Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Chairperson (Dr Archibald): From the Department for the Economy, I welcome, via StarLeaf, Shane Murphy, the head of the EU exit preparation and transition group, and Alan Ramsey from the EU exit preparation and transition group. Were we expecting Giulia Ní Dhulchaointigh from the Department as well?

The Committee Clerk: Giulia was there. She has disappeared. I am not sure why.

The Chairperson (Dr Archibald): OK. I will hand over to you first, Shane. If Giulia comes back, we can add her in to the spotlight.

Mr Shane Murphy (Department for the Economy): Thank you, Chair. Giulia is having some internet issues, and she is frantically trying to get back into the session. We may have to be patient with her; it is outside her control.

If the Chair and the Committee are content, I will not go through the presentation that we sent to you, but I would not mind touching on a few of the top-line messages, if that would be OK. Some of those top-line messages include the point that the changes following Brexit are probably becoming more observable across the UK and the EU. It is obviously still early days and more things will probably pan out. Some areas of business and the economy have been adjusting better than others, and we still see a range of issues where frustration or what you might call "gaps" continue to exist. Those might be with buying from GB, and there are many reports of issues about GB suppliers and so forth. There are also issues and gaps with quotas and safeguarding measures, and at-risk goods are still a frustration. Many of those sorts of things are on the agenda for the programme of work between the UK Government and the EU, but some important ones, such as unfettered access to GB, are not part of that and are within the remit of the UK Government.

In the grand scheme of things, it is early days, but there is emerging evidence of the impact of EU exit and the particular arrangements that fell out of that in Northern Ireland, GB and the EU. There are not yet any official statistics for trade between Northern Ireland and GB, but survey evidence indicates that some difficulties are being experienced by a range of businesses, particularly in buying from GB. We will probably touch on that quite a bit. One of the most common issues that we hear about is how ready GB suppliers were and that there was a big eleventh-hour element to the nature of it all in the run-up to January.

The first couple of months of the year indicate that there have been material increases in exports from Northern Ireland to the Republic. That is a bit of a contrast to the GB-EU and GB-ROI trade positions. As I caveated, it is important to bear in mind that it is still early days. Trade figures can be volatile, but that will probably come as no surprise to any of you. There is lots of evidence out there to suggest that, when you put trade frictions in place, they have consequences for levels of trade. The contrasting experiences in the very early part of 2021 would seem to be in tune with that.

Many of the issues that are on the go, if not all of them, are in the slide pack that we sent to the Committee. Some businesses and sectors face more significant issues and challenges with the changes, and they have been painful for some. I mentioned that a common complaint is frustration with GB suppliers, with how au fait they are with the system and, maybe, with their willingness to get involved in using the system. We had forecast that the administrative burden would come to the fore, particularly as supplementary declarations kicked in, in or around February or March.

Manufacturing businesses face particular issues, and they do not have the same scope to use the UK trader scheme for goods that input into manufacturing processes. Access to quotas, tariff rate quotas (TRQs) and safeguarding measures also tend to fall more on the manufacturing side of things. Those are quite complex issues, and we know that some of them are part of the work programme and discussions between the EU and the UK.

Aluminium is a difficult area as there has been a disjoint with the EU policy on Chinese aluminium since the end of the transition period. The UK has chosen not to carry over those safeguarding measures, which puts GB businesses that are buying aluminium in a different position to those in Northern Ireland.

There are also things on the horizon that will impact. Obviously, there are the discussions on the road map or the work programme — whatever you want to call it — on which the UK and the EU will work. We are all keen to see the outcome of those discussions.

Also worthy of note, although it does not get as much attention, is the fact that the UK has delayed the implementation of border controls for imports to GB. Alongside that, the implementation of phase 2 of unfettered access is also likely to be delayed. We are all keen to see the detail of that in good time so that businesses can be prepared or reassured. That will be a big area of interest to all of us in Northern Ireland because GB is such a big market for many of our businesses.

Another deadline that probably does not get the attention that it deserves is the settled status deadline of the end of June. We have a lot of people in Northern Ireland whose status we would probably want to have clarified and sorted out for the future.

I touched on some of the issues, and I appreciate that time is short. Between this evidence session and the previous session, the Minister published the 10X vision last week. Trade and investment will be a big part of achieving that vision in the future.

