Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr Lynch): I welcome the Minister here this morning. John, you are not my list, but we know you quite well by this stage. Minister, if you want, you can give us a brief presentation. Then, we will open it up to questions.

Mr Kennedy (The Minister for Regional Development): Thank you very much, Mr Acting Chairman, I presume. We all know each other quite well this week.

Mr Lynch: Particularly this week.

Mr Dallat: And last week.

Mr Kennedy: I do not think that introductions are necessary. This is sort of Oliver Twist and the Artful Dodger mark 2, I suppose. I gave some thought to that last night, actually; I was thinking of other characters. We are missing a Nancy, I think, and we have no volunteers yet for Bill Sikes or Fagin, but perhaps they will emerge.

Mr Dallat: Do not forget Danger Mouse.

Mr Kennedy: You have got to pick a pocket or two, I think.

This week, we debated motions on community transport on Monday and budget management yesterday. I hope that many of the issues on which the Committee has sought updates were addressed in those debates. I have demonstrated that my Department and I have been exercising effective budget management in very difficult circumstances. The budget allocated for 2015-16 has resulted in £60 million of pressures. I welcome the Committee Chair's acknowledgement in his concluding remarks in the debate of the extent of the pressures faced by DRD.

As I have said on several occasions, the decisions I have taken have not been easy but have been taken out of necessity. At the same time, I have remained conscious of my responsibilities to maintain the health and safety of the Northern Ireland public. However, given the scale of the reductions required, serious impacts on core services cannot be avoided. I previously outlined the approach taken to manage the reductions across my Department. There are no easy options, but I have not shirked my responsibilities. The provision of a skeleton service is being taken forward at risk. Not providing such services would be negligent on my part, yet it appears that I am being lambasted for taking such action.

Plenty of criticism has been thrown at me over the last few days but little, if anything, in the form of workable alternatives. I am happy to provide further elaboration of my budget proposals to the Committee this morning. We should be realistic and not simply tramp over the same old ground. I welcome constructive debate on how we go forward. As I have stated a number of times, the support of the Committee is important in finding a way through this crisis. I hope that this session can be used in a positive way rather than simply to fight the battles of earlier this week or indeed heap further criticism on my Department and me.

Those are a few brief opening remarks. Hopefully, they have been helpful, Chairman.

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr Lynch): I just want to ask one or two questions before I open the meeting to other members, Minister. The Road Safety Markings Association (RSMA) released a report last week which stated that the maintenance of our roads has been abandoned and that it is leading to severe dangers and risk to life. How do you answer that?

Mr Kennedy: Clearly, I am aware of those remarks. I want to say at the outset and restate, as I have done publicly, that safety is a prime consideration to my Department and me in everything we do. That cannot be overstated. We have got to reaffirm it at all times. We are in a challenging position with regard to dealing with road defects. Everybody knows that. I think that to say that we have abandoned it is unfair. Clearly, we give urgent consideration to the defects that are before us with the budget that we have, but I completely restate that safety remains and will always be our first priority.

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr Lynch): I think we all acknowledge that it is a challenging time, particularly with regard to the pressures on the budget. Do you accept that this problem relates to the £1·5 billion that has already been cut from the Budget by the Tory Government?

Mr Kennedy: The difficulty in all this is that the Executive and the Department can spend only the money they are given. We can complain about cutbacks. My party and I have expressed concerns about the funding that has been given to the Executive over a period of years, but, regardless of that, it does not change or improve the financial position. At some stage, the financial reality has to kick in. I have had to kick it in with regard to dealing with the budget allocated to me. Indeed, the Executive have to face that. There are parties, including yours, in the Executive that, I believe, have not yet faced up to their financial responsibilities on that. I am not sure that it is productive to have that discussion between us today and I am not sure that that is what you intended, but, when £2 million a week is being lost because of welfare issues, I know that that £2 million would be very valuable in dealing with the shortfall that I face and, I am sure, other Executive colleagues face. We could make political points against one another, but we would be better focusing on the budgets allocated and the pressures we face.

