NORTHERN IRELAND ASSEMBLY Tuesday 19 February 2008 Ministerial Statements Executive Committee Business Private Members’ Business Adjournment The Assembly met at 10.30 am (Mr Speaker in the Chair). Members observed two minutes’ silence. Mr Speaker: Yesterday, Members asked whether a statement was due from junior Minister Mr Ian Paisley Jnr. It is important that I clarify the situation for Members. A junior Minister ceases to hold office if he or she resigns by notice in writing to the First Minister and deputy First Minister. There is, therefore, no legal requirement to notify the Speaker or the House. However, junior Minister Mr Paisley Jnr, as a courtesy, informed me yesterday morning of his intention to resign from office. Should Mr Paisley Jnr seek to make a personal statement to the Assembly about his resignation, I shall consider his request. Mr Kennedy: On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I am grateful for your early clarification. Can I have further clarification on the arrangements for the appointment of a new junior Minister? One presumes that ministerial appointments are subject to Assembly approval. On that basis, will the leader of the relevant party nominate a replacement, bring that nomination to the Assembly and, therefore, have the endorsement of that appointment? Mr Speaker: Two junior Ministers were appointed and took up their posts on 8 May 2008 under an existing determination. That determination, in accordance with legislation, makes provision for a junior Minister ceasing to hold office and for the filling of vacancies. A copy of that determination is available from the Business Office. North/South Ministerial Council — Plenary Format Mr Speaker: I have received notice from the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister that the deputy First Minister wishes to make a statement on the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC) in plenary format. Recently, after ministerial statements have been delivered, Members have been in the habit of making their own statements rather than asking questions. Yesterday, I was very clear, and I asked several Members to take their seats after lengthy statements, sometimes with no questions. Therefore, I say to Members on all sides of the House that there are questions to a ministerial Statement. I have given some latitude to Members who wish to lead in their questions; however, if Members insist on making long statements, I will rule them out of order. The deputy First Minister (Mr M McGuinness): A Cheann Comhairle, in compliance with section 52(c)(2) of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, we wish to make the following statement on the sixth meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council in plenary format, which was held in the Dundalk Institute of Technology on Thursday 7 February 2008. All Executive Ministers who attended the meeting have approved that this report be made on their behalf. In addition to the First Minister, junior Ministers Paisley Jnr and Kelly and myself, our delegation comprised the Minister of Finance and Personnel, the Minister of the Environment, the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety, the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure, the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, the Minister of Education, and the Minister for Social Development. The Irish Government hosted the meeting, and the Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern TD, chaired it. The Irish Government delegation included Brian Cowen TD, Tánaiste and Minister for Finance; Noel Dempsey TD, Minister for Transport and the Marine; Dermot Ahern TD, Minister for Foreign Affairs; Micheál Martin TD, Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment; Seamus Brennan TD, Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism; Éamon Ó Cuív TD, Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs; Mary Coughlan TD, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food; Mary Hanafin TD, Minister for Education and Science; Eamon Ryan TD, Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources; and Brendan Smith TD, Minister for Children. The president of the Dundalk Institute of Technology, Dennis Cummins, with his staff and students, afforded us an excellent welcome and highly professional arrangements, facilities and hospitality. We were very pleased to meet among young people in a modern institute of technology. Our young people are the key to our success, and we welcomed the opportunity to let them see that we are working together to build a better future. At the start of the meeting, the Council expressed its united condemnation of threats to undermine political progress. Ministers resolved to maintain progress on building co-operation, and expressed appreciation of the strong, cross-border co-operation between the PSNI and the Garda Síochána. During the meeting, Ministers had a broad discussion and exchanged views on matters aimed at delivering practical benefits, such as co-operation on EU issues, and the north-west gateway initiative. Ministers welcomed the opportunity to discuss those and other important issues. The Council received a progress report, prepared by the NSMC joint secretaries, on the 13 NSMC ministerial meetings since the previous plenary on 17 July 2007. The Council welcomed the work under way in the NSMC sectoral and institutional format meetings on a wide range of mutually beneficial and directly relevant practical issues. The Council endorsed the progress made, including agreement on a management structure, to take forward the plenary decision on the A5 north-west gateway to Aughnacloy and the A8 Belfast-to-Larne road projects, and welcomed progress to date on the Narrow Water bridge proposal. The Council welcomed agreement on the modalities for taking forward the re-opening of a stretch of the Ulster Canal between Clones and Upper Lough Erne. Ministers emphasised the importance of these major infrastructural projects and the need to ensure that they are delivered in a speedy and efficient manner, on time and in budget. I stressed the need to consult local stakeholders during the construction phase of the Ulster Canal, and to develop a targeted marketing programme for this important new tourist facility. The Council welcomed the decision to assess options for the future development of the Belfast-to-Dublin Enterprise rail service, including increased service frequency, improvements to rolling stock and elimination of speed restrictions. It agreed that co-operation on road safety will continue to be a high priority, including recognition of driver disqualification and penalty points, and road safety in border areas. The Council agreed that the tourism sector is making a major contribution to economic growth and employment, and it welcomed Tourism Ireland’s challenging targets of tourism revenue growth of between 6·6% and 7·5% per annum, visitor growth of between 4·2% and 5·1% per annum, and promotable growth of between 14% and 17·2% over the next three years. The Council looked forward to receiving reports from the working groups — which were established at the NSMC meeting in institutional format — on the cross-border transfer of pensions and on cross-border banking issues, which are of direct relevance to greater cross-border mobility. The Council also considered a paper on child protection. It recognised that that is a crucial matter that affects us all. It welcomed the opportunity to discuss the matter and to consider how effective child-protection measures can be developed through enhanced collaboration and co-operation. It noted and welcomed the current cross-border co-operation on child protection, involving Departments, agencies and policing bodies. In order to intensify co-operation on child protection, the Council requested that the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety (DHSSPS) and the Office of the Minister for Children establish and co-chair a cross-border group that comprises officials from relevant Departments. That work would include making early progress on an all-island child-protection awareness campaign; identifying other medium- to long-term measures to improve child protection, including an examination of an all-island approach to child protection, with a particular focus on vetting and the exchange of information; working on the areas for co-operation on children’s services that are emerging from the North/South feasibility study on health and social services; and reporting any progress to the next NSMC plenary meeting. The Council considered the progress report on the St Andrews Agreement review, and it noted the progress that has been made to date in advancing that review. It also noted the intention to present a final report to the NSMC plenary meeting later in 2008. The Council considered a paper on a North/South consultative forum. It noted the completion of the Irish Government’s consultation with their social partners and noted the position, as outlined previously, for reviewing the Civic Forum here. Ministers also considered a paper on a North/South parliamentary forum, and they noted the ongoing discussions between the Houses of the Oireachtas and the Northern Ireland Assembly on the subject, which will be kept under review. It was agreed that the Executive will host the next plenary in October 2008. Mr Moutray: I thank the deputy First Minister for his statement. I welcome the progress that has been made to date on the reopening of a stretch of the Ulster Canal between Clones and Lough Erne. Will the deputy First Minister tell the House whether consideration was given to pursuing the re-opening of further stretches of the canal, particularly the great many that remain in the constituency of Upper Bann? The deputy First Minister: At the sixth meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council in inland waterways sectoral format, which was held on 17 October 2007, the Council approved arrangements that Waterways Ireland proposed. Those included joint-management arrangements and a targeted marketing programme to progress the restoration of the 12 km Clones-to-Upper Lough Erne section of the Ulster Canal over the next six years. Subsequent to advancing the project, Waterways Ireland officials met with representatives of statutory agencies, North and South. Along with local relevant interest groups, Waterways Ireland will progress the matter further by seeking to appoint a project manager and a consultant to undertake preliminary design work. Although I know that there is tremendous interest in the further development of the project, progress on it must be made one step at a time, commensurate with affordability. Mr W Clarke: Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I thank the deputy First Minister for his statement. Will he outline briefly the background to the Narrow Water bridge project? Will he further comment on the accuracy of the statement to the press on the €400,000 funding for the feasibility study for the bridge that Margaret Ritchie, the Minister for Social Development, made following her meeting with Dermot Ahern? The deputy First Minister: In March 2007, the Irish Government’s Finance Minister, Brian Cowan TD, stated that they looked forward to working with the restored Northern Executive in order that his Government could further advance proposals in their national development plan, including the Narrow Water bridge project. The NSMC meetings in transport sectoral format in September and December 2007 noted progress on the Irish Government’s proposals for construction of a bridge at Narrow Water, linking County Louth with County Down. The Department of Transport and the Marine in Dublin has provided some €390,000 to Louth County Council to undertake a technical study of the proposed project. Once the outcome of the technical work is available, the Irish Government will share the results with the relevant Departments here. 10.45 am There was no detailed discussion on the matter at the NSMC plenary meeting. The discussions that Minister Ritchie held with Dermot Ahern TD were not part of the formal meeting. The Irish Government’s decision to fund a technical study on the Narrow Water bridge proposition was taken well in advance of the NSMC plenary meeting on 7 February 2008. No decision was taken on the technical study at that meeting. At the moment, the head of the Civil Service is investigating the circumstances surrounding the issuing of press releases by the Department for Social Development, including the involvement of officials, and will report back to the Executive in due course. Mr Kennedy: Is the deputy First Minister aware that the Narrow Water bridge proposal does not have widespread support? It is the view of many, including Warrenpoint Harbour Authority, that it will not resolve the severe traffic difficulties in the Newry and Mourne and south Down area. In fact, there is greater support for the relief road proposal, which would, in many ways, help to resolve the ongoing traffic problems in the Newry area. Would it not be better to spend some time examining that proposal in detail instead of advancing a rather hare-brained scheme to create something that will have no long-term benefit? Will the deputy First Minister provide more detail on the papers that were tabled on both the North/South consultative forum and the North/South parliamentary forum? Will those papers be deposited in the Assembly Library? How does he intend to consult in the Assembly, either through the Assembly Committees or with the political parties, in respect of those matters? The deputy First Minister: For the moment, it must be accepted that a feasibility study, funded by the Dublin Government, is taking place, under the auspices of