Thank you. I will hand back to the Chair and we can take any questions.

The Chairperson (Dr Archibald): Thanks very much, Shane. I have a number of questions. I will rattle through them as quickly as possible so that we can bring in other members. There is still a lot of what you could call "political background noise" on issues around the protocol. I know that David Frost was in front of the NI Affairs Committee yesterday. From his commentary, you could be forgiven for thinking that his Government had not negotiated the protocol just a few months ago.

On the specific issue of grace periods — I appreciate that some of it will be DAERA's responsibility — what progress has been made in moving those forward in line with current deadlines?

Has the preparedness or lack of preparedness of British businesses improved over the past number of months as the new arrangements have become more widely known?

I have a couple of other questions about how the new trading arrangements are impacting here, but maybe you will take those questions first.

Mr Murphy: A lot of the grace periods and those that attract the most attention are very much in the DAERA space, albeit it is probably the DEFRA space, in that the negotiations are between the UK and the EU. We have to remember that: those things are not necessarily deliverable by DAERA.

I might bring Giulia in here. There are other grace periods in areas such as medical products that draw a lot of attention. While some of those might seem further away, they are no less pressing. Those are of significant interest to us all

our Department of Health, as with DAERA, the UK Government are taking the lead on those.

One grace period that has a particular interest for us is in or around parcels. I will ask Giulia to say a few words about that.

Ms Giulia Ní Dhulchaointigh (Department for the Economy): Thanks, Shane. What concerns us about grace periods in general is the need for businesses to be very clear about what they need to do so that it is easy for them to do what they need to do and that their legal position is clear. We cannot really comment on the things that are in the DAERA space. The sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) issues are very complex. I am reluctant to comment on that as I am not over the detail.

As Shane mentioned, grace periods are in place for medicines and parcels. The UK Government have signalled that the grace period for business to business parcels should end in October. We would really like businesses to be given guidance as soon as possible. If the past few months have taught us anything, it is that, if any changes need to be made to what businesses need to do, they need time to look at what they are required to do and implement the necessary admin. We would like to see guidance on the business to business parcels grace period as quickly as possible.

The Department of Health leads on medicines, and I know that there are a lot of ongoing discussions on that. That is another complex area on which we need a good resolution. However, the detail of that is for the Department of Health to cover.

Mr Murphy: We think that there is still more work to be done on business preparedness in GB. I think that that would be fair, Giulia.

Ms Ní Dhulchaointigh: Yes. I forget the exact figures, but we know from the HMRC survey of businesses that nearly every business here has heard about the Trader Support Service (TSS) and are registered for it if they need it. In GB, those figures are much lower. There simply is not the awareness that we would like to see there. There are a lot of different things in the mix, such as pressures that GB businesses face with trade with the EU, but we definitely feel that there is a need for greater communication to those businesses.

We have tried to do what we can, but it is very hard for us to reach GB businesses. Businesses tell me that they are trying to do what they can and are trying to take their suppliers by the hand and show them what to do, but, equally, that is quite labour-intensive. There is still a lot to be done.

The Chairperson (Dr Archibald): Thanks for that. You will be aware that we had a meeting with TSS and HMRC to tease out some of the issues and get an understanding of the uptake of the services and all the other issues around that. We can pick up on that as well.

Finally, before I bring other members in, the slides show the reported Central Statistics Office (CSO) figures on North/South and South/North trade. There have been significant increases there as businesses realigned their supply chains. We also saw some of that coming through from responses to surveys to the likes of Manufacturing NI. What is the Department doing to support business to realign when they want to do that?

You mentioned the 10X plan, and there is also an economic recovery action plan. There is no great focus in either of those plans on any type of economic strategy that would take advantage of the potential opportunities under the protocol and the ability to sell into the EU and British markets. What work is being undertaken on that in the Department and in agencies such as Invest NI and InterTrade? Can you give us a bit of an outline of that?

Mr Murphy: I will take your second question first. In the 10X vision, there is a big focus on innovation. All of us in the Department recognise that the benefits of innovation require that innovation be commercialised and commercial benefits scaled up. In a market the size of Northern Ireland, we are unlikely to enjoy the full benefits or potential of innovation without a lot of export activity of that innovation. That is where the trade and exports side comes in. The stronger exports offer that we have, the more we can scale up the benefits of that innovation and use it as a means of trading, whether in GB, the EU or around the world. That is where we can multiply the benefits of that innovation. We will probably never make the most of that innovation if all that we ever do is to sell the product or innovation within a market the size of Northern Ireland. All the advantages that we have in trade will be useful in that.

