Official Report: Monday 06 October 2014

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker: Members will have been saddened to learn of the passing of George Savage, a former Assembly Member for Upper Bann. I had the pleasure of knowing George from working together during the first mandate from 1998 and subsequently on his return to the House in 2007. He was quiet and unassuming and did not seek the spotlight but worked behind the scenes diligently on behalf of those he represented. He was a fundamentally pleasant and decent man, and you could always do business with him, even on difficult issues. I think that that has been reflected in the warm tributes that have been paid to him since his passing from across the political spectrum in the House.

I want to take this opportunity to extend my personal condolences to his family circle and to all his party colleagues on their sad loss. As we have done on such occasions in the past, I will call a representative from each of the parties to speak for up to three minutes to pay tribute to our late friend and colleague. I will allow around 30 minutes for tributes and, if there is enough time remaining after all the parties have spoken, I may be able to call other Members who rise in their places to say a few words. The House will now pay its respects.

Mr Nesbitt: Two Saturdays ago, I was honoured to attend Craigavon Civic Centre for the installation dinner for the current mayor, Colin McCusker. I was struck by the number of people, from all parties, who remarked on how sad it was that illness had prevented George Savage from attending that evening's celebration. Those were timely remarks. George's funeral took place on Friday in Donaghcloney, and I know that the family was comforted by the very large number of people, representing all sectors of our society, who attended that day. It will be a tough week for Joy and the family, and I hope that they will take some comfort from the fact that we are paying tribute to George in the Chamber today.

George Savage was an Ulster Unionist stalwart, a man who loyally and faithfully represented the party in the upper Bann area for decades. He was a long-standing member of Craigavon Borough Council and was twice elected mayor, serving as first citizen in the mid-1980s and again in 2005-06.

He also served two terms as an MLA here at Stormont. He was elected first in 1998 and again in 2007. The first time, of course, was the original mandate of this Assembly, when he joined a brave and courageous team at Stormont, trying to make it work.

He also found time to put on the uniform and serve in the Ulster Defence Regiment during some of the darkest days of our Troubles. Those are the facts. Behind facts, of course, lies the person. George Savage was, indeed, an Ulster Unionist to his backbone and a proud Orangeman. A farmer by profession, he became a knowledgeable member of the Agriculture Committee. George was also a tireless worker for his constituents and was held in high esteem by political friend and foe alike. He was described by the SDLP's Dolores Kelly as a decent, hard-working and well-respected man, and by John Dallat as a gentleman who gave his full commitment to making the Assembly work. Many Assembly staff with no connection to party politics have gone out of their way, in recent days, to make clear their sadness at the news of his passing.

I cannot help but pause, at this point, to reflect that George was one of the original 28 Ulster Unionist MLAs elected in 1998 to Parliament Buildings to try to give meaning to the Belfast Agreement. It is a sad and sobering thought that he is the sixth member of that team to pass away. This year, alone, we have bade farewell to David McClarty, Sir John Gorman and Sam Foster, following the early losses of Tom Benson and junior Minister James Leslie. Now, sadly, it is the turn of George Savage. Our thoughts are with his family and many friends. He will be greatly missed in Upper Bann and much further afield.

Mr Moutray: I count it a great privilege to be afforded the opportunity to take part in this tribute to my friend and colleague, not only in the House but for some 13 years on Craigavon Borough Council. George was a quiet, unassuming, affable and mildly spoken person who was not given to rash words even in the heat of debate. He treated everyone the same, no matter what their station in life. His commitment to constituents was second to none. For nearly 40 years, he was an elected representative who was always approachable and contactable, even in his farmyard, as was often the case. His love of farming and country life was known far and wide.

Such was George that his friendship spanned beyond these shores. He was influential in the linkage between Craigavon Borough Council and Ballina in County Mayo. George made many lasting friends as a result, and he attended festivals in Mayo on a yearly basis. George was a giant in agriculture. He farmed extensively near Donaghcloney. He served as Deputy Chair of the Agriculture Committee and on the Northern Ireland Drainage Council, and chaired the SOAR rural partnership.

Some year ago, I was in the south of England and, in a second-hand shop, I picked up a book that referred to the Savages being resident in Donaghcloney for some 300 years. I gave the book to George on my return and he was delighted because he was, justly, proud of his ancestry. He was also proud of his family: of Joy; of his sons Kyle, George and Nigel; and of their families.

Last Tuesday, George would have been 50 years married to Joy. His son Nigel spoke eloquently on Friday about the saving faith that his father had. I trust that, in the days that lie ahead, that will help sustain the family. They have the knowledge that it is, truly, absent from the body but present with the Lord. I extend sincere condolences on behalf of the DUP to Joy, Kyle, George, Nigel, their families and the Ulster Unionist Party on the passing of a real gentleman. Thank you.

Mr O'Dowd: Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I first got to know George Savage in 1997, when I joined Craigavon Borough Council. In Craigavon and, indeed, across the North, 1997 was a very difficult year, with tragedies on all sides of the community and intense conflict on our streets, which was reflected in our Craigavon Borough Council debating chamber. In that atmosphere, it would have been perceived to be difficult to engage or make friends with a unionist, but, in George's case, it was not. George and I come from opposite poles; George was a former UDR soldier, an Orangeman and a proud Ulster Unionist. He knew that I was an Irish republican, but in no way did that come between us being able to engage with each other on a personal or a constituency level to assist our constituents across the board. I learnt a lot from George Savage in terms of not only his determination to represent his constituents but how to work as a team player across the council chamber to achieve what was best for the people of Craigavon. Despite all the pressures that we were under in Craigavon over many years, we did that quite often.

When I heard that he was ill and that he had passed away, it came as quite a shock because he was always out and about. I often met him in this Building, even after he had retired as an MLA. He was still up here lobbying and representing his constituents and the rural community and ensuring that their voice was heard. A tribute to him especially is that the new generation of Sinn Féin councillors on Craigavon council — I think of our current deputy mayor, Catherine Seeley, and our group leader, Gemma McKenna — speak very highly of George as well. Those are new young councillors going into Craigavon council. As the deputy mayor said the other night, she was often late for a council meeting because George was outside the chamber telling her stories. He made an impact across the generations.

My deepest sympathy to his family and to Joy. Without doubt the greatest loss is to his family, but the rural community and Craigavon have also lost a great champion. I wish them well.

Mrs D Kelly: On behalf of the SDLP's Assembly and parliamentary group and our local councillors in Craigavon, we place on record our sincere sympathy to Joy and to George's sons, daughters-in-law and grandchildren. I had the privilege of serving for many years on Craigavon Borough Council with George when he played a role as mayor and another as deputy mayor, and I served on numerous committees with him. George was, foremost, as others have said, a family man. He had a long and enduring good relationship not only with his wife and family but with his mother; he often talked about his mother, who lived to a great age.

I was deeply vexed when I heard the nature of George's illness only a few weeks ago, and I was deeply saddened at his sudden passing. George was a decent, hard-working family man. He is one who, in 1998, remained true and resolute in his support of his then party leader, David Trimble, as he made a great compromise to make a better future for everyone in our society. He never wavered in his support nor in his conviction that what he was doing was the right thing.

George, as others have said, was not afraid of building cross-border links; he had a great relationship, as Mr Moutray said, with the communities in Ballina. I know that they, too, will miss him greatly, especially the energy and commitment that he brought. It is only a few months ago that I facilitated a meeting between George and our Environment Minister. George was an employer in the local area, and he had ambitious plans for future development. I hope that those will not be lost; I am sure that his sons will try to realise their father's ambitions.

I saw a great tribute at the funeral; people from right across the community turned out in their hundreds to pay tribute to George. His loss will be felt, as others have said, right across the community, but it will be felt most around the family hearth. My sincere condolences to the Ulster Unionist Party, which has lost a true friend, and to his family and the wider community.

Mr Lunn: I am conscious of the fact that everybody who has spoken so far probably knew George Savage better than I did. I knew him as a colleague here in the last mandate just for four years, and I got to know him fairly well. I am impressed that there have been such fulsome tributes from what you might call political opponents. It says a lot about George, the man and the politician, that even, dare I say, John O'Dowd from Sinn Féin can pay such a tribute to an Ulster Unionist. That is very good to see.

George was a gentleman. The word "gentleman" has been used so often, but it does not do any harm to repeat it: he was polite and he was calm. He was the Mayor of Craigavon twice, which was quite an achievement. He was the sort of solid citizen that nobody ever said a bad word about, and why should they have, because he was good man. He was a good family man, a good neighbour and a good politician. He was quiet in his way, fair enough, but a lot of us are quiet in our ways and are just as effective. He will be sadly missed.

I know about his history now: he was a member of the UDR, an Orangeman and a farmer. It was one of his Masonic colleagues who told me, about a month ago, that he was not well at all, but it still came as a big shock that he passed away so quickly.

He was a solid citizen and a solid Ulster Unionist, with a good history in politics and a good history in life. So, on behalf of the Alliance Party, I send our condolences to Joy, his wife, and his three sons, Kyle, George and Nigel, and to the Ulster Unionist community. He will be sadly missed.

Mr McNarry: Like most, I knew George Savage for a long, long time. Throughout that time, it was a pleasure to talk to him, have dealings with him and listen to him. He was an outstanding character — "character" being the operative word — about whom you could say, "He did what it says on the tin." That was specifically George's way of doing business.

I have heard my former colleagues in the Ulster Unionist Party use the word, "stalwart", which in this case is very apt. I offer my sincere condolences to them for the loss that they must feel. There must be a tremor going through George's former constituency and among the people who knew him: he loved them as much as they loved him.

For someone like me, who held him in the highest esteem, these occasions are extremely sad, as they are for us all. It seems that over such a short period, we have been paying tributes, and properly so, in this House to others who have left us. That has become commonplace, but nevertheless I am very pleased that the Assembly allows and dedicates moments like this for Members to make fitting tributes to people, particularly people like George, who will be missed.

He is, as you said Principal Deputy Speaker, our late friend and colleague, and I am sure that his wife, Joy, and his family will receive the message loud and clear of how we held him in such high regard in the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Mr Allister: I first got to know George Savage not through politics but in another walk of life. Some years ago, the Savage family went through a very traumatic experience when one of George's sons was brutally assaulted. I, in my role as counsel, had the privilege of representing the Savage family in the subsequent litigation. I met George, Joy and the son in question frequently over that period, and I found George to be everything that has been said of him: a true gentleman, a man with deep concern for his family and a man with whom it was a pleasure to work.

As an MEP, I had some interchange with him in pursuit of agricultural issues, and there too he was most diligent in all that he did.

So, it was with sadness that one learned of his passing. To his wife and family, I convey my condolences and those of my party. To his party, to which he undoubtedly was a very faithful servant, I, too, express condolences on the loss of someone whom it was good to know.

Mr B McCrea: George was a friend of mine. I look back on our interactions with much fondness. There was always a sense of humour with George when you were speaking to him. You sometimes had to wait a little while to discover exactly what he was going to tell you, but there was always the great finger that was raised, which indicated that he was about to say something. I was talking to Joy about it. She said that people sometimes asked how he got that finger. Apparently, a tractor managed to run over it, and, George being George, he just put a bandage on it and carried on. That was the mark of the man. He was very self-effacing, did what had to be done and got on with things.

People here have tended to talk about him being a gentleman and somehow non-controversial. I remember with fondness that he did get his own way through having a particular way of doing things. Even when we had the Belfast Agreement coming up, he told me how he had influence with people who might not have been in the mainstream. He said that he thought that one of the big contributions that he had made was that he was able to talk to people whom others would not talk to.

On such occasions, I am mindful of the family. Those of you who know the family well will know that Joy is facing not just one but two challenges. It is my great hope that things improve with Kyle, who is not particularly well. Joy is one of those amazing women. You talk about great men, but behind every great man there is arguably an even greater woman, and Joy is certainly that.

The Savages made a wonderful contribution to our society. George made a great contribution to the Assembly. When you get to the end of your life, all that you can really do is to look back and have others say, "He did well".

George Savage, a gentleman and a friend, will be sadly missed. I offer my condolences to his family.

Mrs Dobson: It is always hard to join the House on these occasions. However, this afternoon, it is doubly difficult when we are paying tribute to a personal friend and party colleague.

My thoughts and prayers are with Joy, Kyle, Nigel, George Jnr, George's seven grandchildren and his entire family circle. They have lost a loving husband, devoted father and doting grandfather. The community of Donaghcloney and Waringstown has lost a lifelong friend, neighbouring farmer and committed politician.

As was said, above all, George Savage was a good and decent public servant, serving the constituents of Upper Bann on these very Benches and always staying true to the core values of the Ulster Unionist Party, putting his constituents and the community above all else. George stood fast and firm to our values.

My first memories of George are as a neighbouring farmer when, after my marriage, we moved to Waringstown and set up home. Back then, any time that I had the privilege to chat to George, politics was never mentioned. I believe that that sums up George. He was always asking how my son Mark was keeping, and then the topic changed to beef prices and farming. He was a man who put people above politics.

The high esteem in which George was held in the community was evident on Friday when Donaghcloney village came to a standstill. I was proud to join the community in mourning, a community quietly paying their respects and saying goodbye to one of our own.

George was a loyal Ulster Unionist, a member of the loyal orders, a former soldier of the Ulster Defence Regiment and a people's politician, here and on Craigavon Borough Council, and George was so much more than that. He was a loving husband, father and grandfather. He was a quiet man of integrity and honour. On visiting the family's home, I was told by George's son Kyle how much the hundreds of sympathy cards and tributes on social media meant to the family. I know that the tributes this afternoon will add to that. He will be sorely missed by all our numbers.

Mr Anderson: Thank you, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, for allowing me the opportunity to pay tribute to my good friend and colleague Councillor George Savage. George was indeed one of life's true gentlemen and someone whom I held in the highest regard. He was highly respected in all walks of life, especially within the agriculture and farming industry.

I knew George for many years, but it was not until I was elected to Craigavon Borough Council in 2001 that I really got to know him. We shared many conversations on a wide range of issues, especially on matters affecting the rural community. Being a rural dweller myself, it was always good to have someone like George to call upon when seeking advice on rural and farming issues. I know that I can say without fear of contradiction that George was truly a champion of the rural community, not only throughout Craigavon, where he served as mayor on two occasions, but here in the Assembly, where he served two terms as an MLA for Upper Bann.

George was never one to shirk responsibility and that was very evident in the service that he gave to many organisations throughout his lifetime. He was chairman of Donacloney Primary School's board of governors and a former director of Glenavon Football Club. He was involved in the Mid Ulster Football Association, did charity work with the Buddy Bear Trust and gave many years of service to the loyal and Masonic orders, to name but a few.

George also served with distinction in the Ulster Defence Regiment, in what was a very dangerous and testing time for many serving in our security forces during the Troubles. However, first and foremost, George was a family man. He was happiest at home with his family, working on the farm and enjoying the outdoor life, having often done a day's work before most of us had got out of our bed. George's wife, Joy, often said that she never knew anyone who could change from farm overalls into a business suit as quickly as George could.

At George's funeral service on Friday past, the family minister referred to some of George's trademarks. Those of us who had conversations with George will have heard him say many times, "I know a man", with that famous pointed finger. Today, I can say that I knew a man — a man I was honoured and privileged to have known; a man much respected and highly regarded; a man called George Savage.

George will be greatly missed in his community but most of all by his family. To his wife, Joy, to whom he was married for 50 years, to his sons George, Nigel and Kyle and the entire family circle, and also to his Ulster Unionist Party colleagues, I extend my sincere sympathy and condolences. George's family faces difficult days ahead without their loved one, but they can be comforted to know that George is now safe in the arms of Jesus.

Mr Gardiner: I rise in support of all those who have paid tribute to a former colleague and friend of mine, Mr George Savage. I was privileged to be with George just prior to his death. I got another phone call from his son to say, "Look, you better come out, Sam. Dad's going". I got out, but I was a wee bit too late. Words are not sufficient to pay tribute to George or to talk about the man and his character. He was a great man, very sincere, who was dedicated to his work with his three sons on the farm and to his wife, Joy. I was privileged to serve on Craigavon Borough Council with him on the several occasions when he was mayor, and also privileged to serve in this House with George.

George's word was his bond. At the funeral, people could not get into the Methodist church. There were hundreds upon hundreds of people there to pay their tribute to the great George Savage. I offer my sympathy and condolences from my family to Joy and her three sons. He is safe in God's keeping.