Louth County Council. There is no doubt that before we get close to a point of decision on any of those matters that there are all kinds of processes to be undertaken. The views of everyone are important. On the matter of the southern relief road, I have been advised by Minister Conor Murphy that his Department’s Roads Service has employed consultants to undertake a feasibility study to explore options for a new Newry southern relief road that would link theA2 Warrenpoint Road, a few miles north of Narrow Water, to the A1, just south of Newry. That study, which is ongoing, will assess the benefits to strategic traffic management and the potential to ease traffic congestion in Newry. I have no doubt whatsoever that the two projects that are undergoing feasibility studies will be watched carefully by everyone. At the plenary meeting in July 2007, the North/South Ministerial Council noted that the Irish Government would consult the social partners on the North/South consultative forum and also noted the review of the arrangements for consulting civic society in the North. Since then, the Irish Government have held formal consultations with their social partners. The First Minister and I have commissioned a review of the Civic Forum. At the NSMC plenary meeting, I made it clear that although we are keen to see progress on that, we need to get it right. That will include taking on board the views of Members of this House and of the Committee that the Member chairs. At its plenary meeting in July 2007, the North/South Ministerial Council noted the provisions of the St Andrews Agreement relating to the North/South parliamentary forum and that any development of a joint parliamentary forum is a matter for the two elected institutions. The Council agreed that officials from the two Administrations would make contact with the Assembly and the Houses of the Oireachtas and report back to the NSMC at the earliest opportunity on prospects for developing such a forum. Officials from the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister (OFMDFM) wrote to the Clerk of the Assembly conveying the Council’s decision. Subsequently, a meeting was held between An Ceann Comhairle of Dáil Éireann and the Speaker of the Assembly, and further discussions have taken place between the two elected institutions at official level. All parties recognise that any forum will be a matter for the Assembly and Dáil Éireann to consider. At the NSMC plenary meeting, Ministers noted that discussions are ongoing between the Houses of the Oireachtas and the Assembly on the North/South parliamentary forum, and the matter will be kept under review. Mr P Ramsey: I welcome the deputy First Minister’s statement on the good, positive work of the NSMC. I also welcome the high priority being given to road safety, particularly to ensuring that we can reduce, where possible, the carnage on our roads. That correlates with something that was not mentioned in the statement, although I think that it was mentioned by the deputy First Minister, namely alcohol misuse and abuse across the island. Almost 37% of road deaths in the Republic are caused by drunk drivers; and there was an announcement this morning in our constituency, Mr Speaker, that almost 50 youngsters under 15 years of age, including one 10-year-old, have been admitted to accident and emergency departments due to drink-related injuries. What priority is OFMDFM going to give to ensuring that the next generation of children is not going to face the same pressures regarding the abuse and misuse of alcohol, and self-harm? Finally, the north-west gateway initiative was mentioned at the NSMC meeting. Will the deputy First Minister give details of the action plan for health and education and, in particular, whether there will be any co-operation on sporting events in the initiative? The deputy First Minister: We are pleased with the continuing level of co-operation with the Minister for Transport and his officials on road safety. In 2007, positive progress was made in the North on road safety, with a reduction of 11% in road deaths — from 126 to 112. The latter figure equalled that for 1947, which was the lowest on record. The number of children who were killed on the roads fell by more than 40% — from nine in 2006 to five in 2007. That number is also the lowest on record. Road safety is one area in which we cannot become complacent — each death is one too many. We have introduced a number of new road safety initiatives since devolution, and we welcome the publication of the new road safety strategy by the Irish Government. I share the Member’s concern regarding alcohol abuse, and drink-driving in particular. During the Christmas period, An Garda Síochána and the PSNI issued statistics on the number of people who were caught drink-driving. Such behaviour is completely and totally unacceptable. I am pleased to report that we are making steady progress in reducing the number of people being killed and injured on our roads, and that is very important. Mr Ford: I thank the deputy First Minister for his statement. I listened closely to the questions asked by Mr Kennedy; however, I do not think that the deputy First Minister listened to them because Mr Kennedy did not seem to get answers to some specific points. I ask the deputy First Minister specifically: will the Executive publish the progress report on the review of the St Andrew’s Agreement; will the Executive publish the report on the North/South consultative forum; and will the Executive publish the report on the North/South parliamentary forum? I note in particular, Mr Speaker, that the final issue is the responsibility of you, An Ceann Comhairle of Daíl Éireann and An Cathaoirleach of Seanad Éireann — why, therefore, was the NSMC discussing the matter? The deputy First Minister: As work progresses on all those matters, decisions will be taken by the Irish Government and us under the auspices of the NSMC. The time is not appropriate for me to make any commitments on behalf of the NSMC because the Council, meeting in plenary sessions, is subject to joint decisions made by the Irish Government and the Executive Ministers who attend. Mr Shannon: I have two questions to ask. The Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, Nigel Dodds, told me in a recent written answer that there had been 2·1 million visitors to Northern Ireland last year. The deputy First Minister said that he intended to increase the number of tourists by between 4·2% and 5·1% per annum. That being the case, what policies will he be introducing to ensure that those numbers increase? Mr Dodds’s answer also revealed that there had been only 166,000 visitors from North America; perhaps that is one of the areas on which we should be focusing. My second question is in relation to cross-border co-operation on child protection. Have there been any discussions between the PSNI and the Garda Síochána on vetting and the exchange of information, which I think is vital? The deputy First Minister: Tourism Ireland markets the island of Ireland overseas as a preferred tourism destination. Its key role is to provide strategic leadership and international marketing with world-class marketing programmes. The first NSMC tourism sectoral meeting was held in Dublin on 8 November 2007. Tourism Ireland’s business plan for 2008 and corporate plan for 2008-10 were approved at that meeting. At the NSMC plenary meeting, the Council recognised the significance of tourism in the delivery of economic growth. It welcomed Tourism Ireland’s challenging targets of tourism revenue growth of between 6·6% and 7·5% per annum, visitor growth of between 4·2% and 5·1% per annum, and promotable growth of between 14% and 17·2% over the next three years. There is no doubt that we are seeing a steady increase in the numbers of tourists coming to the North. That feeds into our economy, so it is important that we continue to grow those figures. Arrangements are being made for the next meeting of the NSMC in tourism sectoral format to be held in May. The First Minister and I agree that children are our most important asset; they are our future, and it is our duty to protect them. Taking account of the important debate that took place in this Assembly, we agreed to raise the issue at both the NSMC and the British-Irish Council (BIC). The NSMC discussed how more effective child protection measures could be developed through collaboration and co-operation across the island, including between the PSNI and the gardaí. There is already significant collaboration and co-operation involving Departments, agencies and the policing bodies, but we need to maintain momentum to ensure that the collaborative arrangements are as effective as possible on a cross-border, east-west basis. The NSMC agreed that the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety and the Office of the Minister for Children should establish and co-chair a cross-border group of officials to intensify co-operation, including early progress on an all-island child protection awareness campaign; the identification of other medium- and long-term measures to improve child protection, including examination of an all-island approach to child protection, focusing in particular on vetting and the exchange of information and any areas for co-operation in children’s services emerging from the North/South feasibility study on health and social services; and a commitment to report progress to the next NSMC meeting. This issue is taken very seriously by all of us. It is imperative that the police forces, North and South, in particular, work closely together, and we intend to give them every encouragement and support in their task. Ms Anderson: Go raibh maith agat. It is good to see such robust and dynamic all-Ireland work taking place. Will the Minister confirm that there is a need for a step change in the north-west gateway initiative to make it less aspirational and more operational? That is how we in Sinn Féin have always viewed the initiative. Despite what the SDLP and others told us, we knew that it was only ever going to be an aspirational document. It must become more operational. Will the deputy First Minister confirm that that will happen? My constituents in Derry, and those who took part in the Stand up for Derry campaign, would welcome a step change in the north-west gateway initiative. Mr Speaker: Order. 11.00 am The deputy First Minister: The importance of progressing the north-west gateway initiative’s work was agreed at the plenary meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council. I said that OFMDFM hopes to submit a paper to the Executive on the matter in the next few weeks. Mr Beggs: The deputy First Minister said that the NMSC requested the creation of a cross-border group of officials to co-operate on child-protection matters, and that that group would identify child-protection issues in the medium term to long term and focus on vetting and on the exchange of information. Why is nothing happening in the short term? The inadequacies of the Republic of Ireland’s child-protection system have been highlighted in previous Assembly debates. Those inadequacies endanger children in Northern Ireland never mind those in the Republic of Ireland. Will the deputy First Minister state why he has not pressed for short-term changes to the Republic of Ireland’s inadequate system for protecting children? Is there a cosy relationship, similar to the one between the DUP and Sinn Féin, developing between the First Minister and the Irish Government? Why have the inadequacies of the child-protection system in the Republic of Ireland not been highlighted at the NSMC meeting? The deputy First Minister: In short, there are constitutional difficulties in the South that the Irish Government must address. The Irish Government’s commitment to the deepening consensus on amending its constitution to incorporate the rights of children — contained in the 28th Amendment of the Constitution Bill 2007 — has led to the establishment of a joint committee on the constitutional amendment for children. That committee’s terms of reference are to examine the proposals in the amendment, which include the exchange of soft information. The committee is due to report back to the Oireachtas by the end of March 2008. We await a decision on a date for that constitutional amendment with as much interest as everyone else. Mrs M Bradley: The deputy First Minister said there was broad discussion and an exchange of views on matters aimed at delivering practical benefits such as the north-west gateway initiative. Was any consideration given to issues of concern to older people who live at the border? They could make good use of services that are available in the North, which are only between one and a half and two miles away from their homes across the border. At present, they stay at home because there are no day-care centres, or any other facilities, near them. I want issues such as that addressed. The deputy First Minister: Naturally, I sympathise with the Member’s comments. The issue was not discussed at the plenary meeting of the NSMC. However, the First Minister and I intend to publish proposals, which the Member, along with the other Members who represent the north-west, will await with interest. All Members have a responsibility to do as much as possible to ensure the safety and well-being of our older people. The Member has raised a health issue, which requires a feasibility study to detail the extent of the problem for older people who live in border areas. Mr Elliott: I thank the deputy First Minister for his statement. My question relates to the Clones and Upper Lough Erne stretch of the Ulster Canal. Has any timescale been set for the restoration of that part of the canal? Has there