Another element, which I am not sure that many have picked up from the latest release of the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency's (NISRA) 'Northern Ireland Broad Economy Sales and Exports Statistics', is that exports are well distributed across Northern Ireland. At different times, there is a focus on the extent to which economic activity is centred in and around Belfast. Exports are one thing that are not nearly so centred on Belfast. Multiplying the benefits from exporting is also a good way to distribute benefits across Northern Ireland. We see trade and investment playing a big role not only in making 10X happen but in making it happen on the scale that 10X has as an ambition. We hope to say more in the coming weeks and months about how we would take the themes and sentiments of 10X and adopt them in a trade and investment strategy or plan.

Your first question was on exports to and trade with the Republic of Ireland. Again, I have to give the caveat that trade figures can be volatile, and there are only a couple of months' trade figures here. That said, in those first few months of the year, there has been a contrast between, for example, the Northern Ireland-ROI experience and the GB-EU experience or the GB-ROI experience. That may well pan out. In all the literature, it is expected that, if frictions emerge, there will be consequences for trade. I do not know whether Giulia wants to say any more on that first subject.

Ms Ní Dhulchaointigh: Yes. As you know, InterTradeIreland has a very strong programme of work to encourage and facilitate North/South trade. The supply chain issues may have increased the interest in that. You are right that a lot of businesses will think, "Can I get this product elsewhere?", if the admin burden of sourcing it from GB or wherever is increased. From speaking to businesses, I know that sometimes they genuinely cannot do that. Sometimes, there is no supplier on the island of Ireland. For some products, it may be relatively easy to switch. For other products, there is bit more involved. There may be regulatory standards through which your suppliers have had to go that mean that you cannot easily move to somebody else. There might not be another supplier within easy reach. There is definitely increased interest in the North/South supply chain and supply chains generally and in ensuring that people are sourcing goods at the best price that they can. There are also ongoing difficulties in areas where supply chains cannot be re-engineered so quickly. It is a little bit complex.

The Chairperson (Dr Archibald): Thanks for that. I will pick up on your final point: is that being supported through Invest or TSS? What mechanisms are there to support businesses that are having difficulties with supply chain issues that cannot easily be reoriented?

Ms Ní Dhulchaointigh: There are supports from InterTrade. Invest NI has a range of supply chain supports as well. Supply chain issues can be about particular components. It is hard to generalise. The Department, Invest and InterTrade are looking at the issues to see what can be done. In the big picture, where you see an increased cost to businesses, you worry about our long-term competitiveness if those costs remain stable. Shane, do you want to say more?

Mr Murphy: As Giulia said, supply chain issues are more solvable when there are more alternatives. As I have said previously, the interaction between the withdrawal agreement and the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) has a particular outcome for distribution businesses. Many distribution businesses had hubs in GB that often served GB and Ireland. Companies and wholesalers in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland rang those hubs for their supplies. The combination of Brexit and the TCA has made it a lot more complicated to ship components from continental Europe to a distribution hub somewhere in the centre of England before moving those products out. That has now become a lot more complicated. It may be that those distribution hubs will have to change and move in the future. Whatever we do in Northern Ireland, we will be at the end of that, not in the middle of making it happen. It will take a while to pan out. We have already heard of distributors looking at dual supply routes. There are big issues here. A lot are upstream of Northern Ireland and not necessarily within the control of Northern Ireland companies.

The Chairperson (Dr Archibald): Thanks for that.

Ms McLaughlin: Good morning, and thank you for the briefing. I want to reflect on a couple of things that have already been raised and to tease them out a bit more. Shane, the Chair questioned you on how the Department is preparing for assessing the opportunities as a result of the protocol. I also feel that the strategies being launched by the Department may not reflect the available opportunities. A recent quarterly review from the Northern Ireland Chamber of Commerce and Industry reported that 60% of businesses believe that Northern Ireland's status, post EU exit, presents growth areas for their region, and 47% believe that it will represent growth for their particular businesses. It is incumbent on the Department to maximise as much research and opportunity as it can to help to support businesses to realise that opportunity. I feel that that is missing. The Department has a key role to play in that. I appreciate your saying that innovation needs to be commercialised, so export companies will do that. Can you tell us a bit more about that, Shane?