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr Lynch): Yes. I know it is very tight at the moment, right down to front-line services, but, with further cuts and proposed and promised cuts coming down the line, are we not going to be in a worse position? I do not intend getting into a game of ping-pong about party politics here, but we would argue that the £2 million is still in the economy. However, with further cuts coming down the line, how will you handle them? We may not be able to cut the grass once a year.

Mr Kennedy: We have to face the realities as they present themselves at the moment. I am highlighting that and have consistently highlighted it. Some people have criticised me for this and accused me of shroud-waving or bringing forward bleeding bandages or whatever the term is, but I do not think it is helpful this morning to talk about what might happen in July or the outcomes that the Executive will ultimately have to confront. However, I know that I cannot ignore the financial situation I am in at the moment and, as a consequence, some of the cutbacks and decisions I have had to make have been very challenging in terms of front-line services. Education and Health are always the big hitters when it comes to priorities for people to talk about, but the services I and my Department provide are front-line services, and they impact on the lives of people on a daily basis. Even this morning, as I travelled down, I saw grass growing in places where you would want it cut, and road defects that, in normal circumstances, should be addressed. We ought to be tackling those issues together, rather than making one person an Aunt Sally.

Mr Moutray: Thank you for your attendance today, Minister. The point I want you to convince me of is that the constraints — the efficiencies that you are making — are not all just on front-line services. Last week, I asked you a question on the number of professional and management staff you have. Over the past four years, they have increased from 223 to 241. Clerical staff in your Department have increased from 340 to 353. We are making drastic front-line service cuts at the moment and are being told of a skeleton operation, but yet there is an increase in managerial and clerical staff. How does that stack up?

Mr Kennedy: I assure you that we have been bearing down on and looking at staffing levels in all aspects of the business and in Translink and NI Water as well, and we continue to do that. I am not sure whether you are advocating wholesale redundancies, because those are people's jobs as well.

Mr Moutray: Absolutely; I am asking for efficiencies of scale —

Mr Kennedy: Well, what does that mean?

Mr Moutray: — but not growth.

Mr Kennedy: Yes. Does that mean that we will have to make people redundant?

Peter, do you want to handle this and talk about what we are trying to do? We are not simply saying that we have to employ more staff for no good reason.

Mr Peter May (Department for Regional Development): You are aware that there is a voluntary exit scheme for the whole of the Northern Ireland Civil Service. In DRD, we initially set out a proposition to reduce the workforce by 225 posts, but because of our budget situation we increased that to 295, so that is —

Mr Moutray: Sorry to butt in, but how many of those posts are at management level?

Mr May: They are at all levels.

Mr Kennedy: Across the board.

Mr May: The Senior Civil Service in DRD has been reduced by a quarter over the last four years. That is the group at grade 5 and above. There are 12 members of that group in DRD for 2,200 staff: there were 17 four years ago. There has been a significant reduction in the Senior Civil Service already, but at all levels below that the voluntary exit scheme will kick in and there will be further reductions across the piece.

Some of the people to go will be front-line staff. You have to remember when you talk about clerical staff that some of them also deliver what you might consider to be front-line services. For example, the blue badge unit, which issues blue badges, is staffed by clerical staff. It is easy to say the word "clerical" and think that it means paper pushing; actually, it often means delivering a direct service. I want to stress that. So, it will affect all levels of the Civil Service.

Mr Kennedy: It is also important to say that in handling a voluntary exit situation we have to move carefully so that the workforce is not imbalanced in any way. We could leave ourselves exposed in the range of activities we have to carry out. You need to retain experience etc. We have seen that.

Mr Moutray: I could probably understand this better if the numbers were static, but in the past four years, up until 1 June, there has been growth of between 5% and 10% in professional, management and technical staff. I am not convinced on that.