been any estimate of the costs that the project will incur? The deputy First Minister: At the sixth meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council at the inland waterways sectoral meeting on 17 October 2007, arrangements proposed by Waterways Ireland were approved, which included joint-management arrangements and a targeted marketing programme to advance the restoration of the 12-kilometre section of the Ulster Canal from Clones to Upper Lough Erne over the next six years. There is a six-year time frame. Subsequently, in taking forward the project, Waterways Ireland officials have met representatives of statutory agencies North and South, along with relevant local interest groups. Waterways Ireland will progress the matter further by seeking to appoint a project manager and a consultant to undertake preliminary design work. After that, we will have a better idea of cost. Mr Gallagher: I thank the deputy First Minister for the paper that he has brought to our attention and the progress that is evident on a range of issues. However, there is a serious question about the repatriation of illegal waste originating in the Republic of Ireland. We are led to believe that Dublin City Council is the authority responsible for repatriation, but the Minister of the Environment has been unable to get a commitment from Dublin City Council that it will take responsibility for the repatriation of that waste, despite the risks to health. Was that matter raised at the Council meeting and, if not, will it be a matter of high priority at the next Council meeting? The deputy First Minister: A road map drawn up to deal with issues of illegal cross-border waste was endorsed by Ministers at the NSMC meeting in October 2007. Officials have held discussions with their Southern counterparts aimed at repatriating waste originating from two specific sites in Ireland at Slattinagh and Trillick. A formal request has been made to the Irish authorities to repatriate the waste in line with that road map and the relevant EU legislation. There has been very little progress on that matter, and Minister Foster has recently raised the issue with John Gormley, who, I understand, is taking a personal interest in resolving it. I am convinced that Minister Foster is proactively pursuing the issue. Mr Dallat: I note that there will not be another plenary session until near the end of the year. Given the serious issues under discussion, including child protection and road safety — matters involving life and death — is there not a need to let the handbrake off and have more regular meetings so that those outstanding cross-border issues can be discussed? The deputy First Minister: It would be a mistake to think that all of the work is carried out at the plenary meetings. Many cross-sectoral meetings take place in between Council meetings, and the respective Ministers, North and South, have the responsibility of dealing with the detail of those issues. Update on Bluetongue Mr Speaker: I have received notice from the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development that she wishes to make a statement to provide an update on bluetongue. The Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development (Ms Gildernew): Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I wish to make a statement about the bluetongue virus that has been found in animals imported into the North from Europe. Before I go into detail, I will make a few preliminary comments. First, I pay tribute to the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (DARD) and the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI) staff who have worked so hard in recent days — and nights — and who are still working to defend the agriculture industry from bluetongue. Secondly, I acknowledge the recent unanimous support from agriculture industry leaders for messages urging potential importers not to put their own businesses, as well as those of their neighbours, at risk. Finally, I appreciate very much the press release issued by the Agriculture and Rural Development Committee on 15 February. I agree wholeheartedly with Dr McCrea that our farming industry does not need any further challenges at this time. His appeal to the whole industry to work with DARD to enforce high standards of biosecurity effectively reinforced similar messages from me and from farmers’ leaders. (Mr Deputy Speaker [Mr Molloy] in the Chair) Also, I wish to thank Members from all parts of the Assembly for their understanding and support at this difficult time. I will start by outlining the background to bluetongue. The bluetongue virus is present in many countries worldwide, and various strains have been present in the Mediterranean area for some time. However, in 2006 bluetongue serotype 8 began to circulate in northern European countries, such as Germany, Belgium, Luxembourg, Holland and France. In 2007 the virus appeared for the first time in Britain, in East Anglia. Bluetongue is an economically significant disease for ruminant animals, mainly cattle, sheep and goats. However, it does not affect humans, and it spreads in a very distinctive way. I wish to make it clear that bluetongue does not spread by direct transmission from animal to animal — as foot-and-mouth disease does, for instance — nor is there any risk to farmers or stock handlers. Bluetongue is spread by midges. If an infected animal is bitten by a midge at a time of year when the ambient temperature is consistently above 15°C, the virus can develop within the midge, and the midge can then infect any other ruminant animal that it bites. The incursion of bluetongue into England last autumn is believed to have been the result of wind-borne midges having arrived from the continent via prevailing easterly weather patterns. That incursion has established a beachhead of infection in south-east England that could spread north and west this summer through midge activity. However, as I have repeatedly said, the more immediate threat to the North, and the more likely way in which the disease could arrive here, is through imports of infected animals from bluetongue-affected areas in Britain and the continent. That is why I have been encouraging farmers here not to import animals from such regions. The economic consequences of the disease can be severe. Belgian sheep farmers have reported mortality rates of up to 30%. There is also a loss of production in both dairy and beef cattle, although mortality rates are much lower, with a figure of around 1% having been reported. However, this is a new serotype of the virus, and my Department is currently assessing the potential economic impact of its becoming established in the North. Whether it will transmit easily in our climate remains to be seen. It should soon be possible to vaccinate animals to provide protection from bluetongue. Veterinary pharmaceutical companies are developing a bluetongue vaccine, and supplies of it should start to come on stream this summer. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) has ordered more than 22,500,000 doses of the vaccine. Although my Department has input into the vaccination plans, European Commission rules prohibit vaccination in bluetongue-free areas, such as the island of Ireland, at this time. It is imperative that we seek to keep bluetongue out for as long as possible. We operate a programme of restricting and post-import testing all animals that are imported from the continent or from bluetongue-affected areas of Britain. Such imports are restricted on farms here until post-import tests prove negative. Turning to recent developments, on 14 February my Department obtained a preliminary blood-test result which indicated the likely presence of the bluetongue virus in one imported dairy heifer on a farm in north Antrim. On the same day, I took the decision to cull that animal as a precautionary measure while we waited for confirmation of the result from the community reference laboratory in Pirbright. The result, which was formally confirmed the next day, showed the presence of bluetongue virus in that animal. The animal was one of 21 dairy cattle that had been imported to the farm from a collection centre in the Netherlands in January. The animals had originated from farms in the Netherlands and Germany. These animals had been tested for bluetongue after their arrival here, on 22 January, as is routine for any ruminant animal that is imported into the North from the continent. At that time the animal was negative for both evidence of exposure to the virus — as shown by the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) test — and the presence of the virus, according to the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test. At that post-import test, eight heifers in the group of 21 tested positive for antibodies, which indicated that those animals had had previous exposure to the virus — they were ELISA-positive. To explain what that means, the animals did not have the live virus in their blood, only antibodies. For example, a person who has had chickenpox as a child will continue to have antibodies to that disease for many years. The animals were also tested for the live virus, through the PCR test, and all were found to be PCR-negative, which indicated the absence of active infection. However, my Department took the precaution of restricting the herd for a longer period than is usual, and we retested all of the cattle 30 days after import. 11.15 am That retest was carried out on 11 February and one heifer showed up positive on PCR: that is, we found the presence of the bluetongue virus. Having culled the infected heifer, and having received confirmation of a positive test, the decision was taken on Friday to cull the heifer’s calf as an additional precaution. That was done because it was possible that the calf had become infected through virus transmission before birth and through the close contact it had had with its mother. Over the weekend, we received results of tests on blood samples collected on Friday 15 February from calves born to other cattle in that group. They showed that three out of four calves born to heifers in the group were ELISA positive and PCR positive — that is, they also showed active infection with the bluetongue virus. On the basis of those results, and in the light of the findings of the investigation so far, I took the decision on Sunday to cull the remaining 20 cattle and all of their calves in the imported group. The culling of those animals was completed on-farm yesterday. It was judged prudent to remove all the remaining heifers in the group, as the mechanism by which the original animal and the calves became infected is uncertain. That group of cattle had already been exposed to the infection and presented a risk. The mechanism by which animals in the group had become infected is still under investigation. Further tests are taking place in laboratories in the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute and in Pirbright as I speak. Importantly, no evidence exists that vectors are active in that shed, and the suckler herd held in this same airspace remains uninfected, although intensive surveillance of that group continues. I will return to that point shortly. Yesterday, as a precautionary measure, we culled a further three animals, imported in another batch. Because of the uncertainty of the mechanism by which the animals in the first group contracted the virus, it was considered prudent to remove the additional animals. In total, 30 animals were culled on the farm. The Department is under no obligation to pay compensation for imported animals that have been affected by, or exposed to, the bluetongue virus. I repeat that the Department and I are determined to do all we can to keep the North’s bluetongue-free status. The cull does not mean that the disease is circulating here. Recognition of an outbreak of bluetongue, and that a country has infected status, depend on evidence that the virus is circulating in animals other than imports. Such evidence is taken to demonstrate infection of the local midge population. Our active surveillance has yielded no such evidence, and so the North, and the island of Ireland, retains bluetongue-free status. Both DEFRA, and Mary Coughlan, the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food in the South, have been kept informed. I assure Members that I will continue to focus on ensuring that the disease is contained through quick and decisive action. The remaining cattle and sheep on the farm will continue to be restricted and they will be tested regularly until we are satisfied that no risk of infection remains. Surveillance-testing will be extended, as necessary, to other imported animals and across other areas of the North. I have asked my officials to consider what else needs to be done, and I will announce what further steps are to be taken in the coming days. In the meantime, nothing must divert us from the immediate task of implementing intense surveillance of the infected farm in north Antrim. The farm in question is the only farm that has given cause for concern. I will keep the Assembly informed as the investigation progresses, and as more information comes to light which helps us to understand the incident on that farm. Go raibh maith agat. As I said on Friday, farmers who consider importing livestock from bluetongue-affected areas should wise up if they are serious about keeping bluetongue out of the island of Ireland. On Friday, the president of the Ulster Farmers’ Union called for a voluntary ban on the import of animals from bluetongue-affected areas. I welcome that move, as I have no statutory power to ban such imports. Once more, I plead with farmers who are considering the importation of animals to think again. This