Mr Murphy: Yes, I will start off on that. The 10X vision very much focused on the innovation element as the driver of growth. What is implied, but probably not spat out, in 10X is that trade is needed to maximise the great work on innovation, because Northern Ireland is just too small to maximise that potential. We will put out a piece of work that illustrates how we aim to do that and how we will set out our priorities to do that. Trade and investment will be crucial because, if we end up being very innovative but being innovative only within Northern Ireland, we will never prosper, and we will never maximise the potential of that innovation. Therefore, trade and investment are the means to multiply the benefits of that initial focus on innovation. As I said, unlike other economic indicators, the exports indicator is well distributed across Northern Ireland. Many in society and on the Committee would like to see a focus on distributing benefits across Northern Ireland, and exporting appears to be one way of doing that.

As I have said to the Committee before, we have in the pipeline research that is looking at our future economic strengths, weaknesses and opportunities. It will look at the foreign direct investment (FDI) situation across the world, the areas of the world that we compete with and, ultimately, the sort of sectors that we should compete for given our strengths and offers. It will look at the countries that we are competing against and at which countries and sectors we should put client executives from Invest NI on a plane to visit. That research will influence and drive a big part of the trade and investment action plan or strategy.

There will probably be questions about foreign direct investment and 10X. Should we become more selective on that front by focusing on things in 10X in which we can be world class, rather than trying to be good at everything in the world? If we are to focus on everything that we do, are we to focus on that area as well? Alan, is there anything that you want to row in on?

Mr Alan Ramsey (Department for the Economy): No, Shane, that was pretty good coverage. The key points are how we use trade and investment, particularly trade and exports, to, as Shane describes it, multiply the benefits that we hope to gain though 10X and innovation, and to do so in such a way that those benefits are distributed quite equally across Northern Ireland. I do not want to go back over that, Sinead, but I want to give you some comfort that we certainly are thinking about those issues. We are starting to flesh out what that strategy will look like. Initially, we are agreeing our principles and priorities for trade and investment and making sure that those are well locked in with the 10X strategy. I do not have much more detail than Shane, but I hope that I can give you some comfort. We will certainly come back to the Committee and share more information as we develop that over the next few weeks.

Ms McLaughlin: Thank you very much for that, Alan. I look forward to receiving the research document because that will also influence how we think. I will give you a little insight: my team had a meeting with the UK's TSS on areas where some of my constituents were having problems. There appears to be a real problem with distributors. It is not necessarily that there are blockages, but some have, for no particular reason, chosen not to carry goods. There are no barriers, and access is open to them. For example, I had meetings with podiatrists, who said that their suppliers could not distribute blades or cotton wool because of particular codes. Although there are no trade barriers for any of those articles at the moment, distributors refuse to carry them. TSS is working on that from the supply side, on behalf of the companies. However, there seems to be a real issue with GB companies that have chosen not to supply or deliver as opposed to being blocked from doing so. What can the Department do in those circumstances?

Mr Murphy: I raised the issue of distributors earlier, as I did at the previous session with the Committee. There has not been much focus on that. To be honest, a real adjustment is coming to distribution networks. As I have tried to illustrate, and maybe we can say a bit more on this, historically, in many distribution networks in GB, goods from around the world, including from many places in Europe, have arrived at a regional hub in GB — in this context, "regional" means a region of Europe — before being moved on to local distribution hubs. Those sorts of systems have grown up and been in place for years, and it was efficient to operate in that way. However, the interaction with the withdrawal agreement and the TCA has introduced many new complications for those distribution networks. I am sure that many members have heard the Percy Pig story. Marks & Spencer's Percy Pigs come from Germany into some sort of distribution centre for Marks & Spencer in England. Then, when they are set to go to stores in the Republic of Ireland, they hit the "rules of origin" issue: because no further processing of any note has been done in England, they are not tariff-free.

