the issue. The gentleman lived in a draughty Victorian flat rented from a private developer. There was no heating in that house except his open fire, and he had to move his bed into that room to get any heat. He was finally rehoused last November after I visited him and wrote to the Department. Unfortunately, he passed away from a chest complaint in the intervening period, and never actually set foot in his new home. It is unacceptable for anyone to be living in those conditions. I will support the Minister, the Department and the Executive in all serious efforts to address this issue. Mr Hilditch: I support the motion and the amendment, although, like others, I am surprised to see it back before us so soon despite the widespread support that it received in May. However, perhaps today will be of further benefit. As politicians we should be fully aware of the worsening impact that fuel poverty has on our communities, and of the fact that it is costing lives. The figures are totally unacceptable. The Department for Social Development’s 2004 strategy, ‘Ending Fuel Poverty’, revealed that some 33% of households in Northern Ireland could not afford to heat their homes. That means that one in three of us is spending more than 10% of their annual income on heat in what they call their homes. It is a poor state of affairs when the older population have to make a choice between fuel and food. Surely, a home is not a home without warmth and food. In Northern Ireland we are proud that other countries acknowledge us as being home- and family-orientated, yet the reality is that 33% of our homes are freezing, and the elderly are dying in them. The matter that Ms Long finished on needs to be taken into consideration. It has long been established that we have some of the highest levels of fuel poverty in the UK. In my own constituency of East Antrim, 23% of people in Carrickfergus were unable to adequately heat their homes, and in Larne the figure was around 36%. Unfortunately, Craigavon and Magherafelt were identified as having the highest rate, at more than 45%. According to the ‘Interim House Condition Survey 2004’, Northern Ireland has 152,000 people — or 24% of households — living in cold homes. Those vulnerable people are having their home life, health, environment, children’s educational attainment and social well-being affected by the knock-on effects of fuel poverty. Is the Minister for Social Development still confident that we can eradicate the fuel poverty in vulnerable households by 2010 and in non-vulnerable households by 2016? Is that a realistic target? In addition, by 2010 the Minister hopes that no household in the social-rented sector will be suffering. Is that achievable, and has the Department got the tools of the trade to do the job? The Department for Social Development’s strategy for ending fuel poverty was to focus on people; adopt a partnership approach; build on the commitment of community and voluntary groups, businesses, local authorities and statutory agencies; promote equality of opportunity, target social need and promote inclusion; focus on the maximum practical help for households in fuel poverty; seek to provide cost-effective solutions to fuel poverty; and benefit the environment. In May the Assembly decided that the strategy had to be urgently reviewed, and now it is time to show our communities what the Department is going to do to ensure that the 2010 and 2016 deadlines are met. Not all the options have been totally exhausted, such as looking at the advice we have to offer. Are we offering enough simple free advice on the grants that are available through the warm homes scheme? Are people really aware that they can save money on their energy bills? Research shows that thousands of people in Northern Ireland could make significant savings by availing of the insulation measures that are available. Not everyone is aware of them, but another problem could be the cultural resistance issue mentioned by Mr Ken Robinson. On average, 25% of the heat in homes escapes through the walls, 25% is lost through uninsulated lofts and between 10% and 15% escapes through gaps around doors and windows. We should be emphasising that loft insulation, draughtproofing of windows and doors, cavity wall insulation, reflective radiator panels on solid walls, hot-water-tank jackets and compact fluorescent lamps are all available through the scheme. The number of homes that have already availed of them has risen from 8,250 to 10,000, which is to be welcomed, through the warm homes scheme. In 2004, 91% to 94% of people who did avail of the grant |