experience demonstrates that importing is far too risky. I wonder how long it will be before the message gets through. Since my appointment, I have reminded farmers about vigilance in relation to bluetongue a staggering 23 times. On six occasions since May 2007, I have explicitly asked in my press releases that farmers think carefully before importing. The Chief Veterinary Officer has written to all cattle and sheep owners in the North about that, and DARD has issued posters and flyers to farmers and private veterinary practitioners. This week, DARD will again run a series of advertisements to remind farmers to be vigilant and to remind them of the precautions that they should take in relation to bluetongue. I regret the circumstances that have led to my having to make this announcement. One farming family has already suffered loss. I appeal again to anyone considering importing animals to think twice about the impact that it may have on their business and on the wider community. I assure the House that I and my Department will continue to do all that we can to retain our bluetongue-free status, but, as I have repeatedly said, everyone in the farming community must be responsible and vigilant. Go raibh maith agat. Mr Deputy Speaker: I remind Members that they are to ask questions about the Minister’s statement. The Chairperson of the Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development (Dr W McCrea): I thank the Minister, the Department and the farming industry for their continued vigilance, and for working to ensure that the disease does not become the epidemic that we all fear. I endorse the calls for the industry to remain on high alert, and I welcome the fact that Northern Ireland is still a bluetongue-free area. I also support the action that has been taken. The Minister previously told the House that she would adopt a fortress mentality towards disease. However, now that the threat is at the door, there appears to be a hesitation to take the only appropriate action that is available — to ban imports from bluetongue-infected areas. On 1 October 2007, the Minister said that her disease strategy: “recognises that different regions have different priorities to consider, and it provides for us to respond in a way that is specific to our circumstances.” — [Official Report, Bound Volume 24, p102, col 2]. The Minister said then that she had the capability to act, but now she has told the House that she does not have the statutory authority to act. Who has the statutory authority, and is the Minister seeking to have that authority invoked? Does she agree that now is the time to address our specific circumstances by banning imports, rather than simply calling for the voluntary ending of imports? Having agreed with me that the farming industry does not need this challenge, does the Minister agree that action beyond the wait-and-see approach is desperately needed? Can the Minister tell the House why she does not seek to implement the very practice that she has personally promoted — turning Northern Ireland into a fortress by banning imports from affected areas? An order for the bluetongue vaccine has been placed for livestock in England and Wales. What steps have been taken for a vaccine to be made available should bluetongue, God forbid, become a reality in Northern Ireland? I ask the Minister to keep the Committee fully informed as the issue develops. Ms Gildernew: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Committee Chairman for his comments, and I welcome the good working relationship that we have had on the issue. I will, of course, continue to keep the Committee fully informed. The question about the ban is an obvious one. The higher-risk imports are from areas affected by bluetongue in mainland Europe. Under EU legislation, we are unable to ban imports if the relevant trade conditions are met. On 26 October 2007, Commission Regulation 1266/2007, which allows for the movement of animals from bluetongue zones under certain conditions, came into effect. Banning imports would contravene that legislation. The regulation came into effect because so much of Europe was affected. I was opposed to the regulation, and I lobbied intensely on the matter. I wrote to Jeff Rooker at DEFRA, and spoke to colleagues there, about voting against the European Commission’s regulation. However, the UK Government voted in favour of the legislation. I do not have the statutory authority to ban imports; that is why I appeal to farmers and the agriculture industry to work with me to impose a voluntary ban. Although we were part of the vaccination strategy and the discussions around that, we are not part of the tender process. At the moment, no animals in the North are infected with bluetongue; therefore, we are not permitted to vaccinate. If we require the vaccine, we will obtain it through our own procurement process. We are developing a vaccination strategy in partnership with DEFRA and the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (DAFF). I should also point out that the vaccine is expected to have a limited shelf life. If we were to invest money in the vaccine this year and, all being well, not need it until next year, that money would be wasted. We are keeping a close eye on the situation, but we are not permitted to vaccinate against the disease while we are bluetongue-free. Therefore, we must wait until animals become infected before we can buy the vaccine and distribute it to farmers. We will keep a close eye on the situation as it develops, and we will do all in our power within the legal framework to keep bluetongue out of the island and out of the North. Mr W Clarke: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I commend the Minister and her Department for their swift and decisive action over the past few days. Everyone has put in a huge effort. Will the Minister elaborate on the conditions of bluetongue-free status? Are all the results now available? Ms Gildernew: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. We have not lost our bluetongue-free status. Unlike other diseases, bluetongue is not confirmed until there is evidence of circulation of the active virus between susceptible animals and the midge vector population. In other words, we retain our bluetongue-free status until bluetongue is found in the midge population. We are at higher risk from imported animals than from midge activity. The animals that were culled yesterday are still being tested, and we are awaiting some retests on samples that were sent to Pirbright laboratory. This is a live situation, and results are still coming in. We will keep a close eye on those results as they come through and take the necessary action to protect our bluetongue-free status. Mr Elliott: I thank the Minister for her statement and for the work that she and her Department have been doing. I would like clarification on the testing regime, as eight of the 21 imported animals tested positive prior to leaving the country of export. They then appeared to test negative when they came to Northern Ireland. However, at the most recent test on 11 February, they tested positive again. Will the Minister clarify how those results differed so much? Ms Gildernew: With your indulgence, Mr Deputy Speaker, this will be a lengthy answer. I will go through the timeline of events to put the matter into perspective. On 11 January, some 36 animals arrived here from an assembly centre in the Netherlands. The animals originated from Holland and Germany, and they tested negative for bluetongue in the pre-import test before leaving the Netherlands. The consignment went to two separate farms. The animals were restricted on those farms, in line with post-import control for bluetongue-susceptible animals. On 21 January, we tested all the animals from the second farm, and they all tested negative for bluetongue. On 22 January, the 21 animals from the first farm were sampled and eight of them tested ELISA-positive, which means that they showed immunity to bluetongue. In other words, the animals had been exposed to the virus and had antibodies in their blood, but they did not carry the live virus. Therefore, we took the further precaution of restricting the herd for longer than usual to carry out further tests. On 24 January, the PCR test, which shows whether the virus is active in the animal, showed that none of the animals had bluetongue. It was decided to test the animals again 30 days later, and midge traps were placed in the shed. 11.30 am The animals that were imported on 11 January were retested on 11 February, and on 13 February one animal tested positive for bluetongue virus. A further sample was taken from that animal, and both samples were sent to the reference laboratory in Pirbright. On 14 February, the holding was restricted. The decision to cull one animal was based on suspicion and taken as a precautionary measure. On 15 February, we received the official results from Pirbright, and by that time the cow was culled. On the advice of scientists, that cow’s calf was also culled. Test results on the calf showed that it was ELISA positive, because it was exposed to the antibodies that had been passed on through its mother. The calf, however, was PCR negative. Therefore, it had immunity, but it did not have the virus. All other cattle on the premises were sampled. On 17 February, results showed that three calves that were born to ELISA-positive dams were PCR and ELISA positive. Interestingly, the calves that had not been exposed to vector activity were found to be PCR positive. One calf was ELISA positive but PCR negative, so it had the immunity but not the virus. Samples from other animals gave cause for concern, so those animals were retested, and the samples were sent to Pirbright for analysis. On 18 February, the remainder of the cohort that came from the Netherlands — 20 cattle and five calves — were culled. Yesterday, the Department took the precautionary step of culling a further three animals. Those animals did not test positive, but we were not 100% happy with the results. At all times, the Department has taken a belt-and-braces approach to contain the disease and to do what is necessary to protect the industry and to cull the animals. Three out of the four calves that were born to the imported heifers were PCR positive, so the virus was, obviously, transmitted through their mothers. However, the Department and the scientists are still involved in robust active investigations on all of that. I apologise for the length of my answer, but, in short, the animals tested negative before they left the Netherlands, tested negative on arrival here, but tested PCR positive when later tests were carried out. Mr P J Bradley: I thank the Minister for updating the House on the bluetongue virus, and I thank her and the Chief Veterinary Officer, Bert Houston, for their constant attention to the threat and for their call for vigilance; that is appreciated. The events following the detection of the first case prove that our post-import detection is working, but it also shows that we are not impregnable and that our flocks and herds are at risk. What is known about the area of the Netherlands from which the affected animal came? The Minister said that she cannot ban imports from that area, but why are animals allowed in from the likes of the Netherlands and Germany when those countries are so prone to the disease? Ms Gildernew: The bottom line is that the heifers from those areas are cheap. Members are aware of the challenges facing the red meat industry. The farmer who imported the cattle had a suckler herd, but he wanted to move into the dairy sector. Dairy heifers are cheaper to buy in countries where bluetongue is prevalent than they are to buy here. Therefore, the farmer made an economic decision. I can understand that; I am not entirely unsympathetic to his situation. The heifers were cheaper to buy and import, and the farmer was thinking of going into the dairy sector. Those heifers had to be culled because they were exposed to the virus, and we have to protect our industry. The situation should act as a timely reminder to farmers that it is a false economy to bring in heifers from bluetongue-affected areas, because they could end up losing them. The heifers also came through an export assembly centre. They were collected from different parts of the Netherlands and Germany and brought to an assembly centre. The farmer followed the correct procedures involved in the pre-import and post-import testing, but the risks exist in spite of the procedures. That is why I am reiterating my message: please do not import bluetongue virus into the country. Mr Ford: I thank the Minister for her statement and actions and those of her Department’s staff, particularly the Chief Veterinary Officer and those who work with him. Considering the Minister’s answers, some serious questions about the science remain unanswered. Although there was no evidence of a vector, calves tested PCR positive. Therefore, maternal transmission occurred, which, previously, was not considered to be the case. A heifer that tested negative before leaving the Continent tested PCR positive in Northern Ireland. Clearly, much is unknown about the science. Dr McCrea’s point about the necessity of going back to Europe in order to request import restrictions is emphasised by the facts that have emerged over the past few days. In addition, if the post-import tests were only performed on the farm after 10 or 11 days, is that satisfactory at a time in which there has been such a level of threat, or is there a need to impose testing at the ports in order to ensure that it is done at the earliest possible time? Concerning the Minister’s request for farmers’ vigilance, which we all accept, rather than a vague reference