Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Chairperson (Mr Irwin): I welcome Mary T Conway, from the Omagh Forum for Rural Associations; Loraine Griffin, from Community Organisations of South Tyrone and Areas (COSTA); Brendan McCann, from the Armagh, Down and Antrim (TADA) Rural Support Network; and Nicholas McCrickard, from the County Down Rural Community Network. You may begin with a presentation, and then we will ask questions.

Ms Mary T Conway (Local Rural Support Networks): I work in the Omagh forum, so I am covering the Omagh area. Loraine works primarily in the Dungannon and south Tyrone area; Brendan works primarily in the Armagh area; and Nicholas's organisation, the County Down Rural Community Network, speaks for itself.

Thank you for inviting us here today in your consideration of the Rural Needs Bill. We are honoured, and we welcome this engagement very much. The local rural support networks, as you mentioned, Chairman, are a Northern Ireland-wide infrastructure. We deliver the rural community development support service for DARD under the tackling rural poverty and social isolation (TRPSI) framework. We circulated a briefing paper in which we outline who we are. It is the paper with the map, and it contains a table giving all the contract partners. You will see that there are a number of contract partners that are delivering.

As organisations, we draw membership from a wide range of community and voluntary-sector organisations. There are generic community groups, social economy groups, play groups, farmers' groups, women's groups, youth groups, disability groups, ethnic minority groups and older people's groups, and probably quite a few others as well. The local rural support networks are widely recognised as providing an essential conduit or go-between between rural communities and statutory bodies. We provide communities with access to decision-making and a channel into expert local knowledge. We are the go-between.

We appreciate that the Executive, in their rural White Paper action plan, have a vision for a fair and inclusive rural society, where rural dwellers enjoy the same quality of life as all others in the region. That is what we, as local rural support networks, are very mindful of — a fair quality of life. Furthermore, we are conscious of the Executive and their commitment to rural proofing in 2002 and 2009 and the consequent endeavours to rural proof policy. However, it appears that there are failings there, as evidenced by our rural areas losing more and more services. We welcome wholeheartedly — I must emphasise that — a Rural Needs Bill, as we believe that it will take account of rural issues at policy inception — at the beginning of a policy being considered. Therefore it will be intrinsic to policy development. We believe that the Rural Needs Bill will ensure that policy decisions take account fully of rural areas and that decision-makers should be held accountable. We want to see the Bill strengthened to be as robust as possible to ensure better outcomes for our rural people.

I will hand over to Loraine to take you through the wording of the Bill. I remind you that we are laypeople and have not had the benefit of legal guidance in our comments.

Ms Loraine Griffin (Local Rural Support Networks): Thank you, Mary T. We are definitely not lawyers, but we will give you our opinions anyway.

Clause 1, "Duty of public authorities to consider rural needs" states:

We thought that, perhaps, the phrase "give due regard to" should replace the word "consider", as we felt that "consider" does not carry enough weight. A public authority may well consider rural needs but not act on them. Considering rural needs could lead to a rural impact assessment being carried out without any substantial adjustment to the delivery of policy and programmes in rural areas. Therefore, to "have due regard to" may require public authorities to take the issues associated with rural needs more seriously.

If the insertion of "have due regard to" cannot be agreed, we suggest that, as an alternative, the phrase "carry out and give effect to a rural impact assessment" should be inserted in brackets after the words "consider rural needs".

We also suggest inserting the word "monitoring" in clause 1(1)(a) after "developing, adopting, implementing" and before "or revising policies, strategies and plans" and inserting "and budgets". While monitoring might be implicit, we wish it to be more explicit. Likewise, service delivery is dependent on budget allocations, so we want to see rural areas receiving their fair share.

At clause 1(b), after "designing and delivering public services", we suggest adding:

The Bill does not refer to the need to mitigate adverse impact in rural communities where it is identified. We recognise the budgetary constraints under which all public authorities operate. However, we believe that, without reference to the need to mitigate adverse impacts, there is a risk that the "consider rural needs" will not lead to any significant change for rural citizens. The inclusion of the phrase "reasonable steps" aims to balance the need to mitigate adverse impacts in rural areas with the reality that public authorities have limited budgets.

Clause 1(2)(c) refers to:

We appreciate that the Bill will start with Departments and councils, but we are keen to hear which organisations the Bill will extend to. We appreciate that there will be further consultation on this, and we await it with interest, but, at this stage, will arm's-length bodies be included? They carry out significant functions on behalf of government bodies, and we would like them to be included.