Moving on, we had a visit on Monday from the Chinese foreign minister for the opening of the consulate in Belfast, and his entourage was up in the estate on business. I hope that when he went out of here he did not look at the roundabout at the bottom of Massey Avenue or the junction at Tillysburn, because they resemble something from an African country at the moment. Minister, I understand that you have to cut front-line services, but what message does that send out for Northern Ireland plc, not only to the people who live here but to tourists, of whom we are attracting more than ever? I will give an example. I know somebody from my constituency who emigrated to America some years ago. This summer, that person will bring four tours of Americans to Northern Ireland and Donegal. What kind of message do we send out to people like that?

Mr Kennedy: I am on the same side as you on that. I am not glorying in the fact that we are not able to cut grass, empty gullies or address road defects as often as we would like to do or should do. In some ways, I am asking for your support to help me, through your colleagues at a higher political level at the Executive table, to put the case that more money should be allocated.

I have not wilfully decided that this is the best way to highlight the financial position I am in. The decisions have been regrettable, but they have been inescapable. That is the challenge for me, but it is also a challenge for all political representatives, including members of the Committee. We cannot simply wash our hands and say, "That's all your fault", because it is not.

Mr Moutray: We have had that mantra rolled out from you, Minister. This is the third day in a row we have heard it.

Mr Kennedy: Unfortunately, Stephen, it seems that it is not being heard, listened to or genuinely appreciated, which is a pity.

Mr Moutray: Can I ask you then — maybe Mr May is in a better place to answer this — how creative your Department is in working with businesses and communities to help them improve their areas? Obviously, you are failing to cut grass in strategic areas across the country. How creative is your organisation being at trying to encourage communities to help themselves if they have pride in their area?

Mr Kennedy: I have no issue with encouraging people to help themselves or for local authorities or other agencies to step in and carry out work. If the Housing Executive can help us, then I am very happy for such agencies to work with either private or public sector organisations. You will not find me opposed to anybody who has got ideas or suggestions, or —

Mr Moutray: Minister, with respect, it is not about being "opposed": I would like to see active engagement with local councils. That does not mean that local councils pick up the tab every time, as happened when I was in Craigavon Borough Council. However, if your Department is not able to do it, then I would like to see your Department at senior level try to work constructively with other organisations, individuals and businesses to see whether something can be done, at least in the short term.

Mr Kennedy: I am happy to do that.

Mr John McGrath (Department for Regional Development): On that tack, we have just finished a round of meetings with all the new councils about all DRD business. In each meeting, we briefed them on the cuts and the skeleton service, and at least two or three councils were beginning to seek to generate ideas, particularly around social enterprise, that might be able to contribute something to the grass-cutting problem. That dialogue has gone on and will continue with councils, and this is one of the issues we will want to talk to them about.

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr Lynch): Could I ask members to switch off their phones? They are interfering with electronic devices. That goes for the Public Gallery as well.

Mr Byrne: Welcome again, Minister, to this engagement.

Mr Kennedy: Long time, no see.

Mr Byrne: The reality is that we must all recognise that there will be fewer Treasury handouts. We are in an era of limited public expenditure, so the question is how the resources are allocated according to the priorities of the Department. It is hard to accept that Translink spends so much money on taxis and company cars. After all, it is a transport company providing a service for the public. Lastly, the Roads Safety Markings Association states that maintenance of rural roads has been abandoned: how do you balance the priorities of road safety, with a limited resource, against what is perceived to be a waste of money or too much money being spent on taxis or company cars for Translink?

Mr Kennedy: Thanks for your questions, Joe. It is relatively easy to pick out an issue of taxi fares or company cars against other services that are provided, say, by Transport NI or whatever. Nevertheless, there are issues involved. Some of the issues surrounding company cars and taxis, in particular, evolve from contracts that have been agreed with staff. Translink has made some efforts, and I can tell you that members of senior management have, in more recent times, not been granted company cars as part of their terms and conditions. I am discussing and am prepared to further discuss with Translink how that perceived situation has a negative impact. I accept that the perception is not ideal, and we need to look at that.