Mr Poots: Without repeating what everybody else has said, I would just like to say that George Savage was a decent, honourable gentleman and a pleasure for all of us to do business with. I called with George around three weeks ago, and we had a good time together. Dr Paisley had just passed at the time, and I was able to tell George of the high regard that Dr Paisley had held him in. Dr Paisley was Chair of the Agriculture Committee while George was Deputy Chair, and I know that Dr Paisley leant on George a lot for advice, as someone working at the coalface. I trust that it was some comfort to George, even at that time, to be told of the high regard in which he was held even by someone of Dr Paisley's standing.

My sympathies go to George Jnr, Kyle and Nigel, and in particular to Joy, who has lost a dear husband.

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker: I would like to advise Members that I have received a letter from the Speaker. He expresses his appreciation for the good wishes that have been sent to him from across the House and beyond but has decided that his focus needs to be on his return to health and that it is unrealistic that he will be able to return to exercise the functions of Speaker in the immediate future.

The Speaker is disappointed that he is not in a position to come to the House to announce this himself, but he has informed me in writing that he has decided to proceed with his intention to retire. He will resign as a Member with effect from 12.00 noon on Monday 13 October 2014. In accordance with section 39(2)(b) of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, he will cease to be the Speaker at that time. A copy of the Speaker's letter will be placed in the Library. Following receipt of the letter on Friday, I visited the Speaker and passed on the best wishes of Members.

When a vacancy arises in the Office of Speaker, Standing Order 6 requires the Assembly to proceed to elect a Speaker "as soon as may be". A copy of the Speaker's letter will be forwarded to the Business Committee, and it will be for it to schedule an election for a new Speaker. The Speaker's authorisation, under Standing Order 5(2), for me to exercise all his functions relating to the proceedings of the Assembly, will remain in place until his resignation takes effect next week.

I think that that covers the most immediate operational questions that might come to mind, but Members may seek further clarification from the Business Office.

While we are all sorry about the circumstances of today's announcement, I know that I speak on behalf of the Deputy Speakers and the whole House in wishing the Speaker well in future and thanking him for the dedication and service that he has given the Assembly in the role of Speaker over the last seven years.

I will therefore encourage Whips to consider arrangements for how to formally pay tribute to the Speaker so that the Business Committee can consider those tomorrow for the Order Paper of next week. Let us move on.

Mr Weir: Further to that, I appreciate that arrangements will then be made for a more formal occasion, but I think it appropriate simply to place on record, on behalf of my party and as someone who has served with the Speaker on the Business Committee and the Assembly Commission, my thanks to him for the role that he has performed. It is also appropriate that the House acknowledges its desire to see the Speaker — the soon to be former Speaker — recover and be in the most robust health as swiftly as possible.

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker: Let me just remind the House that I have made arrangements and advised the Whips to consider how best we can pay tribute to a man who justly deserves that. I think that the most appropriate way to do that is to return, upon reflection of today's announcement, to the matter next week. That would be the appropriate opportunity for all Members of the House, if they so desire, to pay tribute to a remarkable servant of this institution. If that is acceptable to Members, we should move on to the next business.

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker: This is the first of three motions on Committee membership. As with similar motions, it will be treated as a business motion. Therefore, there will be no debate.

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker: Order. The next item on the Order Paper is the second motion regarding Committee membership. As with similar motions, it will be treated as a business motion, and there will be no debate.

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker: The next item on the Order Paper is the third motion regarding Committee membership. As with similar motions, it will be treated as a business motion and there will be no debate.

Mr O'Dowd (The Minister of Education): I beg to introduce the Education Bill [NIA38/11-15], which is a Bill to provide for the establishment and functions of the Education Authority; and for connected purposes.

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker: Order. The Business Committee has agreed to allow up to one hour and 30 minutes for this debate. The proposer of the motion will have 10 minutes to propose and 10 minutes to make a winding-up speech. One amendment has been selected and is published on the Marshalled List. The proposer will have 10 minutes to propose the amendment and five minutes to make a winding-up speech. All other speakers will have five minutes.

Mr Irwin: I beg to move

The need for the National Crime Agency (NCA) to have full powers extended to cover Northern Ireland is recognised by many interested parties, most notably and obviously the British Government, the agencies responsible for administering justice and the courts and those involved in policing. Of course, we in the DUP strongly support that extension. As someone who represents a border constituency, I am well aware of the impact that criminal gangs have on our rural communities by creating victims of crime and the negative impact on the rural economy. We have seen audacious attempts by such gangs to carry out all sorts of crimes, including the exploding of ATMs on the forecourts of garages, the laundering and selling of illegal fuel, the stealing to order of valuable machinery and the worrying trend in the theft of cattle and the illegal slaughter and sale of those animals in the Republic and certain areas such as south Armagh. Those incidents illustrate the need to have at our disposal the expertise and assistance of the National Crime Agency. As we all know, the criminals respect neither borders nor victims in their illegal pursuits.

The work that the NCA is involved in not only relates to the crimes that I have outlined but importantly has a significant role in the area of Internet-based crime. Members will be aware that the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child has expressed its strong views on the protection of children online. The UN committee is rightly concerned, as we all should be, about the lack of NCA powers in Northern Ireland, which means that the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre is not fully operational here at this time. The entire House should be alarmed about that issue alone. Our children are at much greater risk due to the fact that the NCA is not operational here. I challenge the nationalist parties to explain to the public why they have adopted a negative stance on its implementation here given the UN report and its ramifications. The protection of our children is hugely important and completely necessary and urgent, especially with regard to the Internet and how our children are protected from those who prey on young people online.

I certainly feel that the issue is directly affecting a very broad range of people, from the rural farmer who has valuable machinery stolen to order to those involved in the detection of online crime, such as the serious and sickening issue of child pornography. The National Crime Agency is a body that Northern Ireland simply cannot do without. It operates in other regions of the UK and, at a time when our policing budgets are under severe pressure, it makes complete sense to allow the PSNI to have the necessary assistance of the NCA to carry out its investigative duties. I also believe that the ability to seize assets is vital in the fight against these gangsters, who currently think that they are untouchable.

The reluctance of Sinn Féin and the SDLP to accept the necessity of allowing the NCA to operate and the PSNI to avail itself of its expertise in the fight against crime internationally means that Northern Ireland and its citizens are at a severe disadvantage. The two nationalist parties continually bleat about equality, but, once again, the calls for equality fall short of ensuring that our communities have the very best security and that the organisations tasked with protecting communities have the very best intelligence and powers at their disposal. The nationalist parties have hollow concerns over the accountability of the NCA, yet the organisation is already subject to rigorous scrutiny from Committees in Parliament, such as the Home Affairs Committee, as well as the Office of Surveillance Commissioners and the Investigatory Powers Tribunal. The public have the right to approach these and many more bodies to question any outward operation of the NCA. Representing a border constituency, I have a desire to see criminality and its effects on innocent victims —

Mr A Maginness: I wonder whether the Member will give way.

Mr Irwin: I will.

Mr A Maginness: The Member talks about all sorts of bodies looking at the NCA. Will he tell the House what accountability measures exist presently in relation to the NCA? Please describe to the House the accountability to the Chief Constable and the Policing Board?

Mr Irwin: The accountability measures are mainly based in the UK. Certainly, I have no fear of any accountability measures —

Mr A Maginness: Will the Member give way again?

Mr Irwin: I will.

Mr A Maginness: I am asking the Member particularly about accountability measures in Northern Ireland, not in Westminster or the UK, as you put it.

Mr Irwin: There seems to be real reluctance from the Member and his party. Many people in Northern Ireland will be concerned that the Member and, indeed, his party want to let gangsters roam free and behave as they will. They are burying their heads in the sand if they believe that that is not happening. It clearly is, right across Northern Ireland. Police sources reckon that there are approximately 140 of these gangs. It is sad that we cannot get the terms to tackle those criminal gangsters.

Mr Givan: Will the Member give way?

Mr Irwin: I will.

Mr Givan: The Member will know that the Member for North Belfast is a very well educated man and very capable in his job. Does the Member share my concern that the SDLP and Sinn Féin are providing the obstacle to the Police Ombudsman being able to hold the NCA to account — currently for non-devolved matters and, into the future, for devolved matters — and that the SDLP and Sinn Féin are preventing the Chief Constable from being given primacy for the NCA's activities in Northern Ireland? They are the ones who are stopping accountability, as opposed to this party.

Mr Irwin: I thank the Member for his intervention. I agree with him absolutely. Representing a border constituency, I have a desire to see this criminality and its effects on innocent victims significantly stamped out. We have the chance to greatly increase the PSNI's capacity for dealing with it.

I urge the House, on behalf of the victims of such crime, to reconsider the matter and move quickly towards its implementation.

Mr G Kelly: I beg to move the amendment:

Beidh mé ag labhairt in aghaidh an rúin seo. I will speak against the motion and for the amendment.

Let us make very clear some of the myths and, at minimum, exaggerations being pointed out here. The NCA already operates in the North on non-devolved matters. That means things like immigration, customs-related crime, fuel laundering and smuggling, which are some of the things that Mr Irwin mentioned. In a way, the core issues are simple, and he pointed them out. The first one is accountability, which was crucial to Patten, crucial to us and crucial to the new beginning to policing. I will return to assets recovery a bit later.

Why do we not want them to be unaccountable? Because our history has demonstrated what unaccountability does. Back in those times, you had a force within a force; you had shoot to kill; you had state agents involved in crime, right up to and including murder; you had confessions beaten out of people going through interrogation centres; and you had a police force — not a service — that acted as front line troops and was involved in collusion and corruption. If you want to know why we are so strong on the issue, the history and the evidence shows why. Let me say this: more recently —

Mr Ford (The Minister of Justice): Will the Member give way?

Mr G Kelly: No. You will have your chance to come back.

More recently, some ex-RUC people who left and got away from the accountability measures brought in by Patten came back in through the retire/rehire revolving door. We have seen that that was much abused in terms of where they were, which created a huge difficulty. At least some of them left specifically because there were accountability mechanisms there, so that they would come back as temporary workers and not be police officers, and then they went back to the old habits of non-accountability. I think that unionists are hankering back to the old situation, and, when there is an opportunity to move forward, they will not take that up.

Mr Humphrey: Will the Member give way?

Mr G Kelly: No, I will not give way.

You will also know that unionists signed up to Patten and eventually, after a long debate, to the transfer of those powers in 2010. Another myth that unionists are promoting — this debate came up close to a year ago — is that the pursuit of organised crime has ceased. Nothing could be further from the truth. The NCA cooperates with an Garda Síochána, the European law enforcement agencies, Interpol and other law enforcement agencies. This question needs to be asked: is the NCA refusing to give information or to cooperate with an Garda Síochána or any other force? The answer to that is no. Most importantly, is it refusing to give any of the information or cooperation that the PSNI needs? No, it is not. On child exploitation, which was mentioned, on drugs trafficking, on cross-border smuggling, on human trafficking — on all those accounts — the answer is no, because they are given the cooperation that is necessary to bring to book the people who are destroying our society. A perfect example of that quite recently was the finding of £100 million worth of drugs on a ship off the coast of Ireland, which the NCA was involved in and an Garda Síochána then moved on. They did not have to do that. It was an Garda Síochána who had the accountability mechanism there.

Maybe the hecklers will keep quiet, and I will get on with it.

I have spoken to Keith Bristow, and I know that he wants further cooperation: why would he not? I know that he wants further powers. In a certain way, people who are offered further powers always want them. Maybe that is fairly normal, except if you are in the DUP. Recently they were offered more powers similar to those that have been offered to Scotland and other places, but they seemed to refuse them. Specifically, Keith Bristow wanted the power of police officer for those in the NCA — incidentally, excluding himself. Of course, the British Home Secretary can sort that out. All she has to do is make them accountable to all the mechanisms. If they want the powers of a police officer, make them as accountable as all other police officers are in this jurisdiction in the North.

Mr Ford: Will the Member give way?

Mr G Kelly: No, I will not.

Folks, you will have your chance to come back on all this.

What are the unionists and, indeed, the British Home Secretary afraid of? If they agree that our police officers should be accountable — they have agreed to that — what is the problem? Why not make NCA officers accountable also? It is one of the things that I cannot understand, except that you may not agree to police officers themselves being accountable and that you want to go back to the past when that was the case.

Asset recovery is raised again and again. In this instance, the Justice Minister — I am sure that he will speak about it when he gets up — has the power to deal with asset recovery. My party and, I believe, other parties put it to him well before that power ceased last October, I think, that he could have a bespoke process of asset recovery that would take the assets of those involved in serious and organised crime who are destroying our society. He has refused and continues to refuse to go down the road of having an asset recovery process that can be used here.

Mr Ford: Will the Member give way?

Mr G Kelly: You are going to get up later, so by all means speak then.

Sinn Féin is up for asset recovery from those involved in serious and organised crime.

There is absolutely nothing to fear from accountability. I really do not understand what you are afraid of. The Member spoke about the ombudsman: the easy answer to that is that that will be involved if we can get the full suite of accountability mechanisms, which was agreed in Patten and should be brought in here. Our experience is that if you leave the loophole — there is a mass of empirical evidence — it will be abused, and that is what we are trying to avoid in this case.

I support the amendment. We should be united, not divided, in arguing for the necessary accountability measures.

Mr A Maginness: Although I disagree with the motion, I welcome the opportunity to debate this important issue and put the facts on the record. First, the SDLP is not opposed in principle to the NCA; we would welcome its resources and so forth. Certainly, we are not opposed to opposing criminality, whether it is organised criminality at an international level, at a national level or whatever. We are vigorously opposed to any form of criminality and welcome resources to deal with it.

Last week in the Chamber, we debated Kincora, and there was almost unanimity on the need for an investigation of that. It was widely accepted in the Chamber that the abuse that took place in Kincora was, in fact, covered up by the intelligence services. It highlights the need for the accountability that was dodged and avoided at St Andrews in relation to the intelligence services, and now it is a timely reminder to the House that the issues that arose in the debate on Kincora last week are relevant to this debate as well. Of course, we are not dealing with the intelligence services —

Mr Humphrey: Will the Member give way?

Mr A Maginness: Let me get on a bit. We are not dealing with the intelligence services per se, but we are dealing with an organisation that styles itself as the FBI of the UK. In those circumstances, you need special rules and regulations to deal with the accountability of that force in relation to Northern Ireland. We know the history of a force within a force, the misuse of the RUC by the intelligence services, the misuse of agents and so forth. We want to avoid that happening again, and we will be robust in defending that position. We do not need any lectures from people on dealing with criminality — we are firm on that — but there must be accountability.

Mr Humphrey: I am grateful to the Member for giving way. He is not frightened of debate, and I welcome that. You talk about resources being applied to dealing with the issue before the House. The last time we debated the issue in the House, the SDLP said that it had concerns — I understand that you are articulating them now — about accountability. You were going to have meetings with the Secretary of State and with the Justice Minister. I ask you this, in all sincerity: how regular have those meetings been? Are you making progress in dealing with the issues that you are concerned about?

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker: The Member has an extra minute.

Mr A Maginness: I am pleased that the Member has raised those issues. There was a very helpful letter from the Minister of Justice in relation to the NCA. That is no secret. In that, a number of issues were raised in it. I am not going to disclose what discussions we have had with the Minister of Justice or, indeed, with the NCA or the Chief Constable, but I will characterise our engagements with all those people as very positive. However, there are still issues to be addressed in relation to accountability. Until those issues are firmly tied down, we will not be supportive of the NCA, in operational terms, in Northern Ireland. I think that that is wise counsel. I do not believe that that is being thran or obtuse or trying to frustrate the rule of law. We know the history; we are right. We are going to get this right, and it is the right approach.

Mr Campbell: I thank the Member for giving way. He is outlining the concerns. He says that progress is being made and that helpful meetings have been held. Does he understand, however, that, while all those meetings are taking place, international criminal gangs are operating here in Northern Ireland, some of which could be prevented from doing so if we had the full implementation of the NCA? Does he accept and understand that?