Clause 2 is "Guidance, advice and information, etc." It states:

We propose that the word "may" be replaced with the word "will".

At clause 2(a), we propose to insert the word "training" between "provide any person with guidance" and

Clause 3 is "Monitoring and reporting". We want to be sure that the Bill is effective on an ongoing basis, so we want to strengthen this clause in some way. We appreciate that no sanctions are envisaged for non-compliance, but how can the Committee ensure that public bodies will take their responsibilities seriously? The clause asks for a copy of the Department's report to be laid before the Assembly, but can this be made more transparent? We propose adding a provision that:

so that there can be a continual review and so that it is aired and discussed as a live issue on the Floor of the Assembly. We understand that the term "laid before" means that the report is lodged in the Assembly Library, but we feel that that is not transparent enough in itself.

Clause 4 is "Co-operation with other bodies". It states:

We propose to add the phrase "to highlight good practice".

Clause 6, "Interpretation", defines rural needs as:

Does that take account of needs such as health, housing, education and the environment? Can there be more clarity on this in the Bill?

I now hand you over to Brendan.

Mr Brendan McCann (Local Rural Support Networks): Thank you, Loraine.

As both my colleagues said, we, as rural support networks, welcome the Bill. Any adjustments that Departments would have to make would be reasonable and evidence based. This Bill is very timely as there is a lot of evidence gathering going on at the minute through the community planning process, which rural support networks are heavily involved in.

I will give you two examples. They are quite abstract, but if you read behind the stories they are very useful. In south Armagh, some of the Gaelic teams — not too many of us here today are involved in Gaelic teams; we are all past that — cannot field full teams. They have to play with 12-a-side or 11-a-side teams. As I said, this example is quite abstract. The population of Northern Ireland is growing, so why do football teams in rural communities have to play with smaller teams? There is a demographic shift, and we need to find out the evidence why. The other example I will give you is from Waringstown. At the weekend, children are breaking into one of the schools to play football. Again, we have to look behind that. There is a lack of provision in the area. Jo-Anne, you will be very familiar with that. All that is part of the evidence-gathering process.

I will give you two examples of the reasonable adjustments that Departments would have to make. Farm family health checks are one example. We would all like a doctor at every corner, particularly if we live in a rural community. That cannot happen, but we can bring the doctors and nurses to you. The farm family health checks take place in the heart of rural communities. People are examined in the privacy of their own home, given a full health check and maybe signposted on. I have run some farm family health checks, and, hand on heart, I think that we have saved lives in cases where people have been sent immediately to Craigavon Area Hospital.

Another example is rural transport, which is being cut back all the time. This is mitigated by the rural transport process, which means that community dwellers are no longer dependent on public transport. They can ring up, attend their hospital appointment or do their shopping and keep up social inclusion, at a very reasonable cost. Indeed, if you have a SmartPass it is free.

Mr Nicholas McCrickard (Local Rural Support Networks): I will conclude on behalf of the panel. As local rural support networks, we speak for our membership on policy and more strategic matters. We engage with our members daily, and we are all too acutely aware of the needs in rural areas. We trust that it gives the Committee some comfort that, in speaking to us, you are hearing the needs of many local communities. Local rural support networks have been successful to date in attracting rural dwellers to consultations, and we welcome co-planning and co-delivery for any future planned consultations to maximise participation of rural dwellers in the roll-out of the Rural Needs Bill.

The networks are keen to see the Rural Needs Bill pass to ensure that public authorities adequately consider the impact of policy on rural people. The Bill will enable a more robust approach by public authorities, requiring them to consider the impact of changes in rural areas, based on evidence, and to make reasonable adjustments to decisions where they are shown to have an adverse impact. If the amendments raised in this submission cannot be included in the Bill at this stage, we seek assurances that they can be added by using the subordinate legislation provided for in clause 1 of the Bill.

I think that DARD will have allies in the councils and in other places when using the Rural Needs Bill to pressure people who spend the money in rural areas to make those reasonable adjustments. We will all be working to translate the Bill into practice with our local councils and local council officers. We recognise the work of the Department and the Committee to date in getting the Bill to this stage and hope that, through the remaining stages, members can work together constructively to produce legislation that will have a concrete impact for rural people.