to north Antrim, is it not incumbent on the Department to give more precise information about the location of outbreaks in order that people who live nearby can be more vigilant, ensuring that they and others are protected in the future? Ms Gildernew: I thank the Member for his comments. We must remember that a farming family is affected by that outbreak, and that is why the location was described as north Antrim. Every farmer in that area — and in the North — should be vigilant. If the infection had been transmitted by the midge population, they would not have stopped at the boundary to the next-door neighbour’s farm. Concerning the origin of the transmission, the Member is right about the fact that scientific evidence of which we were previously unaware is emerging. That evidence is subject to ongoing investigation and, at this time, it is unhelpful to speculate about the results of such an investigation. However, when the outcome is known, it is incumbent on me to keep Members informed about developments. It is necessary to wait for 10 days in order to allow recently infected animals to develop the disease to a point at which it can be detected. The testing regime is conducted subject to that timescale, and that allows us to obtain the most accurate results from blood tests. Therefore, we take into consideration what we know about the disease and apply that to our testing regime. Mr Shannon: I thank the Minister for her statement, in which she said: “I have been encouraging farmers here not to import animals from such regions … farmers who consider importing livestock from bluetongue-affected areas should wise up … I have explicitly asked in my press releases that farmers think carefully before importing.” In addition, the president of the Ulster Farmers’ Union called for a voluntary ban. Will the Minister confirm whether the continuing cattle imports from the Netherlands and Germany pose a real threat to the Northern Ireland cattle industry? Will she also make a statement about the Ulster Farmers’ Union’s comments? Perhaps, instead of calling for a voluntary ban, it would be better if the Ulster Farmers’ Union asked for a statutory ban and used its influence in an attempt to persuade people across the water, where the real power lies? Ms Gildernew: I thank the Member for his questions. When the Member said “across the water”, I presume he meant London. However, on this occasion, the power lies in Brussels. In October, the EU Commission introduced regulations that mean that, if importers meet all the trade conditions, we cannot stop animals coming from infected areas. Therefore, we must be aware of the points at which to apply pressure. The Member mentioned the fact that the agriculture industry’s leadership has been helpful concerning this matter, which it has, and I welcome the comments made by the president of the Ulster Farmers’ Union, Kenneth Sharkey. I also welcome the stark call made six or eight weeks ago by the secretary of the local branch of the National Sheep Association, Edward Adamson: “anyone considering importing animals from a Bluetongue Region — DON’T!” We must get such stark language across to people. We were lucky that this incident occurred during the recent cold snap. It was a timely reminder to the industry of the risk that exists. Had those animals been imported and found to be PCR positive at a later time of year, in August or September, perhaps, the situation could have been very different, because midge activity at that time of year might have resulted in a bluetongue outbreak. In some ways, I am thankful for the weather that we have had. We are in a position to argue our case in Europe for a ban on imports. However, in the absence of such a ban, we must ask the industry to impose a voluntary ban. Until I have the power to impose a statutory ban, the industry must do it voluntarily. I ask anyone who is thinking of importing animals from bluetongue-infected areas not to do it. It is too risky, both to themselves, to their neighbours and to the entire industry. Mr Boylan: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister and her Department for the way in which they have dealt with this issue. The Chairperson of the Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development mentioned the vaccination programme. For the purpose of clarity, when will that programme be made available, and how quickly can it be introduced in the event of an outbreak? Bearing in mind that there is North/South and east-west co-operation on these issues, are there any other new measures that can be introduced to maintain the North’s bluetongue-free status? Ms Gildernew: Vaccination supplies are only imported when a disease is confirmed to be in circulation in a country, and then only within the protection zone. Thankfully, we are not in that position. However, we have to plan strategically in the event that we require vaccines in future. May I ask the Member to repeat his second question? Did he ask what happens if an outbreak is confirmed? Mr Boylan: No. What new co-operation measures are available to keep the North bluetongue free? Ms Gildernew: We must keep our colleagues in Dublin and London up to date on our findings. We have worked and will work closely with Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and their counterparts in Dublin to ensure that they are fully apprised of the situation as it develops. Work is ongoing, and there will be further liaison with veterinarians and scientists in Europe. This is emerging science, and Europe will be interested in our scientific findings. I congratulate Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute and our veterinarians for discovering that previously unknown transmission route. Europe will look closely at how the disease is transmitted. If that helps to make decisions on vaccination procedures it will be very useful indeed. Mr Bresland: I thank the Minister for her statement. Can she assure the House that the Veterinary Service has enough resources to deal with any potential outbreak of bluetongue in Northern Ireland? Ms Gildernew: Obviously, at a time like this, the resources that the Veterinary Service needs to deal with and contain this situation will be made available. Since last week and before, the Veterinary Service has been busy testing animals and carrying out surveillance. Additional midge traps have been placed in the sheds. The Veterinary Service has done sterling work on site, ensuring that we get results as quickly as we can, and that we are kept fully apprised of the situation. I have to rely on scientific evidence and veterinary advice. Everyone has worked hard to ensure that the Veterinary Service can do its job, and that we take the decisions that are necessary to protect the industry. Mr McElduff: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I wish to seek clarification about the Department’s policy on compensation. Will individual farmers whose herds are affected by bluetongue be compensated in this instance? What procedures for compensation are in place should an outbreak take place? Ms Gildernew: Go raibh maith agat. The Department is under no obligation to pay compensation for imported animals that have been infected by, or exposed to, the bluetongue virus. We must be very clear about that. If an outbreak is confirmed, the animals will not be culled because the mortality rates are such that culling is not necessary. Animals can become infected by bluetongue, but then develop a resistance to the disease and recover from it. If an outbreak is confirmed, we will obviously have to change tack. As I said, we will not cull, but we will still not compensate farmers for the slaughter of any animals that become infected by bluetongue. As we do not have the statutory authority to ban imports, we need some mechanism that will encourage people not to import animals and put the industry at risk. 11.45 am Mr T Clarke: My first question perhaps follows on from the previous question. The Minister said in her statement that the Department is under no obligation to pay compensation. Does that mean that there is no willingness on her part to pay compensation to the farmers who are affected? The fact that the Department is not under any obligation to pay compensation does not mean that it cannot pay it. Therefore, I ask the Minister: will she pay compensation? Secondly, does the Minister accept that her comment to farmers that they should wise up was offensive? Ms Gildernew: No, I do not think that the comment was at all offensive. I was simply appealing to farmers who may be thinking of importing animals from bluetongue-infected areas to recognise that their actions will place the industry at risk. It was a straightforward message to farmers, and I received no negative criticism for using those words. I had to make my message clear and simple. I have repeatedly told farmers that I will not pay compensation for imported infected animals. As I said, some mechanism is needed to deter farmers from importing such animals, and if that means financial loss, then so be it. The importing of animals that are infected by bluetongue puts our industry at risk. As the Chairman of the Agriculture Committee said, farmers need no further challenges at this time. A suitable mechanism is required, and if that involves farmers facing a financial hit, then so be it. I have repeatedly said publicly and to the media that I am sympathetic to farmers’ losses, but that a message must be sent that there should be no imports of animals from infected areas because that puts our industry at risk. Mrs McGill: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for her statement, and I commend both her and her departmental officials on the work that they have done to address the issue. My question was about the banning of imports, and that has been fully answered on a number of occasions. Go raibh maith agat. Mr Irwin: I want to associate myself with the remarks made by the Chairman of the Agriculture Committee. Many of us are concerned that, even after all the testing and screening, an animal with bluetongue can still get through the loop and be brought into Northern Ireland. Surely this latest confirmation of bluetongue strengthens the Minister’s case in going to Europe to seek a ban on imports from all bluetongue-infected areas? Ms Gildernew: I thank the Member for his comments. He makes a very valid point. We will discuss the implications of our findings with Europe, and we will press the issue. However, I do not want to place anyone under any illusion that we will be successful. The European Commission has been very clear that, because so much of Europe is now affected by bluetongue, a ban would entirely shut down the movement of animals within Europe. We will take whatever action we can, and we will talk very forthrightly to the commissioner about our findings and the implications for the industry. All the checks and balances are in place as regards pre- and post-import testing, and the science is such that the animal did not get through the loop — we caught it. That is the point, and that is why I am making this statement today. Once findings are determined, we will decide what we need to do in our negotiations with Europe. Again, I am happy to keep Members informed of those deliberations. Mr Burns: Does the Minister agree that local midges would carry this disease? If that is the case, would vaccination be our only defence? Ms Gildernew: I thank the Member for his question. It was very gallant of him to ask it, given that he has almost lost his voice. If the midge population has bluetongue, there will be a live outbreak and further precautions will be implemented. However, we are not at that point. The longer the midge population goes without bluetongue, the better it will be. Local midges are as able to distribute and transmit the disease as other midges. If that happens, we will be able to vaccinate against the disease. My Department is continually working on a contingency plan to avoid the disease. There is also a plan to protect the industry if and when we are unlucky enough for the disease to spread. The longer we can hold bluetongue off, the longer we can protect our industry from it, and the longer we can maintain our bluetongue-free status. It will be better for the industry if our animals are free from the disease. I assure Members that my Department will be working to that end. Budget Bill Consideration Stage Mr Deputy Speaker: I remind Members that the Consideration Stage is intended to enable Members to debate any amendments to the Bill. As no amendments have been tabled, there will be no opportunity to discuss the Budget Bill [NIA 10/07] this morning. However, Members will have an opportunity for a full debate during the Final Stage of the Bill. I propose, by leave of the Assembly, to group the seven clauses for the Question on stand part, followed by the Question on the four schedules and the Question on the long title. Clauses 1 to 7 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Schedules 1 to 4 agreed to. Long title agreed to. Mr Deputy Speaker: That concludes the Consideration Stage of the Budget Bill [NIA 10/07]. The Bill stands referred to the Speaker. Tourism Mr Deputy Speaker: The Business Committee has agreed to allow one hour and 30 minutes for this debate. The proposer of the motion will have 10 minutes to propose and 10 minutes to make a winding-up speech. All other Members who wish to speak 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 to make a winding-up speech. Mr P Maskey: I beg to move That this Assembly calls on the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment to bring forward plans to develop tourist infrastructure, particularly in areas of social need, and to recognise the