These are all extra complications. As a result, it is not the same as before for distribution. It is really rather different, and it is entirely plausible that the distribution networks that are upstream of us — those that sit in the centre of GB — may have to change or be duplicated. These are complicated issues. Those networks are upstream, and we are at the end of the line, not in the middle. I go back to the point that I suspect that some of those frustrations will link back to distributors who are wondering whether the new era is worth the hassle for them and whether they need to set up something different.

The topic of distributors does not get a lot of attention, but, for me, it is rather important. Giulia, do want to say anything more about that?

Ms Ní Dhulchaointigh: We see the difficulties from our end. However, I know, from the Whitehall meetings and more general business meetings that I sit in on, that distribution and wholesaling in GB have had serious issues as a result of the TCA. GB was a big distributor for the whole of the EU, and the difficulties that we have seen are mirrored elsewhere.

As Shane said, it is a big issue. Change is coming, and it is hard to predict how individual distributors will react to that. Some will probably downsize their business; others will probably open warehouses elsewhere, depending on where their customer base is. It is definitely an issue, and it is one that is working its way through. It is very difficult to know what the Government should or could do about it at the moment.

Ms McLaughlin: OK, thank you very much

Mr Dickson: This has been a useful briefing for us. You are right: there is a lot of politics in this. However, there are also the practical outworkings of where we are. Has anybody segregated what might be described as the GB/EU issues from the GB/EU/NI issues? We often lose sight of the fact that many of the EU import problems that Northern Ireland faces are identical to those faced in England, Scotland or Wales, with additional knock-on problems for Northern Ireland. If the Department, or someone else, could set out in simple form the barriers to trade that are nothing to do with Northern Ireland but solely to do with the United Kingdom Government's Brexit arrangements with the EU, that might be useful.

The second area that I want to ask you about relates to the UK's Trader Support Service. We have heard this discussed before. It is excellent that Northern Ireland businesses have picked up widely on the scheme. Good on the Department for identifying that it is there and all the things that are achievable for businesses. The concern is that it has not been picked up by traders across the UK. Is there not a similar scheme in the rest of the UK for those who wish to trade with the EU? Are there not trusted trader schemes or trading scheme initiatives for businesses? Surely businesses that trade into France, Germany, Italy and Spain face many of the barriers that we face in Northern Ireland. I cannot imagine that they are not taking up that advice. Could it not be a simple case of, when they take up that advice, somebody tagging on a little line saying that there is a similar scheme in Northern Ireland?

Finally, one possible solution to the whole issue struck me when somebody mentioned Percy Pigs. It is a solution that is being pushed very hard for medicines, though I appreciate that we are not the Health Committee. This solution was used when we were in the EU and has been used since we left. Goods manufactured in the EU or the UK to identical standards nevertheless have to stop midstream. The solution that many drug companies have come up with, and it has been accepted by the Government, is this: when items come into the United Kingdom, simply switch off the barcode. Many medicines come from the EU, where they are manufactured, and then go to distribution bases in the UK, but they are consumed by patients of the health service in the Republic of Ireland. The point at which the medicines leave the United Kingdom to go to the Republic of Ireland is where this solution is being tested. The methodology is simple: switch the barcode off so that a product cannot be used in the UK; switch the barcode on when the product arrives in the Republic of Ireland so that it can be used there. Why on earth can a simple solution like that not be used for many products across the EU and for trading between the EU, GB and Northern Ireland?

Mr Murphy: OK, there are three questions there, and I might get Giulia to think about the last one. Of course, the Department of Health leads on medicines, so it will know more of the detail than we do.

Mr Dickson: It was only an example of a solution.

Mr Murphy: The sentiment behind the first question is, I think, that of trying to understand which outworking drives which types of consequences, and that can be done. However, in some of the things that we are talking about, particularly distribution and so forth, the interaction between the Trade and Cooperation Agreement and the Northern Ireland protocol means that both are in play. I am not sure that the issues can always be separated and pinned down to a single source. Brexit was always expected to be complicated, and it certainly has ended up being complicated. I am not certain that we can trace lots of issues back to a single source.

Secondly, unless Giulia can put me right, there is, as yet, no equivalent of TSS for GB businesses that sell into the EU. That said, there are general schemes, such as a trusted trader-type scheme, which affords certain privileges above the norms when undertaking trade activity, but that is not the same as the TSS.

Giulia, do you want to say any more about that before we go on to the third point about medicines being an example of a way to overcoming issues?