The Chairperson (Mr Irwin): Thank you very much for your presentation. The Bill is based on the premise of voluntary compliance, with DARD providing guidance, advice, information, doing research and compiling and planning information for an annual report. Do you think that there should be more than a premise of voluntary compliance? Should it have more teeth? Do you think that it will happen if it is voluntary?

Mr Conway: We certainly have some concerns about that. We feel, however, that the Bill places a duty on each Department and public authority. Until now, Departments and councils could decide to rural proof or not, as they saw fit. Having a duty included in the Rural Needs Bill certainly carries weight. We would like to see it have more weight but understand from your deliberations and presentations that legal terms could lead to further and too much administration. We do not want this to be cumbersome, weighed down by distractions, the ticking of boxes and all the rest of it. We want it to be seen as something that is genuine.

One of our recommendations was that, as well as it being laid before the Assembly, it should be verbally reported on annually, so that a statement or summary of some description is made and debated in the Assembly, and Ministers and Departments are held to account for what they did or did not do.

Mr McCrickard: It would be great if you could give the Bill more teeth. I heard from members' responses to earlier submissions that you are all keen to do that. I suppose that we are in a much better place than we used to be in that at least rural is on the table now. The rural White Paper and the implementation plan are there. This is another incremental step that DARD is taking, and your Committee is leading in giving it more teeth, as we put the squeeze on all the other Departments to ensure that they take account of rural needs. We would certainly love to see the Bill have a bit more teeth. If that were to have increased cost and all the rest, I am afraid that the politicians have to deal with that issue. However, we would support you in giving it more teeth.

Ms Conway: I also take on board comments from some on the Committee. Indeed, Brendan referred to community planning. Our new council infrastructure is looking clearly at consulting local people. The rural development programme has a developed strategy in most areas. Economic development plans are being consulted on at council level. So, an awful lot of engagement is happening already. I think that you are pushing at an open door in local councils being proactive and supporting their rural communities. So much of the North is rural, therefore the willingness is there.

Mr Anderson: Thank you for your presentation. You have pre-empted my question. I think that Brendan mentioned community involvement and the community planning process, which I was going to ask about.

Mr B McCann: Yes.

Mr Anderson: What engagement or consultation have you had, up to now, with, say, Armagh City, Banbridge and Craigavon Borough Council (ABC)?

Mr B McCann: Thank you, Sydney. It is quite light at the moment. I am liaising with Elaine Gillespie, who is in charge of community planning. Elaine is doing thematic research and stuff like that through NISRA and does not want to start community engagement until the new year. However, she is pleased that I, as a member of TADA and our team will be there to support her with public engagements. The ABC council is running behind the rest of the councils but it thinks that it will be fit to catch up.

Mr Anderson: You say "fit to catch up" but rural communities have been catching up for years. As a rural dweller, I have always considered that we seem to be the forgotten people. We are moving to this new dispensation with district councils. I do not want to see it as a catch-up situation; I want to see them take the lead here. I want to see them out with you and others really pushing for certain issues here. The loss of facilities over the years has been mentioned in the Committee many times. We cannot afford for that to happen; in fact, we should be looking for more facilities.

Under the Bill, councils and all will have to step up to the mark in community planning and engage with rural people.

Are you happy with the engagement that you are having with rural people on what they are looking for and how this can be brought forward?

Mr B McCann: I am quite happy. I have worked in community planning and in other areas such as in Newry, Mourne and Down District Council, so I have seen examples of good practice. The community engagement that I am involved in is just my day-to-day work. I am a rural dweller and I know what the rural community needs. In future, it will be a multifaceted approach, with the district council leading community planning. They have to lead and we will follow, but we will be with them all the way and pushing them all the way. Community planning, in conjunction with the rural development programme, can deliver for the rural community.

Mr McCrickard: I work across Ards and North Down Borough Council and Newry, Mourne and Down District Council. There are differences across councils in the level of consultation on community planning. Ards and North Down Borough Council has already had hundreds of inputs. The council has a live questionnaire in electronic format and hard copies in every shop and library. Newry, Mourne and Down District Council is doing similar things. There is a workshop this Friday in the Mournes district electoral area on how to engage with the community on rural isolation and rural transport. The council picked two themes and is hitting those in that one district electoral area. Mixtures of things are happening all over the country and community planning is generally leading on that. I think that some councils are just taking their time to make sure they have their ducks lined up before they hit them but others are ahead of it.

Mr Anderson: Could there not be a more coordinated approach? Are you telling me that there may be some council areas ahead of others?