significant potential of political tourism. I have a conflict of interest as I am currently the chairperson of Fáilte Feirste Thiar, which is a West Belfast tourism initiative. I am also a board member of the Belfast Visitor and Convention Bureau. The motion has been tabled for a number of reasons. First, it is to recognise that there is a significant increase in the tourism budget, which I welcome. Tourism offers the potential to deliver a sustainable economy, but only if it is worked right and we get our act together by working collectively to ensure that that is the case. The next reason is to recognise that the number of visitors who travel to the North has increased greatly over the years, which generates hundreds of millions of pounds in expenditure every year that can be invested in the economy. The tourism industry sustains over 36,000 jobs in the North. However, we have yet to reach the full potential of the number of jobs that could be created, or the visitor numbers and the expenditure that that would generate. The motion also seeks to draw attention to the fact that many thousands of visitors come to see certain areas, but the local communities do not benefit due to the lack of infrastructure and underinvestment from the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment. Many of those communities are in areas of social need and would benefit from investment as it would bring them into line with others. Due to the lack of investment, there is nearly a fishbowl scenario — visitors come into the community on a bus or in a taxi, look out the windows and drive off again. No money has been spent by those tourists in the local community. Such visits, therefore, have little or no benefit to the area. People who are from outside the area benefit on the backs of the people of the local community. The area that I represent, West Belfast, has many thousands of visitors every year, yet it has no hotels. There are only a small number of B&Bs and one fair-sized tourist-accommodation establishment — Farset International on the Springfield Road. Clearly, however, it does not have enough rooms to cope with demand. In Belfast alone, a 30% to 50% increase in bed space must be provided during the next few years in order to cope with the increased number of tourists. How many of those beds will be provided in west Belfast and the greater Shankill? I imagine that none or very few of them will be provided in those areas, or in any of the other new TSN areas throughout the North. If the Assembly is serious about tourism and tackling areas of social need, the motion must be taken seriously. The Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment stated that it will target 50% of financial assistance for all tourist-accommodation projects to new TSN areas during the 2005-06 financial year. I tell DETI clearly that none of that money was spent in Shankill or west Belfast. The West Belfast and Greater Shankill Task Force’s strategic review report stated that: “Tourism is a fast growing industry and in West Belfast there are many community initiatives” — such as Fáilte Feirste Thiar and Shankill Tourism — “which have the potential to significantly contribute to the local economy.” It went on to state that: “Invest NI and NITB should be financially assisting and encouraging local community tourism initiatives, local businesses and hoteliers alike to invest in a range of tourism initiatives, including accommodation to boost the local economy.” That will help to eradicate the fishbowl scenario. Those areas have yet to see any commitment from Invest NI or the Northern Ireland Tourist Board (NITB) with regard to tourism. I sincerely hope that the Assembly, under Minister Dodds, will go some way towards dealing with those issues. For too long, his Department — under direct rule, I might add — has only paid lip service to those communities. The tourism product is often discussed. I agree that development of the tourism product must be high on the Assembly’s agenda in order to enable the North to attract new visitors and, even more importantly, repeat visitors. Another aspect of the motion is the potential for political tourism. Political tourism attracts many visitors, whether people like that or not. Curiosity is a major reason for that attraction. During the years, Belfast City Council has carried out several tourist surveys. The results indicate that more visitors would rather see attractions that relate to the Troubles than those that relate to the Titanic Quarter. However, currently, the NITB neither invests in nor recognises that type of tourism. I understand that people have sensitivities towards political tourism. However, I also recognise that it has massive potential to grow the tourism industry and will assist in the regeneration of many areas of social need throughout the North. One only has to consider the number of journalists who have written many articles on political tourism and the opportunities that it creates. In a guide complied by ‘The Independent’, one of Britain’s top travel writers, Simon Calder, placed gable-wall art above any other visitor site. Instead of going to Buckingham Palace or the Tower of London, the journalist advises visitors to go straight to the Shankill and the Falls. That is an important statement from a significant travel writer. Another recent poll that highlights the places one must visit before he or she dies includes the North’s political murals. Such articles show the potential of political tourism. The Assembly must grab the opportunity to build tourism infrastructure, recognise its importance and pay attention to what journalists write about it. People are interested in and curious about the North’s history. They want to be told that history by the people who have lived through it. The Assembly has that clever marketing tool at its disposal. Political tourism showcases the North to the rest of the world in a positive manner. As I mentioned earlier, certain organisations work together in order to bridge and deal with tourism issues. Their co-operation shows great leadership. EPIC, which is a loyalist ex-prisoners group, conducts tours in the Shankill area. Many tourists and journalists have availed of those tours. Coiste, a republican ex-prisoner group, conducts daily walking tours of the Falls Road. On many occasions, the two organisations have worked closely to promote their communities and give tourists what they want. They have seen the demand for political tourism and have grasped its importance. They recognise that if political tourism were promoted and developed by the NITB and other bodies, it has the potential to lift those communities from areas of social need into areas that have great employment and socio-economic opportunities that will become must-see areas for tourists. The possibilities are immense. 12.00 noon Writers from the ‘Lonely Planet’ series of guidebooks gave great reviews of the tours that they took with both organisations and raved about what the areas have to offer. I am sure that NITB officials have read the reviews of many journalists from throughout the world on political tourism. I daresay that NITB would be thankful for the free publicity that freed up hundreds and thousands of pounds of its marketing budget. Many people from around the world read the reviews and travelled here to experience what is on offer. The opportunity to expand the industry must be taken and the potential of all aspects of tourism must be realised. The Assembly must ensure that tourism benefits everyone. I am not saying that all resources should be invested in areas of social need or that political tourism is the only tourism product. However, infrastructure must be built in the areas that tourists visit. Pilot schemes that operate in those areas have no visitor accommodation, but they attract many thousands of tourists. I am not hung up on its name but, for want of a better phrase, political tourism has massive potential. The relevant agencies must promote it, and NITB must explore its possibilities and offer it support. Fair play to those organisations that have worked on tourism schemes, because they have tried to create employment opportunities for local people. Despite having received no financial support from NITB, they have led by example and increased the number of visitors. I urge all Members to support the motion and to recognise the importance of the tourism industry here. All aspects of its huge potential must be considered. Areas, such as the west Belfast and greater Shankill area that I represent are calling for that to happen. Local people see many thousands of visitors coming into their areas every year but they have no accommodation to offer, and there is little benefit to their communities. Go raibh maith agat. Mr Ross: I beg to move the amendment: Leave out all after ‘infrastructure’ and insert: “; recognises the benefits to the local economy of tourism; and seeks to promote Northern Ireland in a positive manner.” In his opening comments, the Member acknowledged that tourism is a growing industry in Northern Ireland. It is recognised as such in the Programme for Government, which aims to increase the number of tourists from 1·9 million to 2·5 million by 2011, and to increase the revenue generated from £370 million to £520 million by the same date. Tourism is vital to the local economy, and it is one of the fastest growing sectors here. Public service agreement (PSA) 5 in the Programme for Government commits to: “Develop our tourism sector and promote Northern Ireland as a must-visit destination to facilitate growth in business and leisure visitors.” I listened to Mr Maskey’s opening remarks, and I had a similar debate with him on Radio Ulster in August 2007. He must recognise that people choose where they want to visit — they are not told where to go, and that is an important point. Unlike the motion, my amendment wants tourism to be developed throughout Northern Ireland and recognises that that will benefit everyone. Although political tourism or terror tourism, as it been labelled in some quarters, will attract some visitors to the Province, Members must ensure that Northern Ireland sells itself as positive and upbeat. Everyone remembers the days when the only coverage of Northern Ireland that appeared in the foreign media was of bombs blowing people to bits and destroying our towns and cities and of the numerous murders and shootings. Unfortunately, those were the associations with Northern Ireland, and they did not encourage anyone to visit. In fact, such imagery was the reason why people did not come. Thankfully, Northern Ireland is moving into a more settled and prosperous time, and it is attracting record numbers of tourists to its shores. Although many people may come because they have a genuine interest in the history of Northern Ireland, many others visit for reasons that are totally unrelated to the conflict. Simply to promote Northern Ireland’s political or terror tourism, or even to focus on that, does a disservice to many of the positives that Northern Ireland can boast. It is important to state that political tourism can, and will, have a part to play in an overall tourism strategy. It would be naive to say that there is no market for it, although perhaps it may be deemed to be historical or cultural tourism. Perhaps cultural tourism could also focus on the celebrations that are held on 12 July every year. The Orange Order suggested that approximately £6·5 million could be generated for the local economy by promoting the Twelfth. Northern Ireland’s Ulster-Scots heritage is also of interest to many Americans, who trace the roots of many presidents to this part of the country. Political or cultural tourism has a role to play. Countries such as Poland and Germany have marketed that type of tourism, of which the Berlin Wall is probably the best example. Given our history, people are interested in areas associated with the Troubles. Yesterday’s debate on the reclassification of the terrorist campaign demonstrates the fact that there is disagreement about the interpretation of our history. The Member for West Belfast referred to history being told by the people who lived through it; this side of the House resists any attempt to glamorise the past or terrorism. Since devolution was restored in May 2007, there has been phenomenal interest in Parliament Buildings. My colleague Simon Hamilton has raised the need for a designated tourist centre on the Stormont estate. People are interested in modern political tourism in Northern Ireland, but if we focus only on such tourism, we associate ourselves only with the worst incidents of our history. Northern Ireland should be promoted positively. We should promote the breathtaking scenery and the beautiful tourist attractions — the Giant’s Causeway, the Fermanagh lakes, the Marble Arch caves, the Titanic Quarter, Londonderry’s walls and the Ulster American Folk Park. We have the Mourne Mountains, which reminds me about the possibility of a national park and Members’ making their pitches. In my constituency of East Antrim, Carrickfergus Castle is yet another attraction. East Antrim is the gateway to the coast road and is in a good position to reap rewards from our tourism potential. It is also important to promote and support our small hotels and bed-and-breakfast establishments. There is an emerging market for other types of tourism. I am a member of the Committee for Employment and Learning, and, last week, we heard evidence from the owner of the Share holiday village, who told us that adventure tourism in Northern Ireland is on the rise. We must also consider that type of tourism. Many tourists come to Northern Ireland for sporting activities, the best example being the North West 200. They also come