Some usage of company cars and taxis, either for drivers, conductors or whatever, is the most cost-effective way of getting Translink staff to where they need to be. With that in mind and with that qualification, I am and will be discussing further with Translink the issue you have raised.

Mr Byrne: I appreciate the position you are reflecting. However, how do you make sure that road safety is maintained as a key priority at all times? Given that there is so much concern about road safety, how confident are you about getting extra funding in the monitoring round to meet the immediate needs over the summer period?

Mr Kennedy: As I said, road safety remains a key priority. It cannot and should not be otherwise, and we will seek to deal with the situation that is in front of us, challenging though it is. We have made significant and robust bids to June monitoring. You will be aware that the Committee discussed those last week.

We have to be honest about this as well. If June monitoring does not yield what we need, the challenges will continue, so we have to highlight that. The representations made in the Chamber and in public by Assembly Members and Committee members are significant, and I very much hope that they are being listened to in the Department of Finance and Personnel and by Executive colleagues. I think that, on the ground, they accept that more money needs to be allocated to offset some of the difficulties we are face. We have put in a robust bid. It has the support, I hope, of the Committee and other representatives, and we will await the outcome and see what happens next.

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr Lynch): Again, those using phones in the Public Gallery please switch them off. They are still causing interference.

Mr McAleer: You said on a number of occasions, Minister, that road safety was a prime consideration for you and your Department. We saw comments from the RSMA that rural roads had been abandoned, which you obviously disagree with. What work is being undertaken on rural roads?

Mr May: In general terms, the most serious defects on main roads are being addressed. In relation to the less-trafficked rural roads, we are not currently intervening. Over time, that will lead to the fabric of roads being damaged. The skeleton service goes only so far. As the Minister has highlighted on a number of occasions, the skeleton service is being undertaken at risk. We currently do not have funding for that service, so we need to get that money from the June monitoring just to pay for what we are delivering.

We are storing up difficulties; there is no question about it. The fabric of the roads will deteriorate over time if we are not able to enhance the service we provide. That is the reason for the additional bid we have put before the Committee for June monitoring: to go beyond the skeleton service in relation to road maintenance.

Mr Kennedy: Article 8 of the Roads (Northern Ireland) Order 1993 places a duty on my Department to maintain all public roads in reasonable condition. That is what the law says, so, irrespective of the budgetary constraints, my Department still has to seek to meet its legislative obligations. In recognition of that duty of care, a set of maintenance standards is in place to ensure a consistent service level and a safe highway while offering value for money. The standards are based on best practice. Roads are still being inspected as normal, and repairs will be prioritised as resources permit. However, we are in a difficult and challenging position.

Mr McAleer: Peter, you said that the most serious defects on the main roads were being addressed and that there was no intervention on minor roads. What criteria do you use to differentiate between a main road and a minor road in rural areas?

Mr May: I would need to write with the detail about how a less-trafficked rural road is defined.

Mr Kennedy: It is down to the grading of roads. There are major trunk roads and —

Mr May: The level of usage, I think, as well.

Mr Kennedy: There are A roads and B roads and minor roads. There is a grading analysis that we will happily provide.

Mr McAleer: I want to make the point that this is creating quite a big issue, particularly in rural areas.

On another point, we have received briefings here from Disability Action and community transport organisations: can you explain the justification for such a drastic cut to their budgets?

Mr Kennedy: You will be aware of this from the debate on Monday. On baseline allocations, I have a very good record, in that we have maintained the baseline, but, in the current situation, we found ourselves in a challenging position. We are working with all of the community transport providers. I understand that it is an essential service to a great many people. There is the issue of reserves. They are normally held by anybody for what is called a rainy day, and my view is that it is raining now. I said that in the House on Monday, and we will work to find, if we can, acceptable solutions and outcomes that create less inconvenience and impact on the services that people need.