Mr A Maginness: What I am saying to the House and what I understand very clearly is this: there is a problem with organised crime. We have to address that, and we will. We have PSNI resources here addressing it but not as fully as we want. However, as soon as there is agreement on the accountability measures that we have suggested, we will move towards that. The point I make and emphasise to the House is that, given the experience that we have had, we have got to tie these things down firmly and clearly. It is not right for people to simply say, "Well, look, there's the NCA. We've got parliamentary Committees looking at the NCA, and we've got the Home Secretary and so forth". We cannot accept that. It must be internal to Northern Ireland. The operations of the NCA must be subject to the PSNI and the Chief Constable and accountable to the Policing Board.

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker: The Member's time is up.

Mr A Maginness: That is the appropriate approach. That is what we want to see happening.

Mr Dickson: Will the Member give way?

Mr A Maginness: Yes.

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you. I call Mr Tom Elliott.

Mr Elliott: Thank you, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker. I am not going to give way to Mr Dickson at this stage.

I believe that the secret is in the name: National Crime Agency. It appears that the two nationalist or republican parties are opposed to it simply because it is a UK national crime agency. What could be wrong with trying to curtail, cut out and stop crime? I am not sure what the argument is about.

I heard Mr Maginness and others talk about accountability. Let us not forget that, a number of years ago, they approved the devolution of justice here with SOCA in place. The NCA will have much more accountability than SOCA had, so I do not see what the problem is with allowing an organisation to manage itself in Northern Ireland to beat international crime. This is not just about local criminals and localised crime but about international crime. This is about crime that is going on throughout the world that we can do something to stop. Criminals will see Northern Ireland as a back door to the United Kingdom and a back door to Ireland to carry out their criminal activities, and, my goodness, have we not seen plenty of it in Northern Ireland with fuel smuggling, fuel laundering, and contraband cigarettes and alcohol? Why do people not want to curtail that? Why do people not want to stop human trafficking and to use the NCA as a mechanism for doing that? I do not see why people do not want to do that. I do not see why people want to try to curtail the process.

On accountability, I understand that the NCA would not have the powers of a constable in Northern Ireland. I recognise that the two nationalist parties were willing to jump on board with Haass and approve a historical investigations unit. As I understand it, that would have been a stand-alone police force in Northern Ireland separate from anything that you have in the Police Service of Northern Ireland. Were there going to be accountability mechanisms there? I never heard any of the nationalist parties argue for that in the Haass talks, not once. So, I think that people need to get real.

Mr Attwood: Will the Member give way?

Mr Elliott: The only argument that I hear against this from the nationalist parties is that they do not want the National Crime Agency because it is part of the UK. What have you to fear? I will give way to Mr Attwood.

Mr Attwood: For the record, the Haass proposals said that the new arrangements would be accountable to the Police Ombudsman and the Policing Board. We opposed that, because we believed that the new arrangements proposed under Haass should have their own, separate accountability mechanisms. So, yes, we did make the argument. Maybe on those occasions you were not listening very carefully.

Mr Elliott: Mr Attwood is accepting that it was going to operate separately, outside the Police Service of Northern Ireland. He is then concerned that the NCA has accountability mechanisms to the Police Service of Northern Ireland. What does he want? He cannot have it every way. He seems to want his cake and eat it, but, unfortunately, no matter what argument he puts forward, this is because it is a UK national crime agency. That is the reality of it. They just do not want anything that is British in Northern Ireland. Let us get of rid it all. Let us not have it here because it is a UK-established force. I say this to those Members who do not want it: what are you afraid of? Is it maybe because it will investigate some of the criminal activities that maybe some Members in the House have a relationship with? I do not know. Maybe they will tell me. There should be nothing to stop the National Crime Agency from operating to its full potential in Northern Ireland. I think that nationalists and republicans are using excuses, and that is all that it is.

Mr Dickson: I welcome the debate, and I want to make it very clear that we are supporting the motion and opposing the amendment.

The motion does give us an opportunity to debunk some of the myths and, indeed, fears that have been created around this particular organisation. There is absolutely no doubt that the absence of a fully functioning National Crime Agency is negatively impacting on our ability to deal with serious and organised crime. Clear, precise and statistical evidence is available and has been since the National Crime Agency came into being on 7 October 2013. What bit of "Since 2013, you have had time to sort all of this out" do you not understand?

Mr A Maginness: What about accountability?

Mr Dickson: I will come on to accountability.

The Justice Minister has said that there is now clear evidence of a major gap in our ability to tackle serious crime. We are not isolated or immune from these problems in Northern Ireland. There is, as others have said, people trafficking, extortion, money laundering, robbery, drug smuggling and many other serious crimes going on. There are people in this House who, by their actions, are assisting all those crimes to take place. Let us not put too fine a point on it: there are people in this place who are assisting and allowing those crimes to proceed against our citizens in Northern Ireland. Shame upon you.

There are international issues that require an international response, and the purpose of the NCA is to connect our neighbourhood policing to our national policing and our international crime-fighting agencies. The effect of the NCA not operating was explained in more detail recently by the Minister when he told us that there are examples involving child abuse, money laundering and drug importation where the responses were arguably less effective than they could have been had we been able to join up right from the very ground, from neighbourhood policing through national policing in Northern Ireland and right across the UK, reaching right across Europe and beyond its borders.

We have seen an effect on asset recovery. The police are unable to target the assets of criminals. That is less money that is being taken off criminals. We know that the proceeds of that go to communities, but the important thing is that many criminals can only be dealt with effectively by hitting them where it hurts, and that is quite often in the pocket. We are facing international criticism, as has been referred to, with the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child having expressed strong concerns about the absence of necessary powers to effectively address child exploitation.

Our police resources are under strain, and we have all heard the debate around the Budget in recent days. The effect of that and the failure to introduce the NCA has been to skew resources to the PSNI that could have been met nationally by the NCA. You are effectively making us pay for things that other people in the rest of the United Kingdom are having paid for them through the NCA. There is a serious and urgent need for a solution.

While it appears to me at least that Sinn Féin is beyond the pale in this debate, it is disappointing that the SDLP has still not been able to come up to the mark when it comes to acknowledging what has been done and what has been achieved since the agency came into force in 2013. They have fears and concerns, but I believe that they have been addressed and that now is the time to accept that they have been addressed. You cannot have everything and you will not get everything, but the time has come to accept that what is on offer is not only the best for all the citizens in Northern Ireland but substantially more than in many other regions in the rest of the United Kingdom.

Let us be absolutely clear what has been offered. The NCA cannot use constabulary powers without the approval of the Chief Constable. The director general can be called to attend the Policing Board, making him answerable on how its annual plan is to be implemented, taking account of the Northern Ireland policing plan. The Police Ombudsman's remit will cover all functions of the NCA, and the Criminal Justice Inspection's role will be extended. It is therefore nonsensical for parties to suggest that there is lack of accountability. There is more accountability here than in any other part of the United Kingdom.

Mr Campbell: I thank the Member for giving way. I am glad that he is outlining the degree of accountability that exists. It is just unfortunate that the mover of the amendment has absented himself from the Chamber. He outlined the exact opposite and said that there is no accountability.

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker: The Member has almost a minute left.

Mr Dickson: I wholeheartedly agree with Mr Campbell. Indeed, it is increasingly looking like a deliberate plan to oppose the NCA in all circumstances rather than to accept —

Mrs D Kelly: Will the Member give way?

Mr Dickson: I would have except that the Speaker has only given me one minute and I need to finish this.

It is looking like a deliberate plan to oppose the NCA and its operation in Northern Ireland in all circumstances. Members now need to show maturity and recognise the significant package that is on offer. I encourage Mr Maginness and others to weigh up what is now being offered. You are not going to cross every t and dot every last i when it comes to this. What is on your shopping list is not necessarily on everybody else's shopping list. There are many in the community —

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker: The Member's time is up.

Mr Dickson: — who will ask, after this debate, why the SDLP is acting so unreasonably and not picking up on what has been offered to defend all our citizens, which is the introduction of the NCA.

Mr Givan: Tomorrow is the first anniversary of the National Crime Agency. Unfortunately, the only people celebrating will be the criminals involved in human trafficking, drug dealing and some of the vilest crimes that they can inflict on our people in Northern Ireland. People should remember who benefits most from the inability of the SDLP and Sinn Féin to deal maturely and responsibly with the issue. It is no surprise that Sinn Féin cannot do so, but the SDLP is letting down the people of Northern Ireland because of its inability to step out from the shadow that Sinn Féin cast upon it. For too long, they have kowtowed to Sinn Féin on a whole range of policy matters, and here they are doing exactly the same when it comes to policing.

Mr A Maginness: Will the Member give way?

Mr Givan: I will give way to Mr Maginness.

Mr A Maginness: As a simple matter of history, the SDLP joined the Policing Board in 2001; and, in 2007, Sinn Féin joined the Policing Board in the wake of the SDLP and on the basis of the good work that the SDLP had done to build up the PSNI. That is history, so we are not in the shadow of Sinn Féin whatsoever.

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker: The Member has an extra minute.

Mr Givan: Ever since Sinn Féin eclipsed the SDLP in electoral terms, the SDLP has done nothing to try to differentiate itself from the largest nationalist party, and it is time that it started to do that.

Members have highlighted the fact the NCA will not have constabulary powers unless the Chief Constable grants it those powers. The new beginning to policing that Sinn Féin and the SDLP talked about included the Serious Organised Crime Agency continuing to function. The devolution of justice allowed the Serious Organised Crime Agency to continue to function, but now that SOCA has been dismissed and the NCA has come in, they want to revisit all of this and wind the clock back.

Mr Byrne: Will the Member give way?

Mr Givan: No, I will not give way again; I want to make some progress.

Either the two parties got it wrong in the first place and should admit that they got it wrong when they set up the Policing Board and those structures, or they are misleading people by the arguments that they are making here today. Members need to be very serious about this issue because we are talking about serious crime.

Sinn Féin and the SDLP often use the United Nations to advance their progressive, as they deem them, human rights policies. Yet here we have the UN highlighting a serious concern about the rights of children, and they just dismiss what it has to say. I am not usually an advocate of the United Nations, but, on this occasion, it is right. Members who usually support the UN should take some cognisance of what it has to say.

Then we have the PSNI budget and the strain that it is under. Mr Kelly, who is no longer here, interestingly, refused to engage in debate and has now run away, not for the first time, from the debate. He and Mr Maginness continually talk about the cost of policing Twaddell, for example, and yet here we have Westminster wanting to pay for policing in Northern Ireland. However, the nationalist parties are saying that they do not want Westminster to pay for that. When it comes to welfare reform, Westminster needs to open up the coffers and give them the money. They want Westminster then, but when it comes to policing, they do not want the support of a national body. They would rather that the PSNI, which does not have the resources or, let us be clear, the same expertise and specialism as the National Crime Agency in dealing with matters of human trafficking and child exploitation —

Mr Newton: I thank the Member for giving way. My point specifically relates to the point that he is making about the lack of information. Does he agree that, had the unfortunate people in the Tilbury docks incident not created a row and the container had completed its journey, it is unlikely that the information would have been available within the PSNI to pick up, arrest and take before the courts those now alleged to have been involved?

Mr Givan: I agree. The Member brings us back to a very important point: we are talking about human lives. This is not some technical bureaucratic matter; it is about the impact on real people through not being able to effectively tackle those who are involved in serious organised crime.

As Members rightly highlighted, the NCA currently operates in Northern Ireland but is not subject to the levels of accountability that Members would want. Again, I was not a proponent of setting up the Police Ombudsman's office, but that office would, under these proposals brought forward by the Minister, be able to hold the NCA to account on devolved and non-devolved matters.

There has got to be a point at which people realise that there is a compromise on the table. I would suggest that the compromise nearly goes too far, but we do not always get everything that we want. Members need to recognise that this is as good as it is going to get. There will not be any point in the NCA being in existence if Members want to thwart its ability to tackle crime.

We need to bring this matter to a conclusion. I ask the Minister to bring forward the legislative consent motion (LCM) that is necessary. If he cannot do it, I will work with the Alliance Party and one of its members to bring an LCM to this House. Let us have the debate and let us have the vote on this issue. I trust that Members would not abuse the petition of concern if it came to that point.

Mr Lynch: Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I oppose the motion but support the amendment.

Let me deal with the first part of the motion:

Sinn Féin totally supports that part of the motion. We have consistently condemned criminal activity. Communities have a right to live in a safe environment, not to be impacted upon by these criminal gangs and to feel secure and safe in their homes. However, communities and citizens must be protected through the oversight and accountability of law enforcement agencies. This is the crux of the issue. The NCA, fully implemented in the North of Ireland, will, in effect, be accountable to the Home Secretary and not the Policing Board.

As recently as last week, the Minister responded to my colleague Raymond McCartney on the issue of tackling serious crime, and on making the NCA effective and, most importantly, making it accountable. The Minister said nothing to explain why he believes that all members of the NCA should be subject to the same accountability structures as all members of the PSNI.

Mr Ford: Will the Member give way?

Mr Lynch: No. You will have your say, Minister.

No real claim has been made to date to demonstrate that policing serious and organised crime will be ineffective if the NCA is not fully implemented.

Mr Newton: Will the Member give way?

Mr Lynch: No. If your name is down, you will have your five minutes.

Indeed, there has been opposition to the present NCA model from former senior officers. In reading part of the motion, one would be led to believe that, unless the NCA is not fully involved in this part of Ireland, society will be left to the complete mercy of these gangs. What is the role of the PSNI in tackling organised criminal activity? This is a service that has a budget of almost £1 billion and 7,000 personnel. On the other hand, in the South of Ireland, an Garda Síochána polices four-fifths of this island with a similar budget and under 12,000 personnel. It has to deal with similar organised activity.

The parties opposite argue that, if the NCA is not established in full, there will be limited access to NCA intelligence. That is not true. The previous Chief Constable, Matt Baggott, in answering a question from Pat Sheehan at a Policing Board meeting about whether there would be any restrictions on information-sharing between any of the law enforcement agencies on these islands, answered with an emphatic no. As my colleague Gerry Kelly said in his speech, only last week, we had a good example of this type of sharing of information, where the gardaí arrested a number of criminals off the coast of Cork and captured one of the biggest hauls of cocaine ever in these islands. This was a joint task force involving the Air Corps, revenue services, naval services and the gardaí.

Mr Liam Peakin, the head of the Irish Customs Drug Watch and Law Enforcement department, said afterwards that they have the resources to tackle major drug dealers and that it was an international intelligence-led operation that involved agencies outside Ireland.

Mr Campbell: Will the Member give way?

Mr Lynch: No. That confirmed the point that Matt Baggott made to Pat Sheehan last year. During the arrests and seizure in Cork, the guards were in total control of the operation on Irish soil. There is no bigger crime than trying to land £100 million worth of cocaine in this country, North or South.

I want to close on the aspect of the motion that calls for the full implementation of the NCA to:

I live close to Monaghan, Cavan and Leitrim and meet senior PSNI officers regularly. There is no evidence that major organised crime is greater in that region. One of the organised activities in the area is livestock and farm machinery theft. Only last week —

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker: The Member's time is almost up.

Mr Lynch: — the gardaí were successful in an operation against those who are involved in that in County Monaghan, using information from the PSNI. The law enforcement agencies on the island of Ireland are capable of tackling serious and organised criminality without the full involvement —

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker: The Member's time is up.

Mr Lynch: — of the unaccountable NCA.

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker: The Member's time is up. Thank you.

Mr Poots: It was an interesting line that the previous Member who spoke took. He seemed to support cuts to policing and railed against everything that was suggested last week about the pressures that police would be put under. He has made it very clear that Sinn Féin thinks that we can do with considerably less police and the services they provide in Northern Ireland. I am interested in hearing that argument develop over the next number of days.

The Assembly does not often bring good news to people, but good news is going out today. There is good news for fuel launderers, cigarette and alcohol smugglers, drug barons, pimps, human traffickers, gangmasters, fraudsters, those who are wrecking our environment through illegal dumping and, of course, the paramilitary organisations. They are getting that good news free and gratis from none other than Sinn Féin — we would well expect them to give them that good news — and the SDLP. They are hiding behind a fig leaf of accountability, but, behind their fig leaf, all we see is nakedness. They have no real substance to their argument, and all those whom I named will be better off as a consequence of their activities.

Mr Wilson: Will the Member give way?

Mr Poots: Yes.

Mr Wilson: I am sure that the Member is not surprised that Sinn Féin wants to protect criminals, especially since most of the criminals who have been referred to were probably their compatriots not so long ago. Does he find it surprising that the SDLP is complicit in that protection of criminals in Northern Ireland and is allowing them to walk away with ill-gotten gains and terrorise the communities in which they operate?