Ms Ní Dhulchaointigh: Shane is right on TSS. I add to that the movement assistance scheme for SPS goods. Some of the businesses that have not heard of the supports available in GB are surprising, in that they are businesses of some size. There is clearly a communications gap, and it has proven to be a difficult one, for us in particular.

The medicines system that you describe is from the falsified medicines directive. I see your point about knowing where the goods have ended up. You see similar systems for excise goods. That is generally where we see —.

Mr Dickson: Yes. Security coding and barcoding. The electronics are all there. It is a matter of getting the appropriate and secure systems in place.

Ms Ní Dhulchaointigh: Yes. From memory, some of those issues were raised as part of a group of alternative arrangements that was looked at. It is very difficult to apply those to all goods, whereas systems are in place to deal with some goods that are controlled for various reasons —.

Mr Dickson: Name a good that does not have some sort of barcoding or tracking code on it.

Ms Ní Dhulchaointigh: I do not know. A piece of aluminium.

Mr Murphy: Giulia is putting across the point that medicines are a regulated environment. Medicines have a particular supply chain. When they enter a country, they will enter the health system and end up being prescribed to a person. There is comfort in the regulation of the end use. A packet of cigarettes may have a barcode, but there is not the same regulation of where that packet ends up. Is that part of the point, Giulia?

Mr Dickson: If you just add a little more information to the barcode, you can embed in it everything from origin to the name of the person who made it. It is simple.

Ms Ní Dhulchaointigh: That may be. If that were to be introduced, it would be a customs solution.

Mr Dickson: It is.

Ms Ní Dhulchaointigh: Yes. It would probably be for HMRC to implement. A system of switching off barcodes would probably have to be introduced on a wider scale than just in Northern Ireland.

Mr Dickson: I will not charge you for the idea. You are OK. Go ahead.

Mr Murphy: We understand the idea and the concept. My cigarettes example is probably one that would require a UK/EU negotiation. I would not be surprised if the EU had some thoughts about the risk to the single market and the risk of goods being moved, potentially illegally, if there is not the same sort of control. We are not saying that there is no merit in such an idea and such an approach, but an idea having merit does not necessarily mean that it would meet the threshold of the negotiating stance of the EU or that of the UK Government.

Mr Dickson: It does not remove the requirement to sample, for example, at the port of Larne, but it adds an extra line of surety to the whole process, and it probably allows larger quantities to be shipped, rather than their having to be stopped and checked. It is part of the armoury or way of doing it.

Mr Murphy: Ultimately, it may be. By the sound of it, these concepts should be known about within UK Government and EU circles, and, ultimately, it is about whether people in those circles pick up those ideas, run with them and make them work in a way that is acceptable to both parties.

Mr Dickson: I was trying to take the politics out of it and get down to the practicalities.

Mr O'Dowd: My first question is about the distribution centres. Understandably, there has been quite a bit of discussion about distribution, and that problem will increase if certain issues are not resolved or if changes in supply networks are not enacted. I do not want to put words into people's mouths, but there is a suggestion that some distribution centres in Britain may need to be moved. Can they be moved to here? What potential is there for economic growth if such distribution centres are moved here?

Mr Murphy: Obviously, the owners of those distribution centres will have to make choices about moving to a location that best suits their situation. Yes, there may be opportunities. For example, Northern Ireland might be the one place where the old model of distribution might still work, but, on the other hand, Northern Ireland, as far as remoteness within Europe goes, is at the edge, so cost and distribution are obvious factors. I do not know what the conclusion in that sort of trade-off would be for a distributor in England, for example. A move to a location that might get over some of the distribution issues may come with the consequence of the location being somewhat more remote.

Mr O'Dowd: Yes, of course, each business will have to make its own calculations, but it appears that it is a choice between being able to distribute into Europe or not. I imagine that a number of businesses, depending on the scale of the operation — not many businesses — will have to do the equation.

Shane, you said that the deadline for the EU settlement scheme is next month.

I, as I am sure are others, am deeply concerned, because we face the prospect of EU workers — they are our neighbours, our children's classmates and families — being denied EU settlement, and if they have not applied or there are problems with their application, some of them may be asked to leave. Have you an estimate of the number of our neighbours and fellow workers that the scheme will impact? What else can be done to ensure that as many people as possible apply for it? What assistance is being given to businesses for the extra costs of the scheme?