Mr McAleer: Finally, are you confident, Minister, that you have allocated enough funding in your budget to help to fulfil the cycling revolution that you have referred to occasionally and which you support?

Mr Kennedy: We have allocated a couple of million pounds in this year's budget. That is less than I would I like. I support cycling for a variety of reasons, not least economic. There are economic, environmental and health benefits. We have Bike Week coming up, and I hope to see you over a saddle, competing with others from the Committee and other Assembly Members for a very prized trophy. On a serious point, I want to continue to encourage cycling and improve the infrastructure because that, in turn, will encourage more people to use it. All of these things are important as we go forward. Sometimes the glass is half-empty. I prefer to see the glass as half-full, and cycling is part of that.

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr Lynch): I hope to see you on your bike, Declan.

Mr Dallat: Minister, Translink officials did not realise that the phase 2 project was a Programme for Government —

Mr Kennedy: Sorry, John, I am having some trouble hearing you.

Mr Dallat: There seemed to be a lack of communication between Translink and the Department as to what projects were included in the Programme for Government. I am talking about phase 2. Is there a lack of communication between the Department and Translink?

Mr Kennedy: No, there is not. There is neither a lack of communication in my view, nor is there what is described by some people as a "cosy situation". I think that, if you examine in detail the evidence about its financial position that Translink senior executives have provided in front of the Committee, you will see that it is clear that we have been challenging them on finance and also on getting things done, including the upgrade of the Coleraine to Londonderry line. The Coleraine to Londonderry line is a Programme for Government commitment, but it is also a priority for my Department and for me personally.

Mr Dallat: So there was no lack of understanding between Translink and you that that project was a Programme for Government commitment.

Mr Kennedy: No, it was always clear that it was in the Programme for Government, and, in my view, it has always been clear that it has been a priority for me and the Department.

Mr Dallat: Well, obviously I am not going to criticise the outcomes of it. If Ross Hussey suggests changing the name of the railway to the "Danny Boy" line, I will not object. Certainly, when you became the Minister —

Mr Kennedy: That might have a 'Londonderry Air'. [Laughter.]

Mr Dallat: I am not going to comment on that. You raised the project well above party politics, so let us leave it at that.

When you rudely interrupted me, I was saying that you were putting a lot of emphasis on European funding. Back to Translink: do you think that the railways of Northern Ireland have benefited from European funding to the extent that they should have, given that Irish Rail was able to get funding to renew a railway line from Cork to Dublin on the understanding that it eventually went further north? Is there any European funding in the £46·1 million?

Mr Kennedy: We are pursuing opportunities for European funding with the second phase, the upgrade. I should also say that the Enterprise service is currently being upgraded — "tarted up" is a local expression, mostly around Newry, I suppose — with European funding. That is happening on a positive basis, and, as part of it, some work is being done to the Drogheda viaduct through Special European Union Programmes Body (SEUPB) funding that we have been able to avail ourselves of and which we will continue to pursue. You will know that my record in charge of the Department has seen DRD top the league when it comes to performance in relation to European grant assistance. When you are at the top of the league, you want to stay there.

Mr Dallat: Indeed, some time in the past, we were in Brussels and learnt that for ourselves. I think Ministers have to get credit where credit is due.

Mr Kennedy: Steady now. [Laughter.]

Mr Dallat: I am not going to embarrass you much further, I assure you. We had the debate yesterday, and we will not go over it again. Minister, you are a person of compassion: surely, if you had fully realised the effect of the recommendations that were put in front of you in relation to Disability Action, in particular, you would never have signed them off.

Mr Kennedy: I understand some of the emotion around these issues, and as a local representative — I said this in the debate in the House — I am on the ground, listening to groups and individuals, people who are affected by all of the cuts and their impact on services. My commitment is that I will work with others to provide the maximum protection and support to front-line services. I will continue to do that as we go forward, and that is why part of the bid we have submitted for June monitoring includes community transport. Let us hope that the voices that we all have raised in support of that will be heard.