Mr Poots: I know that the public will be hugely disappointed. For a considerable period of time, the SDLP have positioned themselves as the stooges of Sinn Féin. They will never separate themselves from Sinn Féin on any of the big issues. They are like rabbits caught in the headlights.

Mr Byrne: I thank Mr Poots for giving way. Would he accept that it is virtually impossible to run a family-owned private business in parts of Belfast in the pub trade, the fuel business or in amusement arcades? We have the abuse of an official mechanism known as the national charities registry. Fronts for paramilitaries on both sides have become legitimised and a blind eye is being turned to that. We want the NCA to be effective in that regard as well as on the other issues and to have real accountability.

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker: The Member has an extra minute

Mr Poots: Of course I agree with the Member. That is why we want it to happen. That is why we need it to happen. The Member has stated very clearly that the current arrangements are ineffective. Meanwhile, the SDLP are wringing their hands and saying that they cannot change it because we do not have as much accountability for the NCA as we have for the PSNI. It is not that we do not have accountability. It is that we do not have as much accountability as we have —

Mr Byrne: Will the Member give way?

Mr Poots: — no, I am not giving way again, Mr Byrne — with the PSNI. We really need to move ahead with this, and the SDLP needs to look at themselves and who they are is lining up with on this. They are lining up with Sinn Féin and all of the other people that I named at the start. The SDLP needs to reconsider their position. If they have genuine concerns, get them dealt with and let us move on. This business of carrying on and on and on, and delaying, delaying and delaying is brilliant news for all those criminals and gangsters out there.

Mr Frew: I thank the Member for giving way. May I ask a question about the SDLP fighting for accountability? Does the Member know how accountable accountability is? At what cost will that come when we look at criminals who will be able to infiltrate Northern Ireland?

Mr Poots: Accountability is certainly being placed on a pedestal well above actually catching criminals. The public are fed up. I remember, when I was Minister of the Environment, going to Newry and Mourne District Council, and it was fed up with having to clean up the aftermath of fuel launderers who left materials and toxic waste dumped at the side of the road. The council had to spend £1,000 a ton to get rid of it. They are fed up with it. The public are fed up with people having fuel laundering plants dismantled, but nobody ever appearing to be arrested. Who is operating these fuel laundering plants? We need to go after these people in a serious way and ensure that all of the tools are used to tackle it.

The public are fed up with illegal dumps across Northern Ireland, and we do not have that specialist service and support from the National Crime Agency. The public are fed up with the human trafficking that is taking place; with the young girls that are being brought into prostitution and who are being used and abused; with the people who are working in the back streets as cheap labour for gangmasters. We need all the resource that we can get to support us.

George Hamilton made it abundantly clear last week that he does not have that resource. There is the opportunity for us to introduce additional resource to Northern Ireland. There is the opportunity for those people to be held to account —

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker: The Member's time is almost up.

Mr Poots: — in a number of different ways. Get on board, and let us get this organisation in here and get its help.

Mr Attwood: Whilst he did not realise it, Mr Poots has just made my argument. He went on and on — rightly — about illegal fuel dumps. He said, "Sign up to the NCA, because that will deal with it." Explain, then, why, despite the efforts of the PSNI, SOCA and other agencies on this island, virtually nobody has ever been before a criminal court in relation to such matters? If you want us to support the NCA, it has a responsibility to us — to everybody — to prove that it will go after fuel launderers.

The biggest waste dump in the history of these islands lies two miles outside Derry, on top of the River Faughan. Those responsible for it got £50 million out of that dump. It will cost £110 million to clean it up, and that is independent of any leachate that is likely to gush into the River Faughan and the River Foyle, and yet —

Mr Newton: Will the Member give way?

Mr Attwood: Not to you. I will give way to other people.

He knows why. That Member knows why.

Yet the police knew nothing about it. The Serious Organised Crime Agency knew nothing about it. It was not on the radar of the organisation that David Ford chairs, namely the Organised Crime Task Force. Nobody knew about the biggest waste dump in the history of these islands. So we have asked the NCA this: convince us that those responsible for that — the organised crime on the island of Ireland — will never again be able to get away with something like that. Show us that all those private arrangements that SOCA enters into — probably not many — are approved by the High Court and that that will become the rule of thumb of the NCA. That is the way to deal with organised crime — by going after all of those involved and ensuring that there are no no-go zones when it comes to organised crime.

Let me explain.

You might laugh. I will give way to you if you have any questions.

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker: Mr Attwood, I may not be able to award you an extra minute if you take interventions. The same goes for Members who speak after you. I am bound by the Business Committee's ruling on the timing of the debate. It is your choice.

Mr Attwood: I was not aware of that ruling. I will check the Speaker's rulings, as I have tended to do.

Let me deal with the issue of the SDLP approach. When it was right to move on policing because the accountability threshold was sufficient, we moved on policing. Why is accountability so important? It is not technical, which is how Mr Givan referred to it. Accountability is the method of ensuring that an organisation accounts for its practices. In that moment, you win community confidence. Any police officer, NCA official or anybody involved in crime enforcement will tell you that community intelligence is at the heart of good attacks on crime. By having proper accountability, you have the mechanisms to ensure that, when the community has doubts, it can have confidence and, when the community has confidence, it provides information and intelligence to the crime agencies, including the NCA.

Paragraph 13 of the Minister's paper says that the Police Service, by giving agreement to operations, becomes accountable to the board for that activity. Does that or does that not mean that all the board's accountability mechanisms — public sessions, private sessions, special committees, section 59 and section 60 requests and all the other arrangements of policing that the SDLP negotiated — will be in place in respect of the NCA? Paragraph 10 of the paper says that the NCA will be required to secure the agreement of the PSNI prior to commencing covert investigations. Does that or does that not mean that all agents involved in that activity will be subject to PSNI requirements? If the PSNI says that they are vetoed, will that mean vetoed, rather than vetoed to a degree? Paragraph 25 is the elephant in the room. Is it credible in this day and age for a Home Secretary, by order, to say that the NCA shall deal with counterterrorism, that there is no role for the Executive or the Policing Board in the North, with all our experience —

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker: The Member's time is up.

Mr Attwood: — with the security agency and policing in the past? I ask those questions to represent our concerns.

Mr Nesbitt: The Home Secretary established the National Crime Agency in 2010. Its purpose is:

I repeat: "the UK's fight". According to the NCA, serious and:

I repeat: "the UK's national security". It is an organisation designed to have national and international reach. It is meant to have:

The problem is that the national reach is restricted here in Northern Ireland. The NCA does not have the same mandate and powers in Northern Ireland as in the rest of the United Kingdom. The problem is that it cannot bring the full weight of the law to bear on criminals based here. Those dedicated to child abuse or child exploitation or those who make a twisted living from cybercrime, drugs and the rest find Northern Ireland an attractive place to base themselves.

The NCA is designed to respond on a 24/7 basis. It has three tools in its armoury: it conducts its own operations, it provides operational and specialist support to its partners and it provides clear national leadership that ensures that the UK's law enforcement makes the best of its collective resources. Given that we all woke up this morning to the latest example of how our Budget is broken, with the cuts in the events budget, what responsible politician would not want the full resources of the NCA in play in Northern Ireland? Who, other than the organised criminals themselves, could object to the PSNI being able to call on the expertise of such a body? It is not as if the PSNI has access to the same expertise and specialist knowledge within its own ranks. Even if it did, only last week, the Chief Constable laid out starkly the seriousness of the situation facing the PSNI and its service delivery, following the latest round of budget cuts. Speaking on Thursday, George Hamilton made it clear that the cuts would make the PSNI "unrecognisable". He said that he had been pushed into a "virtually impossible" position and that there would be fewer officers, longer waiting times for non-emergency calls and possibly compulsory retirements. Quite simply, the PSNI and Northern Ireland plc need the National Crime Agency. If it is OK for the NCA to lift suspected child abusers in England, Scotland and Wales, why is it not OK for them to do it in Northern Ireland? Why do they have to ask the Chief Constable to eat into his overstretched resources to make those arrests in this part of the United Kingdom?

Opposition to the NCA has been couched in terms of concerns about oversight arrangements, but many people — not all of them unionist — have grave concerns that that opposition is rooted more in a nationalist ideological opposition to a UK-wide body operating in this part of the United Kingdom. As Mr Elliott reminded the House, when the proposals for dealing with the past were brought forward by Richard Haass, nationalists seemed happy for a new, separate police force operating here called the historical investigations unit (HIU). That would have been utterly unaccountable to the PSNI. It would have been OK for the HIU to do its own thing but not the NCA. Opponents may argue that there was more chance of the NCA and the PSNI investigating the same individuals at the same time for different reasons, but no one can tell me that there was not a chance that the HIU and the PSNI would also have investigated the same individuals at the same time, each ignorant of the other's intent and therefore each capable of derailing the other's investigation.

The bottom line is that Northern Ireland and its people do not enjoy the same protection as the rest of the United Kingdom, and that is not acceptable. Police assessments state that there are 140 gangs operating in Northern Ireland. The Ulster Unionist Party wants to see the PSNI given access to every possible resource as it works day and daily to fight crime and protect our people. There is no question whatsoever that opposition from the SDLP and Sinn Féin is severely limiting how much the NCA can do in Northern Ireland. On that basis, we reject the amendment and support the motion.

Mr Ford: I welcome the fact that we have the motion before the House today, as I am glad of the opportunity to share with Members the difficulties being faced by law enforcement agencies because of the ongoing situation with the non-operability in the devolved sphere of the National Crime Agency.

As has already been highlighted — Mr Givan referred to the first birthday being tomorrow — the NCA came into operation on 7 October last year, and we have still to reach agreement on its powers extending fully here with appropriate accountability mechanisms.

I have been having talks in recent weeks with most of the Executive parties on the proposal paper that I put forward. There is a significant gap in our law enforcement ability, as anyone who read the Chief Constable's recent comments in the 'Belfast Telegraph' would have seen. It concerns me, as Justice Minister, that we do not have access to the skills and expertise that are available from the NCA and are not easily available to the PSNI. These are not issues of minor crime; they are issues of serious and organised crime both in Northern Ireland and with a reach across these islands and the world.

Recent PSNI figures estimate that 140 to 160 organised crime groups are active in Northern Ireland and there are 800 active criminals. We have had descriptions from different parts of the House of the impacts of organised crime, whether it be drug dealing, fuel laundering, waste dumping or the increasing problem of cybercrime, on which there is a very limited pool of expertise to tackle it at the highest level. We all know, because we discuss it frequently in the House, the damage that human trafficking does: it destroys lives. Northern Ireland is both a transit country and a destination for many traffickers. I believe that the PSNI does an excellent job, but there is no doubt that, once criminals start operating across jurisdictions and international boundaries, as many crime groups do, it needs the support of the NCA, just as the Irish authorities — we had a list from Mr Lynch of all the Irish authorities involved — benefited from that support from the NCA recently when they seized the yacht carrying a significant amount of cocaine. The amount seems to inflate as the debate goes on. I am not sure that it has reached £100 million yet, but it was a significant and serious issue. There is a certain irony that an Garda Síochána can benefit from the full cooperation of the NCA to deal with arresting the occupants of a yacht off the waters of County Cork while some Members of the House will stop the PSNI getting the full benefit. What is even more ironic is that Gerry Kelly, who is, of course, not present in the House, managed to highlight that as one of the specific issues. If I were Gerry Kelly, I would not have scored an own goal like that.

On a resource level, there is absolutely no doubt that, at a time of increasing pressures, the PSNI must be able to tap into the resources that the NCA can provide to undertake or assist in operations. If the PSNI cannot access those resources, we will see officers being redeployed from the crimes that they should be dealing with in the purely devolved, local criminal sphere to deal with the organised issues. NCA officers are currently sitting in Belfast doing back-office work for police services in England, Wales and Scotland because they are not allowed to be operational here. That, at a time of increasing pressures, is utterly ridiculous.

Many Members will have seen the paper that the Chief Constable circulated after he received it from the director general of the National Crime Agency. The paper looked at some of the issues for which we have simply not got the resources that we need to deal with organised crime. I highlighted that at Question Time last week, but let me refer to just a few of those points. Operation Notarise, the UK-wide operation against online child abuse, could not get direct support from NCA officers in Northern Ireland. The PSNI had to carry out the duties that were performed by NCA officers elsewhere, on the basis that the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre has been absorbed into the NCA. That is where the UK-wide expertise is, yet those officers cannot be operational on the ground in Northern Ireland. We had an issue of money laundering using pre-payment cards where there was serious need for a complex financial investigation, which, again, is part of the NCA's expertise, but it could not be provided.

Mr Attwood highlighted the issue of the largest waste dump found, I think, anywhere on these islands, on the banks of the Faughan. The NCA was unable to continue the assistance that SOCA gave in the early stages with financial investigations, because it was a devolved issue and the NCA could not continue to provide that support.

Mr Poots: Will the Minister give way?

Mr Ford: I will give way.

Mr Poots: Mr Attwood was also responsible for an organisation called the Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA), which had a key role to play in that. For him simply to place the blame on the National Crime Agency, which did not have the powers to act, is wholly spurious.

Mr Ford: What I want to see —

Mrs D Kelly: Will the Minister give way?

Mr Ford: Aw, come on.

I want to see all the relevant agencies joining together in the way that the NIEA was able to send people to the next meeting of the Organised Crime Task Force to discuss some of those issues. Unfortunately, that assistance could not continue. I give way.

Mrs D Kelly: Thank you, Minister. What is totally spurious, of course, was Mr Poots's allegation. As the Minister will know, it was Mr Attwood and the NIEA that highlighted that waste dump, and the NIEA brought to bear its full powers on that.

Mr Ford: Yes, but the point that I am trying to make about joining up is that the NIEA had the duty to identify it, because that is its specific role, but the financial expertise was best available from SOCA, which was then absorbed into the NCA, and that expertise could not continue from within the NCA. We will call that a score draw between Mrs Kelly and Mr Poots.

One other issue that I highlighted last week was the NCA requiring PSNI assistance to search the homes of suspected drug dealers. Other serious incidents under way meant that the PSNI could not respond as quickly as it had hoped in circumstances that may have led to evidence being removed. If the NCA had operational officers here, that work would have been carried out by them. We have already seen the issue of the PSNI losing officers to cover work that the NCA would do otherwise, but in terms of priorities and the difficult pressures that the PSNI is under, as the current budget changes come through, it becomes increasingly difficult for the PSNI to do what is its responsibility, without also carrying out the NCA's responsibility, and to provide the services that our people expect.

I mentioned it earlier, but let us repeat it: the NCA is the UK centre of expertise in many areas around cybercrime and, in particular, child exploitation online. Those areas cause huge concerns to the people of Northern Ireland. They are areas where the NCA can give arm's-length advice and assistance. The kind of line that was coming from the Sinn Féin Benches was that they can help and they can provide the information. Sure they can, but they cannot put operational officers on the ground — the people who have the direct experience — to go in and investigate what is happening. They have to pass the information on to the PSNI, and the PSNI then has the obligation to carry things through, whereas the expertise and the information reside with NCA.

Of course, one of the key issues is around civil recovery, on which there was a noticeable reluctance on Mr Kelly's part to take any intervention, because it is really the intervention to target the assets of local criminals. That has been lost since 7 October last year. It has not been hampered or reduced and nor does it require additional resources — it has been lost. Mr Kelly spoke about the idea of setting up a separate body for Northern Ireland. Gee, look at the successes we have had on legislation in this place around contentious issues. We have just introduced the Education Bill about three years later than it should have been introduced. If education is contentious, heaven spare us from what would happen if we were required to do separate legislation for our own bespoke body. There is a body that is capable of carrying out civil recovery: the NCA. It is operational in England, Wales and Scotland, and it needs to be operational here to tackle the organised criminals who seek to secrete assets in Northern Ireland.

Mr Wilson: Will the Minister give way?

Mr Ford: I will give way.

Mr Wilson: Does the Minister also accept that setting up a separate body involves additional cost? It still means that there has to be liaison with another body and that is where the gaps in effectiveness fall in dealing with crime that is seamless across international borders.