Mr McCrickard: There is a mixture across the country, absolutely.

Mr Anderson: Why is that? Why can we not have a coordinated approach? We are all fighting for the one objective here, which is for the rural community. Maybe lessons can be learned, and if one council area is ahead of another, we should be picking up on that. I do hope that ABC is catching up; I am a champion for that area.

Mr B McCann: Honestly, I am doing my best, Sydney. I am in regular contact with the council. I want that to happen and I want to be involved in it.

Mr Byrne: I welcome the presentation and your submission. Mary T, you outlined the range of activities that the rural community networks have been involved in. Has anyone from your organisation or the Rural Development Council quantified the resources that have been used over recent times? It is going to be crucial that there is some sort of computation made of all those partnerships and voluntary and community development groups that have been involved in delivering our rural services and have developed an infrastructure in an almost haphazard way. For example, we have had day-care centres established in Dromore, Gortin and elsewhere. We have an awful lot of preschool provision being done by voluntary and community groups. Eskragh is another example. We have at least 12 community transport partnerships. Do I take it that there is apprehension about whether they can continue if we have this Bill that is being advanced without proper research into the resourcing requirements going forward?

Ms Conway: I cannot comment on the amount of research that has been done. All we can comment on is the infrastructure that we are working in daily and represent. You referred to other partners. The briefing paper that we circulated will show you the rural community development infrastructure where we, as the local rural support networks, deliver on the rural community development support service contract.

You referred to the rural community network and the Rural Development Council in looking at things like the roll-out of the rural development programme and even looking at the Rural Needs Bill. We work and consult with our partners there. Likewise, with service delivery, we always try to support rural areas in any of their challenges. You referred to the removal of day-care services, and that is in the written submission; we did not dwell on it. In the submission, we look at the effect that the removal of day-care services has on rural people. That removal is of huge detriment to the rural community.

As local support networks, all we can do is support the community sector and the voluntary sector in our area; it is not about filling gaps that Departments are missing. The voluntary and community sector is certainly very strong in Fermanagh and Omagh and all our other areas, but the issue is not about that sector plugging gaps; it is about trying to make Departments, councils and arm's-length bodies more accountable for the decisions they make and consider the impact that they have on rural dwellers. That is where the Rural Needs Bill will come in.

Mr McCrickard: Joe, your question about resources is an excellent one. We know accurately how much DARD is spending in rural areas across Northern Ireland, but we do not know how much the other Departments are spending in rural areas and how much they should be spending to make it equitable. That is the sort of thing the Bill could challenge and demand answers to. If it has any teeth, surely it should be able to at least ask those questions. What are the bus fleets of education boards and health trusts doing in rural areas that, with a little adjustment, could help out rural dwellers? That is the sort of question that we could use the Bill to ask to pressure other Departments.

Ms Conway: You referred to partnerships, Joe. Brendan named the farm families health checks programme, which is supported by the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development through the TRPSI programme and has been funded in conjunction with the Public Health Agency. That has been led by the Northern Trust and rolled out across the North of Ireland. You have your health checks van going to marts or community events, and local people are able to go in and avail themselves of its services. It is targeted primarily at farmers, who are reluctant to get their health looked at because they are very busy people and the opening hours of GP surgeries do not suit them. That is about delivering an effective partnership. We have identified a need, which comes from farmers not going to get their health checked. To supplement and meet that need, this partnership process has been organised and is working very well under the TRPSI programme.

The Chairperson (Mr Irwin): Before I move on to Jo-Anne, members are drifting away from the Bill. I have given a wee bit of latitude but, as you all know, we are under pressure for time.

Mrs Dobson: Thank you for your presentation. Brendan, you referred to Waringstown: I declare an interest as it is my home village, as you know. The lack of provision there is a disgrace, and addressing that is something that I have been pushing for for many years. It is something that needs to be addressed by the Armagh City, Banbridge and Craigavon Borough Council, as Sydney said, as soon as possible.

You spoke about the farm families health checks helping to save lives, which it has done. It has been invaluable in local communities. You are quite right that farmers are very reluctant to come forward, and the fact that you have the vans in marts gives them a chance of making their opinions known.

You were listening to the last evidence session, and I saw a few nods at my questions to the Department on education. What I did not say to the Department, but I would like your opinion on this, was that the University of Ulster found that the closure of the 76 smaller post-primary schools would save only 0·9% of the entire school budget because extra costs from moving pupils would need to be met. I do not need to tell you that small rural schools are the lifeblood of our rural communities.