Mr Dallat: I have just one last question, which I realise is probably a bit risky, but I will try it anyway. There was discussion earlier about grass cutting. Of course we all accept that grass cutting at road ends and roundabouts is very important for road safety, but we have just finished a season where we were all entertained by seas of daffodils all over the place, adding some enjoyment to journeys and bringing us back to that beautiful poetry of William Wordsworth, 'I Wandered Lonely as a Cloud'. But, recently, I learned that 90% of wild flowers are gone: intensive farming has killed them. The only refuge that wild flowers now have is on road verges. Certainly, in the Coleraine area, signs have been erected that say "do not cut", which I am sure must please your Department. There is the most beautiful array of wild flowers, including the much-maligned poppy, causing nobody any bother and giving enjoyment. Does the public really understand that there are times when grass cutting is not the best option and that grass should be —

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr Lynch): Are you putting up an argument for no grass cutting?

Mr Dallat: No. I am wandering a bit, but comparisons were drawn earlier to Africa. I have been there a few times. There are no gang mowers, there is no weedkiller, and the place is an array of the most beautiful wild flowers. The only other place that I can think of where you will see them in abundance is on the Aran Islands, where they cannot get at them either. Is there a need to raise public awareness that being out at 6.00 am to clip the wee shoots is sometimes not the answer?

Mr Kennedy: John, you are waxing almost poetic and lyrical. I accept some of the points. In respect of what was perhaps indicated earlier, I think that we are very blessed in where we live. We benefit greatly from all of the public services that are provided, and obviously people pay their taxes for that reason. I am never comfortable comparing us to Third World countries, because I do not think we are able to stand over that in a way that is objective. I just want to see what I can do to continue to provide the standard to which people have become accustomed here. We are all working to achieve those objectives.

Mr Dallat: In a nutshell — this is me definitely finished, Chairperson — will you, Minister, please continue the project that identifies areas of roadway where there is no road safety risk and where grass should not be cut, to allow the 90% of wild flowers that have disappeared off the farms to grow?

Mr Kennedy: It is a fair enough point, and we will give it due consideration.

Mr Hussey: Good morning, Minister, it is good to see you in one piece. I am going to start off with the European connections. John mentioned the fact that we visited Brussels and looked at various aspects of funding that was available, such as the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) funding. Does the fact that we have a very limited railway system act against us when we look for funding? Basically, the famous Coleraine to Londonderry line was one of our major projects, but, again, it is because we have very limited railways here.

Mr Kennedy: You make a very fair and reasonable point. Even in national terms, when we compare it with the rail system in the rest of the United Kingdom, there are significant differences in the line, the gauge and the operation of that. Certainly, in other parts of Europe they are looking at high-speed links between cities that are a significant distance from one another. High-speed electrification of that nature is not possible — not even between Belfast and Dublin — simply because we are not far enough apart. Now, we might be far enough apart politically on some things, but when it comes to rail track we are not. I have to be careful what I say, or I will land myself in trouble.

There are issues around that, and even when we put out contracts for work to be done on our line here — we have had recent experience of this — we are not inundated with tenders for work to be carried out here. Sometimes we should realise that, because of the differences in gauge and line and the set-up that we have here, it does not always attract attention, even in relation to the awarding of contracts.

Mr Hussey: That was the next point I was going to move onto. The gauge issue is one that we discovered: it was not understood in Europe that there is a different gauge here. In fact, at one point, they believed that you could get a train from London, to Dublin, to Belfast. We found it interesting that they did not see that the blue between us and them was actually water, and because of that, I presume, there are a very limited number of contractors who would even want to see a contract for the likes of the Coleraine to Londonderry line. It is not seen as big rail work for a lot of companies.

Mr Kennedy: In our context, what is a very important contract is sometimes not always considered as such by those who bid for such work.