for walking, cycling and fishing breaks or to play golf on some of the most splendid links courses in the world. Belfast has become one of the most popular destinations for weekend breaks. It has a growing evening economy, with bustling bars, restaurants and entertainment hot spots. There are positive aspects to Northern Ireland tourism that we should promote. At the start of my contribution, I mentioned that the Member for West Belfast and I had a debate on Radio Ulster on this issue. That debate resulted from my travelling out from Belfast International Airport last summer and noticing that the shops in the departure area were not marketing specifically Northern Irish goods. The products in those shops were branded as Irish, with Celtic or Guinness logos, and everything from leprechauns to shillelaghs to shamrocks. Northern Ireland should be marketed as a destination of its own. The Irish Republic is our economic competitor, and we should recognise the constitutional reality and ensure that Northern Ireland is marketed as a single entity so that our hotels and bed-and-breakfast establishments can benefit from tourism and not lose out to the South. My predecessor, the late George Dawson, was often critical of the Northern Ireland Tourist Board for not marketing Northern Ireland as a single entity. He had to travel all the way to the Epcot centre in Florida to buy products on which Northern Ireland was stamped. Fortunately, that situation has been remedied somewhat; the last time that I flew out of George Best Belfast City Airport, I noticed that Northern Ireland football merchandise is now being sold, which is to be welcomed. Northern Ireland must be promoted in a way that not only reflects the fact that it is its own country but will attract tourists. Terror tourism will not do that. Terrorism was a sad blight on our history, and the majority of people want to move on. Recently, a tourist bus was burnt out, which is a sad reminder of our terrorist past. The company, Paddywagons, had suffered twice from such attacks. At the time, press reports stated that a Canadian man who was on that bus said that he may never return to Northern Ireland because of the incident. Such activity is characteristic of our past, and we should be committed to working towards a better future and moving away from our associations with terrorism, paramilitarism and conflict. The Member for West Belfast mentioned that many people visit Northern Ireland to see the murals. I recognise that, but Northern Irish people do not want to focus on the past. Articles in the ‘Belfast Telegraph’ and the ‘News Letter’ have stated that the majority of people who live near peace walls want them to be taken down once it is safe to do so. People want to move on; they do not want to be stuck with the terrorist past and the conflict that we suffered for so long. Northern Ireland wants to move on as a place with a positive image, promoted not only locally but abroad. The amendment that we have tabled gives a much better way to promote Northern Ireland, irrespective of the tourist locations. We do not have to be characterised by terrorism and our bloody past. Let us be positive about what we can offer tourists. I call on the House to unite behind the amendment and support the tourist industry in Northern Ireland. Mr Cree: Since peace came to Northern Ireland, there has been a considerable increase in the number of tourists visiting the Province. Before the Troubles, Northern Ireland experienced considerable growth in the tourist market. The years between 1959 and 1967 were characterised by substantial growth, with tourist trips increasing from 615,000 to 1·1 million. After 1969, however, the number of tourists decreased dramatically and, in 1972, dropped to an all-time low of 435,000. Despite improved tourism growth during the latter 1970s, by 1981, the number of tourist trips had risen to only 520,000. It was not until 1991 that figures recovered to the level enjoyed before the years of terrorism. Since 1991, there has been a year-on-year increase in the number of tourists to Northern Ireland. With a worldwide increase in tourism, Northern Ireland now welcomes substantially more visitors a year than at any other time in its history. The preliminary forecast for January to December 2007 estimated, in total, 2,051,000 visitors to Northern Ireland — an increase of 4% from 2006. The revenue from tourism in 2007 was estimated at £366 million — a decrease of 1% from the previous year. Northern Ireland has received significant praise as a tourist destination. In 2006, the ‘Lonely Planet’ travel guide tipped Northern Ireland as one of the “must see” countries to visit, and listed Belfast as one of the top 10 cities “on the rise”. In November 2007, Tourism Ireland and the Northern Ireland Tourist Board unveiled their 2008 tourism marketing plans. It was realised that to increase the number of visitors to Northern Ireland, it was essential that the infrastructure be improved. The Programme for Government estimated an increase in tourist numbers from 1·98 million to 2·5 million, and an increase in tourism revenue from £370 million to £520 million, by 2011. Furthermore, it was hoped that the tourism sector would be developed and Northern Ireland promoted: “as a must-visit destination to facilitate growth in business and leisure visitors.” Although the Budget states that revenue generated by the tourist industry has almost doubled in recent years, that sector contributes significantly less to output in Northern Ireland than in any other region, and is well behind what is contributed in the Republic of Ireland. An issue for the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment is how to increase tourism’s contribution to the Northern Ireland economy. Regional tourism organisations can assist, but they need more money. The Budget allocation will allow for investment in marketing Northern Ireland as a tourism destination, in the Republic of Ireland by the Northern Ireland Tourist Board and globally by Tourism Ireland Ltd. Moreover, the allocation will allow for investment in tourism signature projects across the Budget period; however, I have reservations about some of those. Much is being done, and I agree that areas of social need cannot be left behind in our drive to increase tourism. There has been significant debate in Northern Ireland as to whether political tourism is appropriate. In ‘Dark Tourism’, Lennon and Foley argued that tourist interest in disaster and atrocity is a growing phenomenon, dating from the late twentieth century, and that it is a form of pilgrimage, or a way of memorialising death. If that is the case, political tourism may be something that should be avoided in Northern Ireland. 12.15 pm It can be regarded as inappropriate to make a pilgrimage to places where individuals lost their lives, especially if the visits are made in order to glorify the murderers. Political tourism can also be seen to pose a problem in Northern Ireland, as feelings regarding the conflict are still raw. Although it may be argued otherwise, sectarianism still exists, if not overtly, under the surface. As such, it can be difficult, if not impossible, to give a neutral view of the Troubles, and visits to sites that are associated with the years of conflict may become occasions for political propaganda. For that reason, I am happy to support the amendment. Mr P Ramsey: I support the motion. There is no doubt that tourism can bring enormous benefits to this region. I heard recently that Galway city, which has a population of around 100,000, receives one million visitors a year. Those visitors stay in local hotels and bed-and-breakfast accommodation, and they buy local products from local shops. That means that hundreds of millions of pounds are being spent each year on the local economy, a great deal of which goes to local businesses. I mentioned the Galway model for several reasons. First, it is a demonstration of the potential of tourism, and, secondly, an examination of the city and region demonstrates the quality that tourists expect. Most tourists visit an area for several reasons. Ireland’s clean, green image, its beaches, golf courses, rivers, the warm fáilte and the high levels of service are the attractions. A complete package is available. I do not think that any Member would argue that we should not develop our tourism package. Clearly, tourism is a potential growth industry here that should be exploited. The motion also focuses on political tourism. That has many elements; academics and political practitioners from other regions of the world come to specifically research our conflict, including its causes and resolutions. Casual tourists also come here for many reasons, and they find it more interesting to sightsee in the areas that are recovering from conflict. Each tourist could contribute to our economy if our tourism package were constructed and developed properly. Focusing on sightseeing tourism, which I assume is the primary focus of the Members who proposed the motion, there is no doubt that many people who visit Northern Ireland want to experience the story of conflict. Many are interested in our story, and developing a product that tells that story could provide an economic boost for areas that are recovering from conflict. However, in building up such a product, we must ensure that the development and maintenance of our historical artefacts does not detract from other kinds of inward investment. I am aware of significant and unfavourable inward investment decisions. For example, a potential investor cited murals and flags as the reason for their not investing. Mrs I Robinson: I am delighted that the Member gave way. Does he agree that certain artefacts should be returned to Parliament Buildings; for example, the table on which Carson signed the Ulster Covenant and all the paintings that were stored away because they were deemed offensive? Mr P Ramsey: I do not have any difficulty with that argument; those artefacts are part of my culture as well, and they are part of the true culture of Northern Ireland. The areas in which that investor chose not to invest were clearly not neutral; they presented the wrong image of Northern Ireland. Investors in high value added knowledge-based industries do not locate in areas that are covered in political murals. The areas in question did not get to the first base, and the investors did not even want to see the business properties in question. I am sure that the Minister will be familiar with similar stories. We need to ensure that the development of the tourism product does not damage the quality of an area for its residents. Many people question whether murals should perpetually mark an area as being either nationalist or unionist. There is no doubt that such murals do not inspire integration. We must also ensure that the development of political tourism does not detract from more basic forms of tourism, such as that of the Galway model. Tourists often want to be educated, and they want to feel comfortable and safe. They may seek to visit an area to hear stories and see murals, but how many will want to stay in such areas and spend their money there? That is a challenge. The good-news story in my constituency is that an interesting historical tourism product is being developed in Derry. The product includes the city walls, cathedrals, churches, museums, murals and the Apprentice Boys’ hall. Each has a story to tell. There are stories of the Anglo-Irish, the Ulster Scots and the Gael — all interrelated and intertwined for hundreds of years. Those are put in a historical context. Visitors to the Free Derry museum or the Apprentice Boys hall get a sense of history — and it is history: the conflict is over. The Minister will be aware of our bid for world heritage status in an effort to ensure that our historical built heritage is preserved. In Derry, the package is being developed to a high standard. The Walled City signature project involves about £10 million worth of capital investment. We are being careful to ensure that, in developing and maintaining our historical artefacts, we put our story into a historical context. It is important, for example, that artwork is constructive and not aggressive. Is my time up, Mr Deputy Speaker? Mr Deputy Speaker: I was going to give you a little bit of leeway, but you have decided to finish anyway. Mr Neeson: I welcome the opportunity to debate tourism. There is a need to develop a new tourism strategy for Northern Ireland. Prior to suspension, the then Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment was in the middle of an important and significant inquiry into tourism. Perhaps the opportunity is there again for the current Committee to take up the challenge and to try to maximise the growing potential of tourism in Northern Ireland. We live in a new dispensation. Statistics show that visitor holidays rose from 16% of the visitor-tourist population in 2001 to 20% in 2006. No doubt, 2007 will prove to have been even more significant. Members need only note the number of sightseeing buses that visit the Stormont estate daily. I welcome, too, the growth of the new air routes not only into Europe but to America and Canada. The arrival of both Aer Lingus and Ryanair is significant and shows the potential that can be achieved by the development of the air routes. The development of the signature projects such as the Walled City of Derry and the Mournes is an important issue. It is to be hoped, too, that, with the controversy apparently out of the way, the development of the Giant’s Causeway signature project will proceed. I have a particular interest in the Titanic signature project and wish to see that developed. With regard to that, I raise again in this House the