I reiterate the point that the Bill needs teeth. It needs enough teeth to make the Department of Education think about the consequences of their actions. Do you agree with those comments with regard to rural schools?

Mr McCrickard: I agree with the comments absolutely. Obviously, there are other issues around rural schools, sharing education, trying to link our communities better and make better use of resources. The Bill should be able to apply pressure and allow us all to ask the questions of the Department of Education and all of the governing bodies of schools before they take those decisions. You are absolutely right: they are tearing the heart out of some rural communities when a wee school goes. Nothing galvanises a community around an issue more than the local school, but often they do not have any legislation to turn to in order to challenge those decisions.

Mrs Dobson: That is astonishing — 0·9% of the school budget for the 76 schools. Those are stark, scary facts. I asked about Scotland: there is a presumption against closure and authorities have legal requirements to look at the impact of the closure. Do you feel it would strengthen the Bill if we had such a provision here in Northern Ireland?

Mr McCrickard: I do not know how that could be fitted into the Bill, but it sounds like a great presumption to have. Schools are clearly one of the most important parts of rural communities, so you would have our support on that approach.

Mrs Dobson: Finally, touching on previous comments, the new planning roles for the new councils should have a much greater role in planning for the future for rural communities. I am sure you would all be in agreement with that as well. The onus is there to protect rural communities.

Mr McCrickard: Absolutely.

Ms Griffin: It would be a great mechanism.

Mr Milne: I just want to thank you for coming up here today to take time out to assist us in strengthening the Bill in whatever way we can. I am a rural dweller myself, and I think there is an absolute need for the Bill that is with us. What would do you think would be a major benefit for your organisation with the Bill coming into being to help or make your workload less? The alternative wording that you have presented today for some parts of the Bill is very interesting to me. I think it will take some time to debate among ourselves here in the Committee and, I am sure, in the Chamber. Maybe you could tell us how you see this assisting you as an organisation.

Ms Conway: We work with rural community groups, so we talk to and are in contact day and daily with rural people. They are telling us about the threat and closure of things like daycare and small schools. Those are things that are facing rural people every day — losing services. The Rural Needs Bill would help to overcome that because it would place a duty on Departments, public authorities and, hopefully, arm's-length bodies to take account of and fully think out how it might affect the rural area. There are several policies. The rural support networks work quite closely with our groups and try to get responses into policy consultations as they come out, so we already engage with Departments on various decisions that they make, but we see this as more accountable and transparent. I heard those words being used earlier. In addition to it being laid before the Assembly, if we could see it being discussed there as well, we think that would carry more weight. The decision-makers would have to be held to account for the decisions that they make.

I will just refer to the rural schools. I come from a rural area, and we lost our school because we did not have the numbers. It would be dangerous to go into the territory of thinking that every small rural school will be protected under the Rural Needs Bill. You have to think of the economies of scale and all the rest of it. I would be the last one to say we should shut a rural school but, in fairness, you have to look at all of the factors involved in that area.

The Chairperson (Mr Irwin): For instance, what were the numbers in the rural school you were talking about? What was the number of pupils down to?

Mr Conway: It went down to 12.

The Chairperson (Mr Irwin): That is the difficulty.

Mr Milne: I have just one —

The Chairperson (Mr Irwin): We are very pushed for time.

Mr Milne: You gave the example of transport, where buses are sitting in bus shelters all day and are not being used for educational purposes or whatever. That is one of the major points that we could iron out with the Bill.

Mr McCrickard: In the Ards peninsula, which is an area that Kieran knows and where we work closely, there is a road map for the community groups. With North Down and Ards coming together, it will be very urban-focused, and this will give rural groups a chance to come back.

The Chairperson (Mr Irwin): Declan, do you have anything to add, quickly? The session is almost over because there is a vote in the House.

Mr McAleer: On the settlement hierarchy that was referred to, NISRA uses a population of 5,000 to define an area as "urban". Are you happy enough with that, or are there situations that have not been looked at? For example, is there a service in an urban area that provides for the rural population? Are there any examples of that? [Interruption.]

The Chairperson (Mr Irwin): Can we get a written response to that? We are under pressure because there is a Division in the House.

Ms Griffin: Yes.

The Chairperson (Mr Irwin): Thank you very much for your presentation. We are sorry for rushing you at the last minute, but the pressure is on. Thank you very much.