Mr Hussey: Going back to the start, when we were in a very musical mode, one of the lines of a song in that famous show is that money:

You have put forward your bid for the monitoring round; do you believe that you have support? Clearly, the Committee has criticised you, and, in my opinion, you have responded by justifying where you are at. How much support do you think you are going to have from your colleagues in relation to this?

Mr Kennedy: There will always be a bit of hurly-burly in politics. That washes off for those of us who have been in politics for 30 years, as I have been. I understand all that. What is more important to me is not personal or political criticisms but the services that we seek to provide. To use another line from one of the songs of that show:

Hopefully — [Laughter.]

Mr Hussey: We did not do this before.

Mr Kennedy: This is clearly not rehearsed. However, I think we have to operate a bit more collectively. I hope that, through the discussions of this week, the debates and the fog of accusations and counter-allegations, we can ultimately make some progress because, generally, I do not think that people are interested in what is called the Stormont bubble. They are more interested in front-line services and are demanding that politicians provide them.

Mr Hussey: Going back to the bubble — perhaps it will burst — in the Stormont House Agreement there is the voluntary exit scheme. You are looking to allow 295 civil servants to step aside. If the agreement is not implemented — we have already talked about the £2 million a week that is going back to the Treasury — what effect will that have on your budget?

Mr Kennedy: It will be potentially devastating. It would be a situation that would be very difficult to contemplate and very challenging to find a way through.

Mr Hussey: We were talking earlier about the famous grass, the grass cutting and everything else. Some suggestions and comments have been made in relation to involving the business and community sectors. Clearly, sponsorship of roundabouts has happened in the past. Is that being actively sought? This just came to me today, so it is out of the blue, and I am just asking the question: as we continue down this line, clearly our judicial system allows for community service, so has any thought been given to using those who are given community service orders to tidy up some of the roundabouts in towns?

Mr Kennedy: That, in itself, is likely to cause some debate and perhaps not a little controversy in some ways. I am not averse to assistance and creative methods by which we can ease the situation that we are in.

Mr Hussey: Finally, I want to go back to the funding for community transport and Disability Action. In relation to community transport, have the reserves that are currently held been accumulated through grants of public money?

Mr Kennedy: We need to be careful on that. Whilst the Department grants public moneys to providers, they have other sources of income. That is an important facet of their operation, so we would need to be very careful before I would make such an assertion.

Mr Hussey: I am only seeking an answer to the question. Coming from a rural constituency, as you yourself do, I believe, like others, that the cuts there are particularly in your face, and that is something that we would like to see resolved. Hopefully, with your bid to the monitoring round, we can see it resolved positively.

Mr Easton: I am not going to give you a hard time, you will be glad to hear, but I must raise a few wee things. The point about the company cars, which was raised earlier, is a bit of a bugbear for me. If we were all to get company cars, there would be a hue and cry about it. I think that you are sympathetic to —

Mr Kennedy: I think that everybody would benefit from a fuller understanding of it. There is a perception, and it is easy to go into shorthand on that and draw a conclusion, but let us look at the detail. I am happy to do that with Translink.

Mr Easton: I am happy enough for that to be done. I have made my point, and that is the end of it.

You are probably looking for the voluntary exit scheme to start in September. I take it that that is factored into your budget at the moment. If that does not happen, will it leave you with an extra shortfall on top of what you already face?

Mr May: Yes, we have made an estimate in-year that the savings in our pay budget will be £2 million. On a full-year basis, it would be £10 million. If there is a delay from the end of September, that will have a further impact on our budget that is not currently factored in.

Mr Easton: That could have a catastrophic effect on you.

Mr May: It would be a further £2 million pressure on top of the skeleton service that we are already running.

Mr Kennedy: It is significant and would further strip it back to a very raw situation.

Mr Easton: What is the latest date that you can enact that, if this does indeed go ahead?

Mr Kennedy: In my view, all this is dependent on an outcome to the continuing wider political discussions and financial debates. The sooner those are resolved, the better.

Mr Easton: It cannot come soon enough.

Mr Kennedy: Yes.