issue of maritime heritage and the fact that no Department in Northern Ireland has responsibility for its development. That is something that must be sorted out quickly. I mentioned the Walled City of Derry, but it must be remembered that my hometown of Carrickfergus is also a significant walled town. Increasingly, greater interest is being shown throughout Europe in walled cities and towns. I want to encourage not only the development of tourism in areas of social need, as the motion states, but all forms of investment in such areas. In that respect, greater focus should be placed on the importance of the social economy in Northern Ireland. Once again, that is an area that the Enterprise, Trade and Investment Committee could examine. What is meant by political tourism? Does it refer simply to the murals? To my mind, the murals in both loyalist and republican areas are symbols of the division in society. Clearly, people who live in those areas are greatly distressed by the appearance of murals. It is time to move forward. Obviously, we have to take the feelings of the victims of the conflict into account. However, we will not be able to move forward within a political culture of murals. One of the most amusing and appropriate pieces of political graffiti that I came across was in Enniskillen about 20 years ago. On the gable end of a house, it read: “Forget 1690, we demand a replay”. It is through that sort of tongue-in-cheek way that we can move forward. Mrs I Robinson: How can we get rid of the murals that are offensive to both sides of the community if we are going to make them a tourist attraction? Mr Neeson: I do not want the murals to be a tourist attraction: I want to move on. If we are to create a shared future, it will not be through political murals. Mr Newton: I support the amendment because the motion contains some negativity. The Programme for Government rightly confirms that growing the economy is the Executive’s top priority, and it has been adopted by the Assembly. Tourism has been adopted as PSA 5 in that strategic approach. The overall aim is to: “Develop our tourism sector and promote Northern Ireland as a must-visit destination to facilitate growth in business and leisure visitors.” There are two major objectives. The first is to: “Enhance Northern Ireland’s tourism infrastructure”, and the three associated actions, if successfully carried out, to ensure that we meet this objective are: “Take forward key tourism signature projects to improve NI’s tourism product Manage and develop our inland navigations Manage and develop NI cultural infrastructure”. Objective 2 is to: “Promote the growth of the tourism sector”; and that strategic objective also has three associated actions. However, I would like to mention the five signature projects for a couple of minutes before coming to political tourism — or “terror tourism”, as it has been called. The five signature projects have been identified for their potential to deliver world-class experiences — they will attract visitors from home and abroad. In achieving international stand-out, the projects will have a significant impact on Northern Ireland’s tourism performance. In other words, they will be must-see attractions. No one will be surprised when I list the top priority as the Titanic signature project. I agree with Mr Neeson — it is my favourite project. As a brand name in a world context, Titanic is second only to the well-known soft drinks brand name Coca-Cola. Developing that signature project will involve Thompson Dock and the Harland and Wolff buildings, etc. I will turn to the negative aspects of the motion. Anyone consulting a thesaurus will see that the word “political” has other interpretations such as supporting; following; biased; taking sides; and being opinionated. There are already initiatives aimed at political tourism in west Belfast, south Armagh and the city of Londonderry. A political tourism experience was organised by the West Belfast Festival, and I want to relay the experience of an American visitor who booked a place on the political tour. “First, you will be taken on your tour by an approved Sinn Féin guide — you will understand that this guide will be completely unbiased — or he will play up a strong republican bias to prove he isn’t an MI5 agent. You will visit the political murals eulogising the republican heroes who blew up Saturday morning shoppers on the Shankill, bombed shops in Belfast city centre and shot policemen and soldiers in the back. You can have your photograph taken at the mural involving that little Communist reprobate Che Guevara. In Milltown cemetery, you will have a guided tour of the graves of infamous paramilitaries and hunger strikers with a Sinn Féin-approved tour guide: the graves of all those who shot, bombed and starved for Ireland. Of course, everything starts with a tour of the Sinn Féin bookshop, stocking all the political propaganda of the Provisional IRA’s terrorist campaign.” 12.30 pm That is the experience of a visitor from the USA. If the role of political tourism is further developed, what will the additional experience be? Will the tourist experience mock kneecappings — maybe even the recorded screams of the supposed victims? What about dummy bomb runs? What about political beatings — hurley sticks provided? Even more ghoulish, what about the activities of the IRA’s infamous nutting squad? With a bit of blindfolding and torture, the tourist could relive the experience of the terror victim. There is a role for tourism. We all want to protect and grow tourism. However, the aim of political tourism is to confuse the political process and to present a biased and prejudiced approach to the events of the past. That is a road down which Northern Ireland tourism, and the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, must not travel. Mr Deputy Speaker: The Business Committee has arranged to meet immediately upon the lunchtime suspension today. I propose, therefore, by leave of the Assembly, to suspend this sitting until 2.00 pm. Suspended at 12.31 pm. On resuming (Mr Speaker in the Chair) — 2.00 pm Mr W Clarke: Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I support the motion. The North of Ireland is investing a pittance in tourism in comparison with the South, and as a result, the potential to attract more visitors has not been realised. The return of devolution to the Six Counties means that the situation should improve beyond recognition. However, a cross-departmental approach to tourism is required to put the necessary infrastructure in place. There are two signature projects in my South Down constituency — St Patrick/Christian Heritage and the Mournes. However, the roads and sewerage infrastructures are inefficient, and that is hampering efforts to attract visitors to the county. Years of underinvestment in the roads infrastructure has had a significant impact on the tourism industry. Visitors to the North do not want to feel stressed because they are stuck in traffic jams as they attempt to reach their destinations. In order to meet tight travel times, tour operators require a better transport network to compete competitively. The Executive must address those requirements. Sinn Féin believes that there are huge opportunities in the development of political and cultural tourism. For example, the Long Kesh project, if realised, will deliver in a similar way to the Robben Island Museum in South Africa, where former African National Congress (ANC) political prisoners and wardens conduct tours. The project will also provide an opportunity for the development of a conflict-resolution centre to accommodate world peace efforts. Another example is Kilmainham Gaol, where the leaders of the Easter Rising were held before their execution. The historical importance of the site is a major factor in attracting visitors, and it was used as a location for a number of scenes in the film, ‘In the Name of the Father’. Both locations have proven to be very popular tourist attractions, and there is no reason why we should not draw on our shared history to maximise the potential of our tourism industry, which also has significant educational merit. The rising of the United Irishmen in 1798 is another event that has been used to promote historical-based tourism elsewhere. For example, much of the tourism in Wexford has been built on the town’s links to the events of 1798. There is no reason why something similar could not happen in the North in respect of equally important events and battles that took place in towns such as Ballynahinch and Saintfield. Gaeltacht tourism in areas such as west Belfast must be developed as it also has massive potential. Such potential is evident in Connemara, where local residents enjoy huge benefits from being part of a thriving Gaeltacht. As was said earlier, tours of Belfast and Derry, which visit murals in places such as the Falls, the Shankill and Free Derry Corner, have been very popular and must be better promoted in Tourist Board literature. However, accommodation must be provided in those areas so that the local community can also benefit. The story of the Battle of the Boyne must also be told in an honest way; tracing the journey of Scottish planters through the glens of Antrim to the River Boyne in Drogheda. That has the potential to be a major attraction, particularly for visitors from Canada and the United States. Investment in large hotels, such as the Slieve Donard Hotel in Newcastle, must be welcomed. However, that leaves a gap in the market. Grant assistance must be provided for the budget end of the tourism market because that has been neglected. Small hostels throughout Ireland are essential to achieving our vision of sustainable tourism. A network of hostels must be built throughout the island to provide accommodation for the thousands of backpackers would be prepared to stay for long periods if the necessary infrastructure were in place. Groups such as hill walkers, fishermen and students require budget accommodation every 10 or 15 miles. The North of Ireland lags way behind the South in tourism, and that is exemplified by the fact that there are more hostel beds in Galway than in the whole of the North. It is important that young travellers from all over the world have fond memories of their holidays in Ireland, including the North, because they are the future business class who will return to our island for conferences. Their initial visits will shape the future attitudes of those people. There must be leniency in the development of brownfield sites, such as old mills and barns, into budget accommodation, and that should be accompanied by substantial grants. Sinn Féin also calls for the development of social tourism in line with continental Europe, where around 75% of families enjoy an annual holiday compared with fewer than two-thirds of families in Ireland. If the Executive are serious about a social-inclusion agenda, social tourism should be developed on a par with the high level of state-subsidised holidays that is provided to low-income families in countries such as France — Mr Speaker: The Member’s time is almost up. Mr W Clarke: Holidays are an essential part of family life and should be mainstreamed into social welfare policy. Go raibh maith agat. Mr Simpson: I am sure that Members will agree that tourism makes an important contribution to the local economy. In 2003, income created by tourism was in the region of 3·5% of gross value added to the Northern Ireland economy. However, only 0·9% was generated by external visitors. There is a clear need for the improvement of our infrastructure after 30 years of terrorist violence and mayhem. The unfulfilled potential of the tourism industry in Northern Ireland reflects the fact that it lost some three quarters of its global market share of incoming visitors at the start of the Troubles. Recent studies show that more visitors are coming to Northern Ireland. However, there is still a huge gap in the market that needs to be explored, and the Assembly and the Tourist Board need to promote, encourage and support new initiatives to regain and improve our maximum tourist potential. It is vital that the Tourist Board provides an outstanding service that gives our taxpayers value for money, while identifying potential growth areas and maximising benefits to the community. We must focus on parts of Northern Ireland that can be further developed; the added benefits would lift those areas out of their current social need. For example, Craigavon has many popular attractions, including Lough Neagh, which is home to Oxford Island, the Kinnego marina and the Lough Neagh Discovery Centre — the second most visited tourist site next to the Giant’s Causeway. Portadown has links to the formation of the Orange Order, and to the history of the Blacker family. It also had a role in shaping Irish history through events such as the 1641 rebellion. Banbridge District Council area is home to attractions such as the Scarva event on 13 July, the Brontë Homestead, and many more. I encourage the Minister to engage with all those council areas, and to encourage the councils to engage with him — Mr Shannon: Does the Member agree that what he has referred to in Craigavon is replicated in the Strangford area almost bit by bit, including its history, its attractions and the reasons for going to that area? Mr Simpson: I will take my colleague’s word for that. He is taking the opportunity to promote his area, and he did that in a very nice way. He slipped it in very well. A Member: In your time. Mr Simpson: Yes, in my time. I hope that the Speaker will be lenient with me as regards time. Will the Minister give us some indication of how he will engage with those organisations and promote and develop those events? I have man |