Mr Ford: Agreed entirely. I was trying to get on and not mention everything, but I am sure that, to the people we represent, the idea of criminals living with their assets secreted in Northern Ireland in lives of luxury, in the middle of what this society is going through, is utterly unacceptable. It is not just people living the life of luxury; it is luxury derived from the misery of other people. At the moment we are doing nothing to tackle it in this jurisdiction. Those are reasons why I believe that we must get the issue of the NCA resolved urgently.

Mr Givan: Will the Minister give way?

Mr Ford: Briefly.

Mr Givan: Is the Minister able to quantify the millions of pounds — just so that we can crystallise the issue for the public — and the extent to which criminals are benefiting and have that money in their back pocket? It would appear that it is not just the millions of pounds they have in their back pocket; it is Sinn Féin and the SDLP as well.

Mr Ford: In brief, the figures show that, last year, there was something like £19 million under investigation in Northern Ireland. This year, it is down to eight-point-something million pounds. I do not have the figures immediately in front of me, but those are roughly accurate.

The proposal that I put forward involved detailed work with the Home Office, the NCA, the Northern Ireland Office, the PSNI and others. In my view, it set out extensive accountability arrangements in line with local requirements and represents a sound and final proposal to enable progress. It represents a realistic, achievable framework. The question is what sort of society we want. Do we want to hamper law enforcement when there is a sensible package available for help?

We had a lot of naysaying in the debate. I will come on to some of the comments that were made by Mr Attwood in particular in a moment, but there was a lot of naysaying from Sinn Féin with absolutely nothing specific. Indeed, Gerry Kelly, in saying nothing at all specific, showed such confidence in his argument that he did not accept a single intervention from any other Member during his 10 minutes. That is an indication of a man who has real confidence in the argument that he is putting forward — real confidence that he has got it right and can deal with interventions from anybody else.

If the situation is not resolved soon, we will have to make arrangements to fill the gaps, because we will have to accept failure. I do not believe that the Assembly should accept failure in this area. I trust that all Members will agree to the motion, and I will certainly oppose the amendment as it is currently formulated, because I believe that it is flawed.

The law already has many different requirements for the NCA because it is a body in Westminster and accountable to the Home Secretary. I will take a quick intervention.

Mr Campbell: The Minister talked about taking steps to fill the gaps. Has he any idea of the cost implications of those measures?

Mr Ford: I think that the technical term is "quite horrific".

The amendment refers to accountability. Let us unpack this and look at what we have. We have the accountability of the NCA to the Policing Board. The director general is required to attend meetings of the Policing Board on request; to consult the board on, and seek its prior consent to, his plans; and to take account of the board's policing plan. The NCA could not exercise constabulary powers or covert investigation powers without the agreement of the Chief Constable. Let me repeat that: the NCA could not exercise those powers without the agreement of the Chief Constable, and the Chief Constable is accountable to the board.

Unlike SOCA, all the NCA's functions, as highlighted earlier, would be subject to investigation by the Police Ombudsman. There would be, through the Police Ombudsman, accountability for all devolved, non-devolved and civil recovery issues. In addition, Criminal Justice Inspection would cover the NCA, as would Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC). So let us not pretend that there is insufficient accountability. I believe that the accountability certainly exceeds that in the rest of the UK and, arguably, in some areas, that of the PSNI.

Mr Attwood made three specific points relating to the paper that I circulated earlier. Let me just respond briefly. He referred to paragraph 13, where it is clear that the accountability of the NCA is to the Chief Constable and the board. Paragraph 10 deals with covert operations and makes it clear that they would be only by agreement with the Chief Constable and subject to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) and the Police Act 2000. Mr Attwood also referred to paragraph 25. I believe that the Department of Justice is bound by annex E to the St Andrews Agreement, which clearly shows how that would be carried through. Indeed, the suggestion from the Home Secretary is that an issue of national intelligence would be carried through only for England and Wales. So there are very clear points there. However, I am grateful that Mr Attwood — unlike Sinn Féin Members — at least put forward some specific concerns and that there has been engagement with the SDLP. I trust that we will very shortly wrap up those final issues.

I also had concerns when I first heard of the Home Secretary's plans for the NCA. That is why I sought and achieved many changes in its operations, and significant discussion has been going on. However, we are now at the end of the road. It is time that Members accepted that we have a good deal. We should resolve these final issues that need to be tweaked; reject the amendment; and pass the motion and the LCM to ensure that we get the benefit of NCA to protect the people of Northern Ireland.

Mr McCartney: Beidh mé ag labhairt in aghaidh an rúin agus ag tabhairt tacaíochta don leasú. I support the amendment and opposed the motion. Let me say first that Gerry Kelly was called away on an urgent matter. I notice that others who made contributions also left the Chamber, but the Minister did not draw any inference from the fact that Alex Attwood was not here.

Mr Ford: Will the Member give way?

Mr McCartney: I have five minutes, and I am not giving way.

Mr Ford: Alex Attwood apologised to me.

Mr McCartney: Gerry Kelly did not apologise to you, perhaps because he did not have the chance to do so, but I noticed that you drew no inference from the fact that Alex Attwood was not here, nor did you say that he had apologised to you. I find you very defensive on this issue. At the core —

Mr Wilson: You still have a rubbish argument

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker: Order.

Mr McCartney: At the core of the debate is accountability, and it is very interesting that most of the Members who spoke today ignored it or tried to suggest that the demand for accountability was not realistic. I think that the Minister said that it was not realistic. It is realistic, and the reason is that, as we know from history and now from current practice, one of the fundamental building blocks of the positive changes made to policing in order to ensure that we did not repeat the mistakes of the past was proper and effective accountability.

I noticed that, when Tom Elliott was speaking, he made some reference to the sort of idea that because it is called "National", the opposition that is coming from Sinn Féin and indeed, as he said, the SDLP was for that result, but I think that he forgot to accept that, if the secret is in the title, it is also in the title of the Assembly that we are in. This is a legislative Assembly. We make legislation for the people whom we represent. That is what we will do. We will make legislation that is relevant to the experience of the people whom we represent. Other people can ignore that. Other people can look to other places to get their lead. We will not. We will be consistent in everything that we do. I notice that Stewart —

Mr Wilson: Will the Member give way?

Mr McCartney: No. I have already said that I have five minutes and I will not get any extra time. It is limited as it is. That, to us, is the core matter. Indeed, even when the Minister was speaking, I think that he accepted that the standards of accountability have made the PSNI a police service that now enjoys the support of people in the North of Ireland. He accepts that the NCA will not be subject to the same level of accountability.

Mr Ford: Will the Member give way?

Mr McCartney: No, I will not give way because —

Mr Ford: On a point of order, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker. Is it in order for a Member to state what somebody else said inaccurately and then refuse to take a point of information?

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker: It is, in fact, a matter for the Member speaking as to whether they give way. Hansard will satisfy everyone as to what was said and who said it.

Mr McCartney: Perhaps Hansard will record what was said and also what was said when I asked that question during last week's Question Time. I asked the Minister whether the NCA was subject to the same accountability mechanisms as the PSNI and he told me that it was not. Maybe, sometimes, when people speak, the metamorphosis comes out and you hear it in a different way. That is what I heard this afternoon and it is what I heard last week. That is what I am saying. If the Minister wants to contradict that, he can. Are those who are operating in the field, in operations and carrying out investigations, subject to the exact same accountability mechanisms as all PSNI officers? Is it or is it not the case? Silence, as Father Ted once said —

Mr Ford: Will the Member give way?

Mr McCartney: If you want, I will give way, yes.

Mr Ford: Sorry, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, I was so shocked that any member of Sinn Féin was actually giving way in this debate that I thought it was yet another rhetorical question. I am grateful to the Member for finally getting round to the point of accepting that there is an issue for debate. Of course, somebody who is a member of the National Crime Agency does not have identical accountability mechanisms to those which apply to members of the PSNI, but I have listed all the ways in which they are as close as they can be given that it is a UK-wide body. I listed the accountability mechanisms to the Policing Board, the ombudsman, CJINI, HMIC and everybody you could think of.

Mr McCartney: I suppose that now when the Minister has been asked to reflect on the point of order, he will reflect on whether he actually agrees with what I said despite the fact that he said that I misquoted him. It is very simple. People can call it a fig leaf. They can call it whatever they want. We will not sign up to any body that does not have the same accountability mechanisms as the PSNI. We will not allow the failings of the past to be repeated and revisited here. That is our job. That is our task. That is what we are elected to do. We make no apology for that, nor will we allow inferences or snide remarks to deflect us from what we do. We are here to represent the people who put us here. There will be proper accountability for all policing structures in the North while Sinn Féin has the powers to do anything about it. Go raibh míle maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle.

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker: Question Time will commence shortly. We will conclude the debate after Question Time. Members may take their ease while we change the top table.

Mr M McGuinness (The deputy First Minister): A LeasCheann Comhairle, with your permission, I will ask junior Minister Jennifer McCann to answer the question.

Ms J McCann (Junior Minister, Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister): East Antrim is part of the northern zone. A number of projects were prioritised in the northern zone area plan. Indeed, contractors are on site at one of those capital projects, the Causeway rural and urban network capital project, which is the development of a charity hub in Coleraine. In addition, a key revenue project, employment fuel poverty, has just received a letter of offer. That project, worth £1·8 million, will help insulate homes and reduce heating costs in deprived areas in the 10 current council areas across the zone, including in East Antrim. Details of all projects prioritised in the funding allocation for each of the nine investment fund zones are available on the OFMDFM website.

Mr Hilditch: I thank the junior Minister for her answer. The East Antrim area probably did not benefit terribly well from the capital projects. Will there be opportunities in the future to avail of the social investment fund, particularly given the financial difficulties we face, now and in the future?

Ms J McCann: As I said, to date, there are 23 projects, with a total commitment of £34·4 million, across all the social investment zones. As of 1 October, a further 12 projects, valued at £18·8 million, are at final-stage approval. Of that, £12·3 million is for capital projects, and it is expected that those projects will soon be issued a letter of offer as well. There is certainly a further strand of SIF money coming soon.

Mr McMullan: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. What opportunities exist to ensure that the social investment fund adds value and complements other Executive initiatives?

Ms J McCann: We all acknowledge that working in silos does not work, and, yet, for too long, that is really how business has been done. The social investment fund cannot operate in isolation and must integrate and add value to other key policies and initiatives. For example, SIF projects will need to align with the Executive's child poverty strategy to help alleviate poverty among our communities. We are all too aware of the expected projected rise in child poverty levels, and family poverty levels more generally, due to austerity cuts, which are unacceptable. We want this money to make an impact and address evidenced, objective need where there is a clear deficit. There are also clear links to neighbourhood renewal, education, regeneration and employment programmes, and investment and other initiatives in rural and urban areas. SIF provides a real opportunity to bind those projects together and enhance outcomes, while addressing the gaps that exist.

Mr M McGuinness: The individual needs review process was established to assess the needs of individual victims and survivors as defined under the Victims and Survivors Order 2006. The process was informed by the key areas of need identified by the Commission for Victims and Survivors in its comprehensive needs assessment.

The purpose of the review was not to extract admissions of any kind from the individuals who presented at the Victims and Survivors Service. Therefore, in delivering the process, the service operated a clear policy of confidentiality for any information provided during the review and ensured that every client completed a declaration to confirm their understanding of the process.

Last year, the Commission for Victims and Survivors commissioned an independent assessment of the Victims and Survivors Service. As part of that, the service has been asked to produce proposals for a new assessment process, and discussions are ongoing. Any process must take account of the sensitivities involved and the need to ensure that victims and survivors are not subject to unnecessary questioning, while still ensuring that the relevant information is secured to make an informed decision, in line with governance requirements.

Mr Campbell: I appreciate the need for entirely innocent victims not to be subjected to unnecessary questioning. However, given that there are those who are not so innocent, such as the deputy First Minister himself in the distant past, how does he feel about owning up to the atrocities that he engaged in as part of a truth recovery process to try to help bring others forward into 2014 with an understanding that people with blood on their hands are prepared to own up and accept the part that they played in the past?

Mr M McGuinness: The definition of a victim is very clear and has been set down in legislation since 2006.

Mr Nesbitt: The deputy First Minister will know that two schemes under the individual needs review that are most favoured by the bereaved — respite breaks and education and training — have both been suspended due to lack of funds. What assurances can he give the House that those funds will be secured under October monitoring, which, I believe, is £3 million, to get to the point where those schemes are back in play?

Mr M McGuinness: The Member is absolutely correct. The schemes are of huge importance to victims and survivors. In our previous Question Time, I made it clear that we intended to deal with that during our agreement in relation to October monitoring. Hopefully, that will be dealt with shortly.

Mr Milne: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. In the independent assessment, what is the time frame for the implementation of the recommendations?

Mr M McGuinness: In total, there are something like 70 recommendations — 55 from individual reports, and a further 15 from the commissioner's covering advice. Of those, ownership for 52 lies with the Victims and Survivors Service, and ownership for seven lies with OFMDFM. The Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety has responsibility for two, and the remaining nine have joint ownership. Some 47 of the 70 recommendations have been fully implemented, and 17 have been partially implemented. All the recommendations are due to be implemented by March 2015. Progress against the implementation of the recommendations is monitored monthly via the monthly victims and survivors update meeting. We will continue to ensure that whatever action is taken in respect of the recommendations and, in particular, any others relating to direct victims services not only happens but that they are the right actions that have the desired impact.

Mrs D Kelly: In relation to the support given to victims groups such as WAVE, there were issues around the number of pages in application forms that individuals had to complete. Has any flexibility or consideration been given to the concerns raised by those organisations?

Mr M McGuinness: That has been the subject of controversy for some time. There can be no doubt that the Victims and Survivors Service has taken on board the criticisms that have been made of the difficulties presented, and we await the outcome of its deliberations on how it intends to proceed with that.

Mr M McGuinness: We are committed to achieving greater diversity in public appointments consistent with the overall principle of selection on merit as a means of ensuring effective public bodies. We recognise that some sections of our society are under-represented on the boards of public bodies, and we are working to encourage greater participation from those groups. Our officials have put in place several measures to raise awareness of public appointment opportunities amongst women and members of other under-represented groups. That is an important step in encouraging them to apply.

Secondly, officials have improved the processes for public appointments aimed at making them more accessible and encouraging greater participation. Some of the steps taken include the establishment of an interdepartmental public appointments forum to share best practice across Departments, including increasing diversity. Independent advice will be provided to the forum by a senior academic with considerable experience in equality and diversity issues, producing the twice-yearly 'All Aboard' publication, which gives details of public appointment opportunities arising over the next six months, and circulating upcoming appointment opportunities to an extensive mailing list of several hundred individuals and organisations, including private and voluntary sector women's groups interested in receiving information on public appointments.

Departments will interview larger numbers of applicants for appointments. Appointment plans will include diversity guidance, which has been developed by the public appointments forum. Rather than making generic appointments, posts are filled to address specific skills in order to build effective teams, and Departments are developing alternatives to established criteria such as better use of presentations.

Ms Boyle: I thank the deputy First Minister for his detailed response, and I commend his Department for what it is doing to address female representation on public bodies. What are the current statistics for female representation on public bodies?

Mr M McGuinness: The recently published public appointments annual report for 2012-13 shows that of a total of 1,050 applicants for public appointments in 2012-13, 317, which is 30%, were women. Of the total number of people appointed in 2012-13, 291, which is 40%, were women. That is a very welcome increase on the 29% in 2011-12. At 31 August 2014, women held 37% of the total number of appointments held. While some progress has been made towards greater diversity, it is clear that further work in raising awareness and encouraging more women to apply for public appointments is needed to ensure an improved gender balance on public bodies.

Mr P Ramsey: Further to Michaela's question, does the deputy First Minister believe that there should be a change in legislation to ensure that groups other than women are included? I attended an all-party group on visual impairment this morning. People who are visually impaired account for only 1% of public appointments across Northern Ireland, and there is discrimination against disabled people generally. Would the deputy First Minister like to comment on that?

Mr M McGuinness: The Member, as do all other Members, knows that in order to get answers we have to have the agreement of the First Minister and the deputy First Minister. I appreciate the Member's point, which is a good one. It challenges us all on the levels of representation that there are for diverse groups in society. I will undertake to have a conversation with the First Minister to see whether more can be done, although I already indicated in my answer that we are not just talking about increased representation for women. We are looking at how other people in society can feel distant from decision-making and at how we, as a Department, can ensure that we are putting in place processes that can create far greater representation across the spectrum.