Mr Easton: Absolutely. My final question is on phase 2. It is costing an extra £6 million. I think that it was said that there would not be any effects on any other projects. Is that definitely the case?

Mr Kennedy: It is costing more, but the nature of capital projects brought forward by Translink is that it prepares them and brings them forward, and we give the green light and say, "Yes, we would like to see progress on that". That process continues, and Translink continues to work up proposals that we help it afford as quickly and as easily as possible.

Mr Lyttle: Apologies for my late arrival. It was due to an urgent constituency issue.

Minister, it is a pleasure to work with you on sustainable transport issues and cycling issues, but I do not think that it is adequate to characterise the concerns of the Committee about a Department that is at risk of breaking spending limits and is bringing in cuts to services for people with a disability as personal and political criticism that just washes off. I do not think that cuts it.

Leaving that aside, can I ask a serious question about the shortfall in funding required to deliver the minimum required standards of maintenance in street lighting, grass cutting and gully clearing? What is the current impact on public safety as a result of that shortfall and what could the impact be if you are unsuccessful with your bid to secure the required funding at the June monitoring round?

Mr Kennedy: It is always a pleasure to work with you anyway, whatever you think of me, on various issues.

The nature of politics is that, this week, I have found myself having to defend not only myself and my record but my Department. That does not alarm me in any way, because I am big enough and ugly enough to do that, but I want to see a fairer assessment of the position that I find myself in and perhaps hear more helpful suggestions to deal with that than I have heard hitherto.

I have stressed the need for safety, and safety remains the priority. Generally, the issues that you have talked about are reflected in an increase in claims against the Department. Happily, at this stage, we have not seen a significant upsurge in that, but, if the situation continues, I cannot say that that will not happen.

We are attempting to manage a situation as we find it, in very difficult and challenging circumstances. We have made bids in June monitoring to offset the short term, but, on a longer-term basis, I have been consistent in my view of how the Department should be properly funded. It should not be funded in the stop-start way or very bitty manner by which we benefit as a sponge to mop up underspend in other Departments. It would be far better for me if an allocation were made at the beginning of the year that would deal effectively with the services that I have to provide. That would help me to spend money more efficiently in carrying out road defect repairs and other services at a time of year when it will not cost me as much to do so. I understand that point; I have made that point; and I am happy for the Committee to make those representations on the overall funding of the Department to the Finance Minister and the Executive.

Mr Lyttle: Thanks, Minister. I have two quick supplementary questions. You have worked hard on flood alleviation and flood prevention, particularly in relation to gully cleaning, and you have visited my constituency of East Belfast on a number of occasions to stand with victims of flooding. Given that, for some reason, June is a month in which flash rain has caused problems in the past, are you concerned that any inadequacies in gully cleaning could exacerbate that problem in any way?

Mr Kennedy: Part of the service that I have directed has to continue at risk and at financial risk is looking for what are called "hotspots" or "wet spots". We will continue to do that. Due to weather patterns, it is not safe to predict where floods or heavy rainfall leading to flooding will happen, but, undoubtedly, it is not helped if fewer gullies are emptied than we would normally expect or hope to be emptied. The sooner we get back on an even keel with the front-line services that we need to protect, the better.

Mr Lyttle: Given the Minister's contributions, perhaps it would be worth the Committee writing to the Finance Committee or Finance Minister to seek his view and response to the point that significant use of in-year monitoring is as much an Executive approach as it is a DRD approach and seek his response to that.

Mr Kennedy: The Finance Minister, of course, is now a lady.

Mr Lyttle: Yes; apologies.

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr Lynch): There are no more questions. Minister, I thank you and your officials for coming to the Committee. After two and a half days of being the focus, you will understand that our role is one of scrutiny rather than to come up with alternatives as to how to run the budget.

Mr Kennedy: Yes. What is it? The prerogative of the harlot — power without responsibility. Anyway, thank you very much.

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr Lynch): Thank you.