Mr Murphy: I may have to defer to Giulia on your latter point about assistance. The deadline for applications to the EU settlement scheme is 30 June. As we understand it, the latest figures published by the Home Office suggest that 88,600 Northern Ireland-based applications to the scheme were made by the end of April. That figure was up by a couple of thousand or so on the previous month's applications. However, there is no doubt that there is a risk that it will not cover everyone, because some people maybe did not get round to applying, maybe did not know about it or did not think that it was important. The Executive Office (TEO) has been leading on the scheme, and it has been putting in place the communications, which you have probably seen. Further communications activity is being planned for the next few weeks until 30 June in order to try to maximise awareness and encourage our neighbours to put their status in the country on a more sure footing.

Giulia, have you anything to add about business on that point?

Ms Ní Dhulchaointigh: We have done a lot of communication with the business sectors that are likely to employ a lot of EEA migrants. That has been ongoing for a good while. From talking to various people, I know that one of the big issues is getting to those who are hard to reach, so, that could be people who are not particularly au fait with doing things online. That population is a real worry. We will not know whether that is a problem or how big the problem is until a little bit later on. One of the issues is that there has been a bit of population change due to COVID restrictions, furlough and people returning to be with family during the lockdowns. The population figures are difficult, and that makes it hard to know whether there is a big problem. Have I missed anything, Alan?

Mr Ramsey: Yes. To follow up on John's concern, I am aware that DWP is working with Treasury and HMRC on the details of a programme for post-30 June for vulnerable EEA citizens and those who miss the deadline. Unfortunately, as Shane said, TEO lead on the matter. I am not entirely clear on the details of the programme, but they are thinking about the post-grace period arrangements. I imagine that that will be a short-term programme and that the focus should still be on readiness and getting the final applicants through the system.

Mr O'Dowd: Surely there is an onus on the Department for the Economy to support local businesses. As Giulia said, those who are less au fait with the online system or are unaware of the need to make the application will be workers in the agri-food industry and manufacturing. In my constituency, many agri-food businesses rely on EEA workers and workers from other states. My experience of the Home Office and DWP is that they are about how to put workers out, not how to bring them in. There is an onus on the Department for the Economy to support our local businesses and, indeed, those EU workers who have kept the economy running over many years. I encourage the Department to take a role in that as well.

Mr Murphy: As Giulia said, we have been endeavouring to target areas where the employment of migrant workers is well known or clustered. Obviously, businesses have an incentive to hang on to their staff. As you say, some of our businesses rely particularly on migrant workers and people who are here and have an interest in getting their status regularised. That is something that we can take away and think about and consider whether there is more potential in that from the employer side. Ultimately, those requirements would have to be exercised by individuals themselves.

Mr O'Dowd: Finally, Shane, I know that you do not mean any offence by the term "migrant worker"— that is not your intention — but I do not like the term. I have to say that I do not like the term "migrant worker". Up until six months ago, those people were fellow EU citizens — in fact, I am still an EU citizen — who had been working and living beside us and contributing to our economy for a number of decades. I understand that you do not mean any offence, and that it is a term that is used, but I honestly do not like it.

Mr Murphy: I understand that. It is a term that is commonplace in this space, but not everyone is comfortable with it, and I appreciate that.

The Chairperson (Dr Archibald): Thanks, John. Following on from that, there is a wee bit less awareness about frontier workers. Is the Department doing any work with TEO or InterTradeIreland to publicise that a bit more? There is not the same deadline; I think that you can still apply beyond 1 July, but, if you are here, you are supposed to have applied by that date.

Mr Murphy: Unless Alan knows the detail on frontier workers, we might have to come back to you on that. Alan, have you anything in particular on frontier workers? I presume that those frontier workers would be folks coming from down South who would not be crossing on the basis of common travel area (CTA) rights. We might have to come back on that.

Mr Ramsey: Yes. I am happy to do so. I do not have the detail at hand right now, Chair.

The Chairperson (Dr Archibald): OK. Thanks for that.

I do not have anybody else indicating that they want to come in. Thanks for your briefing. We will follow up on a few wee things as well. Thanks for being with us.

Mr Murphy: Thank you.