Mr M McGuinness: The Programme for Government 2011-15 includes a commitment to develop the One Plan for the regeneration of Derry, incorporating the key sites at Fort George and Ebrington. Job creation is one of the key priorities of the One Plan, and that is reflected in the milestones and outputs identified for each year of the Programme for Government period. For 2013-14, the programme set a target of 1,670 jobs promoted through the public, community and private sectors, and we are pleased to report that the total number of jobs promoted for 2013-14 that have been identified to date is 1,683. That figure is an estimate based on inputs from all Departments, from Derry City Council and from Ilex's analysis of the impact of the City of Culture.

The jobs to be created have been achieved through small business start-ups and expansions, support from Invest NI and as a result of the City of Culture year. It includes two major inward investments by Fujitsu and Convergys, which together account for over 500 new jobs. I commend all businesses that have created jobs in the city during a very difficult economic period. At the same time, I recognise that much more work still needs to be done.

Mr Eastwood: I thank the deputy First Minister for his answer. We all know that there is a difference between jobs promoted and jobs created and people getting paid to work in those jobs. How many actual, real jobs have been created in the financial year?

Mr M McGuinness: The important thing to remember is that jobs promoted is, effectively, a guarantee of jobs, given the commitments made by different companies, but over a period. These are not jobs that are put in place immediately, but they are not promises; they are firm commitments that are having a very important impact on the employment situation in a city that badly needs jobs created.

One of the key issues for the One Plan is to create jobs in the city. That is also possibly the biggest challenge, given the current economic climate. Interdepartmental groups set interim one-year targets to align with the One Plan catalyst programmes, and each Department reports back through OFMDFM to the strategy board.

As I said, the jobs target for 2013-14 was 1,670. That target was set in 2010 and was based on a number of assumptions about future development. Among the major inward investments negotiated in 2013-14 was investment by Fujitsu. As the Member will know, the First Minister and I met Fujitsu in Japan, and 192 jobs were then created. Of course, we met Convergys when we were in the United States. It is creating 333 jobs. As well as that, I know that a lot of work is taking place under the auspices of Invest NI. Whilst Invest NI cannot direct companies on where to locate, I think that there is a recognition that, given the difficulties that exist in the north-west, not only in the Derry area but in Limavady and Coleraine, that area needs to be tackled. That is one of the reasons why the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development made a decision to relocate to the north-west.

Obviously, we are continually looking at opportunities to bring jobs to the city. Just last week, the First Minister and I met a potential investor. It looks very promising, and, if it comes to pass, as I expect it will —

Mr Deputy Speaker: The Minister's time is up.

Mr M McGuinness: — there will be further job announcements in the time ahead.

Mr Wilson: How many of the 1,600 jobs which currently deliver welfare benefits to other parts of the United Kingdom are located in Londonderry? Does the deputy First Minister have any concern that 1,600 public sector jobs could be lost to Northern Ireland? Or, is he more concerned about Sinn Féin's pursuit of power in the Irish Republic than about jobs for people —

Mr Deputy Speaker: The Member has asked his question.

Mr Wilson: — in Northern Ireland?

Mr M McGuinness: I hear the nonsense propagated regularly that Sinn Féin's position on the welfare cuts, which are very ruthless and of which more are promised as a result of last week's Conservative party conference, is all to do with the development of Sinn Féin in the South. That is like saying that we do not care about our neighbours or increased levels of child poverty or low-paid workers whose tax credits are being threatened. Of course, we could get into the politics of "whataboutery". People talk about it costing £40,000 a night to police Twaddell Avenue. That is £280,000 a week. Over 12 months, it is a figure of some £12 million, which could, quite easily, employ 200 new nurses or 200 new teachers.

Ms Maeve McLaughlin: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the deputy First Minister for his response, and I welcome the additional focus and the focus on Derry and the north-west. What progress is being made in relation to the Ebrington and Fort George sites?

Mr M McGuinness: A development framework for the Ebrington site was completed in March 2014. It, ultimately, supported an additional 1,800 jobs in the city and an additional gross value added of £42 million. The framework will, shortly, be submitted for outline planning permission. Current developments on the site include a two-storey underground car park and enabling platform, which have just been completed. Many Members who pass that way on their way to Stormont will have seen that. Commercial opportunity is approved for a further two buildings, and a proposal is being developed for a maritime museum and renovation work to develop a digital and creative industries hub.

The North West Regional Science Park, which I had the privilege of officially opening just a couple of weeks ago, is the first development at Fort George. It was completed recently. On opening, the facility will be 80% occupied, which exceeds its target. The focus there will be on research, development and innovation. I think the fact that the science park is of a regional nature will be a major attractor to that site. It was very encouraging to hear the people associated with the project saying that they envisage a substantial extension to the science park in the time ahead.

So, I think that that, coupled with the many and very exciting expressions of interest that there are in Ebrington, clearly shows that the potential of Fort George and Ebrington to deliver many, many more jobs is very real indeed.

Mr Deputy Speaker: I remind Members to make sure that their mobile phones are not causing interference to the sound system.

Mr M McGuinness: A LeasCheann Comhairle, with your permission, I will ask junior Minister McCann to answer this question.

Ms J McCann: We fully acknowledge that the needs of victims and survivors have to given high priority, and we will continue to work to ensure that they are. We are committed to ensuring that the victims and survivors' budget is protected, and, to that end, we have a bid for £1·3 million in additional funding in October monitoring. We have raised the issue directly with the Minister of Finance and are confident that the budget will be protected at the same baseline — £11·3 million — as in the previous financial year. However, we are also aware that there has been an increase in the number of victims and survivors coming forward to the service.

To protect front line services, and in line with the levels of efficiency savings being sought from our Department and its arm's-length bodies, the Victims and Survivors Service is seeking a 4·4% reduction in administration and in funding to groups. The Victims and Survivors Service has been working with groups to help them find the efficiencies needed, and the service itself has been able to make efficiencies in its running costs to mitigate the impact on its front line services. We remain optimistic that a bid for additional funding for the Victims and Survivors Service will be successful in October monitoring. Funding for victims' services has increased over recent years, with £50 million being allocated for victims during this budgetary round.

Mr McCarthy: I thank the junior Minister for her response. Can she, on behalf of the deputy First Minister, explain why he and the First Minister decided to reduce disproportionately funding to the Victims and Survivors Service by somewhere between 15% and 20% while the Department saw a reduction in its budget of 1·4%?

Ms J McCann: As I said in my answer, there have been efficiency savings of 4·4% right across all arm's-length bodies. Unfortunately, the bid that was made in June monitoring was not met, and that is why we are very optimistic that it will be met in October monitoring. Therefore, the funding cuts that you are talking about had to be implemented in the previous period. We are committed to ensuring that funding is protected for the services that are being delivered to those victims and survivors who need them.

Mr Hazzard: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. When does the Minister envisage a new Victims' Commissioner being appointed?

Ms J McCann: As the Member will be aware, the Commissioner for Victims and Survivors, Kathryn Stone, left her post on 12 June 2014. Our officials are currently working through the processes to appoint a new commissioner. The appointment will be regulated by the Commissioner for Public Appointments and will follow the code of practice for ministerial appointments. The process will be taken forward by HR Connect, and advertisements recently appeared in newspapers. The closing date for applications was 12 September 2014, and interviews will take place in the week commencing 13 October. The Victims and Survivors Forum was consulted on the skills and qualities needed for the role, and that was taken into consideration when finalising the necessary skill sets for the incoming commissioner. I know that the Member will be aware that, as this is a live recruitment process, it is not possible to comment any further.

Mr Deputy Speaker: I remind Members that supplementary questions should link to the original question, which was about budgetary reductions.

Mr A Maginness: The junior Minister has underlined the need for reductions in costs, and so on. Is maintaining and sustaining a service, particularly one that serves as a respite for victims and survivors, not so important that it should remain unaffected by any sorts of cuts? You are sending out the wrong message to victims and survivors if you continue a policy of reduction in cost.

Ms J McCann: The real source of the financial difficulties that we are in today is the result of the Tory Government reducing the block grant from 2011 in real terms by £1·5 billion. We are facing into year four of those cuts, and we will see that being the case with all sorts of funding. I agree with you about victims and survivors funding being crucial. I have met a number of organisations and, indeed, individual victims along with junior Minister Bell in recent days, and we have to look at where those services are being cut, but we also have to remember that this is a result of the Tory cuts to the block grant and is the type of thing that we are seeing being played out and cascading down to impact on vulnerable people and vulnerable groups in our society out there.

Mr M McGuinness: LeasCheann Comhairle, with your permission, I will ask junior Minister McCann to answer this question also.

Ms J McCann: We are engaging with the main childcare stakeholders in a detailed co-design process to develop the content of the full, final Bright Start childcare strategy. To date, that has included one-to-one consultation meetings with the childcare sector, all of which are now completed. Childcare strategy development workshops involving all the main stakeholders will explore further the emerging key themes and issues. The first of those took place on 3 October. Following the workshop stage, the Department will publish a consultation document setting out policy proposals for childcare. Consultation will include public consultation events and a request for written responses. We aim to launch our consultation before the end of the year based on the responses received during consultation, and we will liaise with the OFMDFM Committee and develop the consultation document into a final strategy for publication following approval by the Executive.

Mr Brady: I thank the Minister for her answer. Can she outline how the dual aims of child development and childcare solely for reasons of the labour market will be taken forward under the banner of a childcare strategy?

Ms J McCann: Early years interventions and quality childcare, including school-age childcare, are widely accepted as critical factors in a child's development. It is internationally recognised that quality, child-centred activity in a safe place can promote positive interpersonal relations, develop cultural awareness and complement educational provision. An important aim of the Bright Start childcare strategy is therefore to support the development of children and young people and to enable children and young people from all backgrounds, including those most deprived, to avail themselves of life opportunities.

It is not just children who benefit from childcare. Childcare is also a critical enabler to help parents into work, move families out of poverty and help break the cycle of intergenerational deprivation. Supported by an affordable, flexible and accessible childcare sector, parents can access work, improve their workplace skills and their employability or continue to be economically active. Therefore, along with its child development aims, the childcare strategy will aim to ensure that no parent who wants or has a need to work or to undertake work related to training or study will be prevented from doing so by a lack of childcare.

Mrs Overend: As the Executive have rightly put the economy at the heart of their activities, what plans are in place to help local businesses, especially small businesses, that will lose out on National Insurance breaks when the childcare voucher scheme is done away with next autumn?

Ms J McCann: We have already had a number of discussions about the childcare voucher scheme and have met some of the organisations. Indeed, I think that, this week, I am meeting one of the organisations that has raised that issue with us. We will look, as part of the Bright Start strategy, at all areas. I know that the initial stage in the first 15 actions was basically around school-age children and the social economy model, but we are keen to look at all sorts of aspects of childcare that will affect people.

The voucher scheme is part of the Westminster Childcare Payments Bill, and there is a discussion ongoing. We had a meeting last week with members of the Committee in relation to that, and we are very open to meeting again and discussing how we can liaise with the Committee and other interested bodies to see in what way we can take anything forward in our future strategy on that.

Mr Deputy Speaker: That is the end of listed questions. We now move on to topical questions. Question 8 has been withdrawn.

Mr M McGuinness: The Member has been around these negotiations as long as I have and is well aware that the Irish Government were involved during the Good Friday negotiations. He is also well aware that the Irish Government were involved during the discussions leading to the St Andrews Agreement and during the discussions on the transfer of power of policing and justice at Hillsborough not so long ago. I think that this is much ado about nothing. I see that the leader of the Ulster Unionist Party is in the House. He was the one who raised this hare. I think that it is very disappointing and very unfortunate that people try to score a political point on a matter of such great importance.

These discussions will involve both Governments, and they will be watched very closely in Washington, both at the State Department and at the White House. There is a huge responsibility on all of us to play a positive and constructive role in an attempt to find a way through the vexed issues of the past, parades, flags, symbols and emblems, and the budgetary challenges that we, as an Assembly and Executive, face. We will do that only if people approach these subjects in a responsible frame of mind. I think that the comment made by the leader of the Ulster Unionist Party was totally irresponsible.

Mr A Maginness: I thank the deputy First Minister for his reply. He referred to the United States Government. Does he envisage any role for the United States Government during the talks?

Mr M McGuinness: Principally, the discussions will involve both Governments and all the parties, with appropriate representation from the Assembly, certainly all the major parties. The role of the United States Government will probably be along the lines of the one that they played in the Good Friday, St Andrews and Hillsborough agreements, all of which were very important. The contribution made by the United States to our peace process and to the agreements that we have made has been absolutely invaluable. I do not know whether I envisage them sitting at the table, which was not the case during the three previous negotiations. I would have no objection to it — none whatsoever — but everybody would have to be comfortable with that. I think that everybody recognises that, whatever way this pans out, there will be very proactive State Department involvement in the discussions.

Mr M McGuinness: This is another fallacy that has been promoted over the last number of months. Nothing could be further from the truth. Never at any stage of any dialogue between advisers in my side of OFMDFM and the DUP side of OFMDFM did the First Minister and I sign off on any agreement about how we would deal with these matters.

We have been involved in important discussions recently. We met the Irish Government on Friday and I met Theresa Villiers on Thursday. These matters were discussed. We also met Alex Salmond in Scotland and were criticised for doing so by the Alliance Party, even though we had very important discussions to agree a trilateral meeting between ourselves, Scotland and Wales, given what everybody agrees have been the very profound implications of the fallout from the Scottish independence referendum. Nobody is under any illusions about what the agenda of the upcoming talks will be.

The First Minister and I met our finance officials and Minister of Finance where they recorded, to our dissatisfaction, the fact that, in the course of the last four years since the Tory-led Administration came into place, that the block grant has been ruthlessly cut each year. On top of that, we have the welfare reform cuts, so we are facing very serious issues in regards to budgetary matters.

Mr Campbell: The deputy First Minister indicated a series of discussions that he has held, but has he given any indication, given that there will be cuts whether welfare reform is introduced or not, whether through him or his counterpart in Dublin, as to what the extent of those cuts will be whichever way the cookie crumbles?

Mr M McGuinness: All of that remains to be seen, given that we are hopefully going to enter into very serious discussions that will include the budgetary situation. The First Minister and I are absolutely agreed that the way in which the British Government have dealt with our block grant, ie, by steadily reducing it over the last four years, is a subject for a big debate between us and the British Government.

Mr M McGuinness: Without hesitation. Before I was even asked the question, I made it absolutely clear during the course of the North/South Ministerial Council meeting that I was absolutely appalled at the burning of the Orange hall in Convoy. It was not until later in the day that I learned that an attempt was made to burn a Presbyterian church and that the buck eejits responsible went into the church and attempted to burn a bible. That on top of the recent attempt to burn the Orange hall in Newtowncunningham, as well as the racist attacks that the Member mentioned and, of course, the attack on Padraig McShane's house in north Antrim, are all very serious matters that could conceivably have resulted in the loss of life.

There is a responsibility on all of us to make it absolutely clear that there is nothing political about any of this, but there is everything criminal about those behind these attacks, whether those attacks are on churches, GAA premises, individuals, homes or defenceless people who come from other parts of the world to live amongst us. It has to be unreservedly condemned by all of us. We all need to be seen to be giving real leadership in confronting those who are responsible. The police have a big job to do, and I would appeal to everybody in society, including people in County Donegal, that if they have any scrap of information whatsoever about the bigots who were involved in these attacks, they should without hesitation bring that both to the Gardaí and the PSNI.

Mr Douglas: I thank the deputy First Minister for his response. Are there ways in which this Assembly can reassure those communities, particularly those communities that feel very isolated, apart from urging those with information to pass it to the Garda Síochána or to the PSNI?

Mr M McGuinness: When these attacks happen, we need to be clearly seen to stand with those who are attacked. I feel a particular sympathy for people who come from foreign shores and do not have any friends, or have very few friends in the community, for how isolated they must feel when their car is burned or their homes attacked.

There is a huge responsibility on all of us to be seen to be standing alongside those people. Similarly, after the recent attack on the Orange hall in Newtowncunningham, I was very pleased that Pádraig Mac Lochlainn, our TD for the constituency, was there in full support of the Orange Order in the area.

I come from a part of the North where there are good relationships amongst the community; among the Apprentice Boys and the local community in Derry. There is great respect and tolerance for cultural traditions in that city. When I see events taking place in the hinterland of that city that are an attempt to fracture the building of those good relationships, I am horrified. I get very angry. We all need to consistently challenge ourselves to see what more we can do. However, we certainly must be seen to be standing together against racism and sectarianism.

Mr M McGuinness: The Minister of the Environment made his decision in relation to the Belfast metropolitan area plan (BMAP). Over the weekend, that was challenged publicly by the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment. Essentially, the case will find itself before the courts in the context of a judicial review. It is very disappointing that it has come to this. However, from our perspective and without breaking the confidentiality of what is discussed at Executive meetings, as the decision made by the previous Minister of the Environment was effectively supported by the new Minister of the Environment, we were all very conscious that we were heading towards some sort of challenge. Undoubtedly, that will now be played out in the courts.

Mr Byrne: Will the deputy First Minister accept that, after 14 years of discussions, the DRD gave the green light to the Minister of the Environment to proceed? Surely, we are in a process in which the Assembly and the Executive have to demonstrate collective political responsibility.

Mr M McGuinness: I think that I will try to answer that question. That is my job today.

I reiterate what I said — it is disappointing that it has come to this. A Minister has made a decision, there is a question of the Executive responsibilities of individual Ministers, but there is also an issue, as you correctly stated, of the whole approach of collective responsibility of the Executive. We all have to recognise that we are in a five-party coalition in which different parties with Ministers on the Executive have different approaches to subjects. On occasions, it is very hard to get agreement on very challenging issues.

A short while ago, the First Minister and I met our Programme for Government team to go through our Programme for Government commitments. It is amazing the level we have reached in the agreement and in the implementation of those commitments. Of course the media do not talk about that; the media talk about the issues that overshadow all the good work that happens in the Executive and the Assembly.

There are issues out there that are challenging and that have not been resolved. We will undoubtedly face into trying to resolve some of them in the period ahead.

Mr Deputy Speaker: That is the end of questions to the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister.

Ms Ní Chuilín (The Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure): I thank the Member for his question. My Department has planned to spend approximately £3,850,000 on Irish-language projects in the 2014-15 financial year. This figure includes £3 million —

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order. I ask Members to desist from conversation on the Benches.

Ms Ní Chuilín: This figure includes £3,462,107 that has been allocated to Foras na Gaeilge for the 2014 calendar year. Funding is also available from departmental mainstream projects that have an Ulster-Scots, Irish-language or cultural dimension that cannot be separated from the primary funding objectives.

Mr Wilson: I thank the Minister for her answer. What reductions will she make in the Irish-language budget this year as a result of the 6% reduction in her budget, due to her party's decision not to implement welfare reform and, therefore, cause reductions in budgets across the board?

Ms Ní Chuilín: I have no plans to reduce any budgets for the Irish language or Ulster Scots this year.

Ms McCorley: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a freagra. An dtig leis an Aire a rá linn, mar gheall ar an rath atá ar Líofa, an dtearna gníomhaithe Albainis Uladh stocaireacht uirthi ag iarraidh tionscnamh den chineál céanna? An mbeadh sí sásta rud éigin a thabhairt chun tosaigh?

Given the success of Líofa, has the Minister been lobbied by Ulster-Scots activists for a similar type of initiative, and has she considered bringing something like that forward?

Ms Ní Chuilín: I have not been lobbied by Ulster-Scots activists in relation to bringing forward a similar Líofa-type project to Ulster Scots. Since September, when Líofa was launched, I have asked the Ulster-Scots Agency and the ministerial advisory group (MAG) on Ulster Scots to bring forward a similar programme. I believe that that would add value to what they do. The MAG Ulster-Scots Academy is facilitating a partnership with other sectoral bodies. Ulster Scots has strong community links with lifelong learning elements, and I thought that there was an intention to bring something forward in a vein such as that. However, all main sectoral bodies are participating in the work on a collaborative basis. Despite that, there seems to be almost a reluctance to bring a similar initiative forward. I have made it clear that it does not necessarily have to be on the Ulster-Scots language, because I understand that there is no agreed standard. However, I am keen to see some programme or similar initiative based on culture and heritage.

Mr Byrne: Does the Minister accept that the Líofa project has been very successful for people involved in promoting the Irish language, and are there plans to extend it, given that there is a growing participation among groups?

Ms Ní Chuilín: I thank the Member for his supplementary question and absolutely agree with him. At the minute, well over 7,500 have signed up to Líofa. The original target that was set in September 2011 was 1,000 for 2015. That was surpassed by December that year. We then set another target for 2015 again. That was surpassed and set for 5,000. That was again reset at 10,000, given the popularity. We will extend it where the demand is there. I hope to meet some of the other organisations and groups that have expressed an interest in Líofa and bringing it forward, and that includes on an all-Ireland basis. I am certainly happy to extend the programme where the demand is.

Mr Allister: The Minister has already made and announced some cuts in respect of other aspects. Why is it that she is making this boast that, when it comes to efficiency savings in the North/South bodies, such as the language body, she refuses to make them? Now she is refusing to even entertain efficiency cuts that her party, by its actions, is imposing on the rest of government.

Mr Deputy Speaker: The Member has asked his question.

Mr Allister: Why does she think that that particular sector should be immune from cuts? Is it not just typical of the financial anarchy that she is presiding over?

Mr Deputy Speaker: The Member has asked his question.

Ms Ní Chuilín: First, it is not a boast; it is just a statement of fact. There has been a strong reluctance, and indeed a refusal, on my behalf, to bring additional efficiencies to the language bodies as high as 4·5% in addition to what was already agreed.

That would have a particularly huge impact on Ulster Scots. I say with some confidence that the majority of those are from the Protestant, unionist and loyalist community. It is ironic that an Irish republican is protecting the interests of the Protestant, unionist and loyalist community when an elected representative who claims to represent that community wants me to wield the axe on the people who need it most.

Ms Ní Chuilín: I thank the Member for his question. Funding from my Department is available through the Ulster-Scots Agency and the Arts Council. In 2013-14, Lislea Lambeg Drumming Club received £1,500 through the Arts Council's musical instruments for bands programme. In 2014, the Ulster-Scots Agency, through its financial assistance scheme, has allocated £7,750 towards tuition for Lambeg drumming groups. In addition, groups can apply to the Arts Council's lottery-funded small grants programme for tuition and music classes.

Mr Anderson: I thank the Minister for her response. I am here to try to drum up some support for the drumming fraternity. Maybe you are aware that Lambeg drumming is a big thing in County Armagh and throughout my constituency of Upper Bann. It is also very much to the fore in the local Orange lodges —

Mr Deputy Speaker: Can we have a question, please?

Mr Anderson: — in that constituency. Can the Minister tell me what more she and her Department can do to give more finance and resource? How will the Ulster-Scots Agency be affected by the cutbacks?

Ms Ní Chuilín: The Member was in the Chamber when I answered the question from the Member for North Antrim about additional cutbacks to the Ulster-Scots Agency. I certainly appreciate the work that bands do, particularly in the community and in rural communities, where, more often than enough, the bands are the community and help to bring people forward. It is about demand. If there is a demand, the agencies, which, in this case, are the Arts Council and the Ulster-Scots Agency, will bring forward additional bids. That has not been the case thus far, so there needs to be a head of steam built up in terms of the demand for it. It would be different if it were done in isolation, but the Lambeg drumming club in Lislea has received some small awards from different forms of funding. That seems set to continue.

Mr McMullan: Go raibh maith agat. Will the Minister give a breakdown of funding presently available to bands?

Ms Ní Chuilín: The Arts Council's musical instruments for bands programme provides grants from £500 to £5,000 for the purchase of instruments. That scheme is available to formally constituted bands based in the North. Funding is also awarded by the Arts Council through its lottery-funded small grants programme for band-related activity, which includes equipment and tuition. For items over £10,000, funding is available from its equipment programme. Bands can also apply for funding for musical tuition from the Ulster-Scots Agency through its financial assistance scheme.

Mr Dallat: I thank the Minister for her answer. I am sure that she will recall that one of the most successful groups in Northern Ireland in recent years was called Different Drums. Will the Minister give serious consideration to encouraging the integration of not just the drums but the accordions, pipes and everything else so that we can all enjoy the music together?

Ms Ní Chuilín: I certainly will. The Walled City Tattoo was the culmination of two cultures and communities coming together and celebrating each other's culture with inclusivity, respect and diversity through dance, song and music. If ever there was an example of what we need to do more of, that is one of them.

Mr Swann: I thank the Minister for her answer. I am not letting the Member for Upper Bann steal all the glory; there is a great Lambeg drumming tradition in North Antrim as well, and they are better drums.

Minister, your Department gives support to the Ulster pipe and drumming schools. Would you consider such an appeal from the Lambeg drumming associations as well?

Ms Ní Chuilín: The Lambeg drumming associations have received funding from the Arts Council, the Ulster-Scots Agency and the ministerial advisory group. As I said to the Member for Upper Bann, if there is a demand for additional funding based on evidence of need, the agencies will happily consider that. It is good to see that the Lambeg drumming associations have such widespread support throughout the House today.

Ms Ní Chuilín: I thank the Member for his question. I have asked that an arts strategy akin to the Sport Matters strategy be brought forward to increase attendance and participation in the arts whilst contributing to an inclusive society and a stronger economy. The strategy will aim to complement the developing tourism sector, promote the creative industries and underpin the value of community arts and festivals.

It is time that the full benefits and value of the arts to individuals, communities, the economy and wider society are acknowledged and recognised. A draft strategy proposal will be brought forward for public consultation during 2015, and I look forward to meaningful and innovative collaboration and engagement with all stakeholders, including ministerial colleagues, to develop that strategy.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Again, I ask Members to desist from having conversations that disturb those who wish to listen to answers from the Minister. I will remind Members once more, after which I will name those who are interfering.

Mr McKay: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I welcome the work that the Minister is doing in this area, as someone who knows well the link between tourism and the arts in my constituency. What does the Minister see as the future role for the arts in the North? How can we make them more inclusive and open to people from all backgrounds?

Ms Ní Chuilín: I want the arts to be seen as something that can be enjoyed by everyone across our society and something that can be valued and appreciated by everyone. I also want the arts to be seen as a serious and important career choice for children and to be recognised through education and employment structures.

I also want the arts to be valued as a contributor to health, the economy and, indeed, the whole notion of citizenship. In the economy, I want to see arts that produce the best for people at national, international and local level, including visitors and potential visitors who will see our arts offering as a reason to come here and, more importantly, a reason to return to the island.

Arts have a lot to offer, but in this House some see them as a luxury rather than a right. Until we get to the stage where the need for the arts is recognised across the Executive and across the parties, they will constantly be placed at a disadvantage by some.

Mrs McKevitt: In her reply, the Minister talked about stakeholders. What stakeholders does her Department consult in developing policies? How often is the database held by the Department updated?

Ms Ní Chuilín: I thank the Member for her question. The last strategy for the arts was done in 2001, which, I am sure she will agree, is far too long ago. Back then, the strategy was called Face to Face.

I signed off very recently on terms of reference. There will be full public consultation, which will start in early spring of next year. The consultation will happen in the normal way, but I would like to go out to arts groups, communities and individuals that I have been lobbied by to give them an opportunity to feed in, because a lot of people who work in the sector have a lot to offer but do not often get the opportunity to input into Government strategies. It is really important that we make sure that we go across as many of the communities as possible. So, we should use places such as libraries, schools, residents' groups, community groups and anywhere where there is possible access to the community to make sure this is as broad and inclusive as possible.

Mr McCausland: Within any strategy for the arts and culture, there will be a number of important key organisations. One of those is undoubtedly the Ulster Orchestra. Will the Minister acknowledge the financial issues concerning the Ulster Orchestra and give a commitment to ensuring that it is sustained to play its continued important role in our cultural infrastructure?

Ms Ní Chuilín: The term, "brass neck", comes to mind, but we will say nothing. I value the role of the Ulster Orchestra, but, as the Member will know, I cannot give a commitment to bail-out the Ulster Orchestra or plug the gap that it is experiencing. However, I am really keen to ensure that the Ulster Orchestra continues and that enough stakeholders and sponsorship are brought to the Ulster Orchestra and am happy to assist it. As the Member may be aware, I have plans to meet the Ulster Orchestra very soon, and I look forward to hearing what plans it has to meet the deficit in its budget.

Ms Ní Chuilín: I thank the Member for his question. Responsibility for the management, maintenance, development and restoration of inland waterways for recreational purposes lies with Waterways Ireland, one of the six North/South implementation bodies.

There are currently no plans to introduce an annual fee for boat users. Waterways Ireland operates a charging structure for a variety of services to users of the waterways across the Waterways Ireland network. Those vary from £1 for passage through a lock on the lower Bann to €153 for winter moorings along the Shannon.

Mr B McCrea: Does the Minister think it appropriate that luxury boats should be able to travel without paying a fee when, for example, a car has car tax? Given the lack of capital investment in the waterways, that might be an appropriate way in which to raise the necessary revenue to spend on the infrastructure.

Ms Ní Chuilín: I think that there is a myth that anyone using the waterways has a luxury boat or yacht. Maybe the Member's friends have luxury boats and yachts, but the people whom I have spoken to on the waterways the length and breadth of the island do not. Waterways Ireland's by-laws are out for consultation. It is looking at fixed penalties, speed limits, respectable mooring and responsible parking. From time to time, people cruise up and down the length of our waterways in much smaller and respectable boats but certainly not in anything substantial.

Mr Humphrey: During the Committee's recent visit to County Fermanagh and Waterways Ireland's lovely offices that cost £13·5 million, the chief executive admitted to the Committee that she is having to make choices as to whether to fund some of the jetties that are about to collapse into the lough. What influence can the Minister have — or the tourism Minister, but I ask this in specific regard to your own portfolio — in ensuring that we have investment in the proper infrastructure for those who are tourists, especially those tourists who travel to Northern Ireland to fish and use our waterways?

Ms Ní Chuilín: It is really important that we — in this case, it is Waterways Ireland — manage our budgets appropriately. The cost of the running, maintenance and upkeep of the premises will have been in the original outline business plan.

Are there things that Waterways Ireland could do? It has said, or it has been reported, that it has space and could lease out some of that space to accrue some money that it could spend. There are many things, I am sure, that it could do. Dawn Livingstone is a very responsible chief executive who is more than aware of the potential of tourism and what Waterways Ireland would like to do if given even small amounts of money. Modest investments have gone a long way and accrued a lot of benefits, particularly in rural areas around the waterways. I have no doubt that the chief executive of Waterways Ireland will bring that to our attention at the next sectoral meeting.

Mr Lynch: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Can the Minister give an update on the plans to restore the Ulster canal?

Ms Ní Chuilín: I thank the Member for his supplementary question. The main project was due to commence, and the financial situation, particularly with the Irish Government, put a halt to that. Rather than waiting on the money to be brought in all at once, we are starting to look at options. The Member is aware that there is an inter-agency group set up around the Ulster canal. He raised that through previous correspondence and at meetings.

I am meeting Ms Heather Humphreys, the new Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, next week to look at ways in which we can start work and start looking at bringing a phased approach to the restoration of the Upper Lough Erne to Clones part of the Ulster canal.

Ms Ní Chuilín: I thank the Member for his question. Since 2009, Sport NI has invested funding of almost £48 million towards increasing participation levels across our population through a variety of programmes.

Since Active Communities began in 2010, opportunities have been provided to over 175,000 young people, almost 135,000 females, just over 30,000 people with a disability and over 27,000 older people. Examples of other promotional activity include funding for programmes such as Active Awards for Sport, Active Clubs, boxing investment programmes and ongoing investment in sporting facilities that are developed to encourage participation by all members of local communities.

A range of activities is also provided by other partners involved in promoting opportunities in sport and recreation. Those partners include the sports governing bodies, such as the GAA, rugby and the IFA, and public bodies such as the Public Health Agency and the Environment Agency. Outdoor Recreation and other leisure organisations such as angling clubs have also been included.

Mr Deputy Speaker: I call Jo-Anne Dobson. Apologies, I call Chris Hazzard.

Mr Hazzard: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for her answer. Will she provide an overview of how Sport Matters targets have helped to increase participation among the elderly, women and, indeed, the disabled?

Ms Ní Chuilín: The Sport Matters implementation group looks at the progress — certainly for the period from October to September 2013 — and has recorded progress against each of the targets. The target to increase participation rates amongst older people by 6% is deemed to be on track, with the achievement of an increase by 9%. The target to increase participation rates amongst women by 6% is also on track, with an increase of over 17% so far. The target to increase participation rates amongst people with a disability by 6% is deemed to be on track, but with some delay. In comparison to the Sport Matters strategy, they are certainly on track. I hold the view that the progress is good, but, certainly in the case of disabilities, we are doing well but need to do more.

Mrs Dobson: Does the Minister agree with me that multiple benefits accrue from involvement in sports, not least promoting physical and mental well-being and social inclusion, which all support the health service by reducing demand on cardiovascular, diabetes and obesity services, to name only three?

Ms Ní Chuilín: I wholeheartedly agree with the Member. It is really important. As well as looking at obesity and healthy hearts, we also have the whole area of mental health and healthy minds. Increased sport and physical activity have tremendous health benefits, particularly for older people, who are, at times, forgotten. Looking at tailor-made, bespoke programmes for them is really important, because not only does it keep them active, it keeps them mentally active. The social inclusion brought forward by some groups that have a sporting and leisure dimension has been proven to be very successful. For all of those reasons that I have outlined — I am sure there are more that the Member and I could mention — investment for sport is really important, particularly for those targeted areas of women, older people and those with disabilities.

Mr Dunne: Does the Minister recognise the need for greater participation by all in sport, and does she agree that the better use of shared facilities between schools and local government would make a positive contribution to that?

Ms Ní Chuilín: Absolutely. Last year or earlier this year, the Minister of Education and I launched guidelines for better sharing of facilities. The guidelines have been in circulation since last year but the idea has been there for decades. The Member may be aware — I am aware from my constituency and the evidence from other constituencies — that there were lots of reasons put up by schools in particular for not opening the gates past 4.00 pm. I think that we have all seen through that. Now schools and boards of governors are willing partners, and the new super councils will be willing partners as well, because, apart from not having the capital investment to build the facilities at the end of each corner — to be flippant about it — it is much better when we share facilities. Not only will the investment be used to better effect but it will actually help to accrue additional investment in the future when there is a better joined-up approach. It will help with sustainability and maintenance of schools.

Mr Deputy Speaker: The Minister's time is up.

Ms Ní Chuilín: It will also help people to feel part of the community when they are not outside looking in at facilities that they cannot use.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Questions 6 and 12 have been withdrawn.

Ms Ní Chuilín: My Department is considering a number of opportunities for capital investment in the South Down and Newry and Armagh constituencies: for example, a proposal is being developed to build a new Armagh city library; and the Armagh Planetarium and Armagh Observatory have registered a requirement for new CCTV equipment and maintenance works. No capital budget exists, as yet, for 2015-16. When the Executive make investment allocations in due course, those and other projects will be considered for funding in light of departmental priorities and the available budget.

Mr Rogers: I thank the Minister for her answer. The south-east coast master plan includes proposals for the development of sports and leisure facilities throughout the towns of South Down. What input has your Department into those proposals?

Ms Ní Chuilín: I have heard of different master plans in different council areas. Certainly, I am happy to write to the Member on the specifics. Needless to say, in the north-west, we have partnered with the Coleraine, Dungiven, Limavady and Derry City councils. I hope to have the same approach across the new council areas. I think that it is a better spend when different agencies, stakeholders and others bring their purses. I will enquire about the south-east coast master plan and write to the Member with details.

Mr Boylan: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabahim buíochas leis an Aire as a freagra. I thank the Minister for her answer. Minister, that is welcome news about Armagh, but can you update us on the planned refurbishment of Crossmaglen library? Go raibh míle maith agat.

Ms Ní Chuilín: Work is being led and undertaken by Newry and Mourne District Council. Crossmaglen library is a part of the local community centre, and the council is upgrading the centre's facilities, which, in turn, helps the library. The council is carrying out some small-scale improvements to the library at a cost of £52,000. Libraries NI, which leases the library space from the council, is paying for the work from its resource and maintenance budget and has informed the public of what is happening. During the closure, a temporary mobile library service has operated from the square at Crossmaglen. The library is expected to reopen in approximately a month's time.

Mr Humphrey: I thank the Minister for her answers thus far. She will be aware of Ardaluin Regeneration Trust, which does great work in Ardaluin House in Newcastle, County Down. Many kids from constituencies such as ours have travelled there and will continue to do so from right across Northern Ireland. If there are any extra moneys available in her Department, extra funding — or indeed funding — for equipment or capital investment it would be very much appreciated by the trust because it is pretty much a voluntary activity. People give of their time and talents.

Ms Ní Chuilín: I am familiar with the trust and with the Member's involvement through the work of the Scouts. Other youth and community groups have also visited the premises and availed themselves of those services over decades. I am not aware of any current funding application, but I am happy to make enquiries and copy the Member into correspondence.

Ms Ní Chuilín: The cross-community youth sports programme, led by my Department, will seek to deliver a meaningful and sustained impact on good relations through the power of sport. Alongside that, the programme will seek to promote equality and tackle poverty and social exclusion.

It is important that the programme is delivered in areas of multiple deprivation, as these often experience significant conflict and interface tension. That is reflected in the fact that two areas selected for the pilot scheme in 2014-15 are areas of multiple deprivation. The roll-out of the programme will seek to identify other suitable areas, rural and urban, to maximise opportunities for young people.

Mr Deputy Speaker: That is the end of our time for listed questions. We move on to topical questions.

Ms Ní Chuilín: I am aware that there was certainly a proposal by Omagh. I am happy to again meet the Member to discuss that further. I believe that competitions and events in cycling and sport and physical activity in particular are to be welcomed. I am particularly delighted when they take place in rural areas. The Member and other Members in this House have often complained that a lot of funding, particularly for sport and physical activity, is based in cities.

Mr McAleer: Go raibh maith agat. Does the Minister feel that her Department can play a role in helping to maximise the sporting, social and economic benefits of that competition for Omagh and the wider area?

Ms Ní Chuilín: In short, yes, but that does not mean to say that the Member can then walk in and expect to get the initiative funded. I am certainly disappointed to hear the Enterprise Minister's comments that events will no longer receive funding. I certainly hope that the Omagh riding initiative is not one of them.

Ms Ní Chuilín: The Member will certainly be aware that, in 2010, the Events Company transferred from DCAL to DETI. That investigation is still ongoing. That is with the regret of even the Enterprise Minister, other Executive colleagues and I. Having even just listened to media reports this morning, I am quite shocked and disappointed that events funding, particularly for tourism, has certainly been scaled back, if not ceased. I will certainly have discussions with my officials and local councils to see what additional funding they can bring forward because it is important that we ensure that those initiatives continue.

Mr Weir: I appreciate the response and the fact that there are constraints on budgets. Does the Minister have any suggestions as to how, either through her Department or arm's-length bodies, they can, at least, give some degree of assistance in kind to those events, which may not be a direct financial contribution, but can perhaps ease the burden in other ways?

Ms Ní Chuilín: Certainly, the skills and experience that DCAL officials and even officials from the arm's-length bodies have in relation to helping people to prepare business plans and possibly attract funding and sponsorship is there. If the Member has any specific examples or requests, I am more than happy to receive them, but let us be clear: what we do not need is a cut in one Department that another Department is expected to pick up. That is not happening either.

Ms Ní Chuilín: I thank the Member for his question. I am sure that he was here when we discussed the Sport Matters strategy earlier. It is important that all councils in their current and future configurations are not only part of the Sport Matters implementation group, but actually implement the Sport Matters strategy, particularly in relation to disabilities. Those people need our help more than most. I would be very keen to ensure that the new super-councils play their role as robustly as the old ones did.

Mr McMullan: I thank the Minister for her response. Given that some of the councils appear reluctant to implement the new strategies for sport for the disabled, can she raise that with the Sport Matters implementation group? Go raibh maith agat.

Ms Ní Chuilín: I will actually go further than that. I will ask for an update, certainly from the councils, on the implementation of their disability strategies. I am happy to provide the Member with an update of those when I receive them. As well as that, I will certainly raise it at the next Sport Matters implementation group meeting.

Ms Ní Chuilín: Certainly, in the first instance, athletes who compete in competitions, regardless of the configuration, are the responsibility of the governing body. That is not the responsibility of Sport NI and is certainly not the responsibility of DCAL.

Mr Allister: It is regrettable that the Minister cannot even afford support for the principle of parity of esteem. She mentioned Sport NI. Will she address the discriminatory practice in Sport NI whereby it refuses to fund any group that is attached to a GB governing body if there is an alternative all-Ireland governing body? Will she address that basic discrimination?

Ms Ní Chuilín: I certainly refute the Member's allegation that Sport NI is implementing discriminatory practices. In the past, the Member and other Members have made allegations about some bodies, and the arm's-length bodies in particular. He needs to bring forward the evidence.

Ms Ní Chuilín: I am not aware that there are significant reductions. However, I am happy to query that with officials and copy the Member in to correspondence.

Mrs Cameron: I thank the Minister for her answer. Something was published on that in the local press recently. Maybe, when the Minister has been briefed on it, she will see that there has been a drop in numbers. If so, what might National Museums Northern Ireland do to reverse the trend of reduced visitor numbers to what is a very important part of our cultural wealth in Northern Ireland?

Ms Ní Chuilín: I appreciate the tone in which the Member has asked the question. I have seen things about the museums sector in the press before that, upon investigation, have proven to be unfounded. However, in the spirit of the tone of the question, I am happy to bring it forward to officials, and particularly to the museums sector, to try to find out exactly what is happening. I am happy to write to the Member on that.

Ms Ní Chuilín: There is a difference between the independent museums, some of the private and voluntary museums, and those in public ownership. That is a fairly detailed question, and the Member will appreciate that I do not have the figures to hand. However, I am happy to write to him with them.

Mr Gardiner: I thank the Minister for saying that she is going to write to me. Are there any plans to merge local authority museums with the restructuring of local government?

Ms Ní Chuilín: Certainly not at this stage. When I was asked to transfer some functions to local government, museums, the planetarium and others were down the list. I refused to do that until I was convinced that local government was in a state to implement not just the services but access for everybody, and to do it on the basis of equality.

Ms Ní Chuilín: I see that as being, in the first instance, a matter for the council. I do think that small towns and villages have been somewhat overshadowed by bigger towns and cities. If I had the investment to go to every corner of every small town, village or hamlet, I would make it, but we live in the real world. We have made investment through local government and will continue to do that. However, that is on the basis that it caters for all ratepayers and citizens and not just for some.

Mr McQuillan: I thank the Minister for her answer. Does she agree it is important that smaller towns as well as larger towns feel the benefit of the legacy?

Ms Ní Chuilín: Absolutely. The Member will be aware, through his relationship with Limavady Borough Council, of the Stendhal Festival in Limavady. That is a very, very small festival in comparison with the City of Culture in Derry, but it has a very significant impact. It receives a small amount of money. The people in that area, and the people who visited, were delighted to see that such a small place received government attention. That is the way it should be.

Ms Ní Chuilín: The Member should be aware that responsibility for hosting events and events promotion is with DETI. However, I do not shirk from my responsibility. Events need to be brought right across, as much as possible, and that includes Mid Ulster. Does the new council have any plans to bring forward events? Other councils have approached me about the potential for events and for working in partnership with the Arts Council, the museums sector and the Sports Council, so I am happy to hear from the Member if she has any specific plans.

Mrs Overend: I thank the Minister for that. Given the excellent competition in Cookstown and the fact that the Open Championship is to be held in Royal Portrush very shortly, what is the Minister doing to work with the ETI Minister to encourage more sporting events to come to Northern Ireland?

Ms Ní Chuilín: I have continued and, at times, increased the awards to governing bodies, including the Golfing Union of Ireland. As well as that, through the GAA, rugby, soccer and others, I have met the IFA in particular about bringing competitions here, which includes going across the North — junior competitions, as well, because it is important that we inspire children and young people. It is really important that we still look at opportunities regardless of whether they are in Belfast, the city of Derry, mid-Ulster or wherever. If there are any firm proposals — because, at this stage, it is notional or speculative — I am happy if firm proposals are brought forward not just to the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment but to me, and we will give them due consideration.

Ms Ní Chuilín: I do not read the 'Sunday Life' — I know; shame on me. I was not aware of the story yesterday or of the stories previously that have been printed in those newspapers. I am happy to report that the soccer family — the soccer community — is getting on with it despite having differences previously. It is all working to try to provide and compete for new facilities for each of their clubs. I am not aware of any animosity or ill-feeling as a residue from anything previously.

Mr Lunn: I think that there was some difference of opinion between Crusaders and Linfield, which has now been resolved. Is the Minister satisfied that the concerns of the other Irish League clubs based in the Belfast area will be properly addressed as the saga goes on?

Ms Ní Chuilín: Actually, it is not a saga. If I were to respond to every piece of speculation in the newspapers, particularly some of the Sunday newspapers, I would spend my Mondays and Tuesdays trying to get clarification, to be sitting on Wednesday and Thursday none the wiser. I think that the Member's question is whether local clubs are going to be supported. The answer is, as best possible. In relation to the amateur league in particular, it is important that it gives full inclusion opportunities, and, in turn, that it works with clubs that are involved in the Irish Premier League and works with other partnerships, including schools, community groups, youth clubs and all the rest to make sure that there is greater participation. I think that some of the alleged animosity in the past has been about a perception that some clubs are going to do far better than others without even going through a process in the first place.

Ms Ní Chuilín: I thank the Member for his question. He will be aware that that is in the bailiwick of DETI, but I am happy to forward a copy of Hansard not only to the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment — the tourism Minister — but to the Executive. On receipt of any response or reply, I will copy it to the Member.

Mr Attwood: Does the Minister agree that there needs to be certainty, not doubt, in respect of the proposed hosting of the British Open, not least because the R&A might read Hansard and might look at events in the North and begin to wonder whether it is coming or not. Is there not a need to tie this down so that, whatever the budgetary situation in the life of the next mandate, the funding package promised to Royal Portrush and R&A is guaranteed?

Ms Ní Chuilín: In short, yes, I think that it is important that it is confirmed and that it is tied down. Even just going by what I heard this morning, big ticket items and big public items like that seem a bit more secure than the Cathedral Arts Festival, the Festival or Fools, Féile an Phobail or all the rest. It is important that we get the detail of what is at risk, what is going ahead and what will not get any money at all.

Mr Deputy Speaker: I ask Members to take their ease for a few moments as we change the personnel at the Table.

Mr Newton: On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. I wish to apologise for not being in my place during topical questions to the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure on Tuesday afternoon of last week.

Mr Deputy Speaker: That is noted, thank you.

Mr Campbell: In winding up I will quickly go over some of the issues raised by a succession of Members. It was a comprehensive debate, which was moved by my colleague, Mr Irwin, who outlined the extent of areas where full implementation of the agency would be of considerable assistance.

Mr Kelly of Sinn Féin proposed the amendment, and he mentioned, as did a number of Members, the tens of millions of pounds' worth of drugs — the Minister of Justice said that that figure seemed to vary depending on which report you read — that were seized off the coast of the Republic of Ireland. However, the irony seemed to be lost on Mr Kelly that that was done with the assistance of the National Crime Agency, the full implementation of which his party resists here.

Mr Alban Maginness stated the SDLP's position of total opposition to criminality, and he mentioned Kincora. He did not relate how that was in keeping with the debate, but I am sure that he will come round to that at some point. Mr Elliott talked about the name of the National Crime Agency and said that the SDLP and Sinn Féin's response might, in part, be because of the term "National".

Mr Stewart Dickson outlined some of the evidence that the failure to fully implement the NCA was limiting the ability to counter crime. He also mentioned an issue that was referred to several times in the debate, which was the failure now to be able to proceed around asset recovery. Mr Paul Givan raised another issue that was also mentioned several times, which was that, previously, the Serious Organised Crime Agency did not appear to instil the same ire, opposition or total objection on the part of the SDLP and Sinn Féin, yet it had less accountability than the National Crime Agency, which I would have thought was a fairly relevant point.

Mr Lynch talked about budget queries and, without irony, about the drugs haul off the coast of the Republic of Ireland.

I presume that Mr Poots was talking, maybe not tongue-in-cheek but certainly he was using irony overload, when he said that the inability to fully implement the National Crime Agency was a good news day for criminals. Of course, he was absolutely right to do that.

Mr Attwood mentioned the maintenance that the SDLP needed to have of further accountability mechanisms. Mr Nesbitt said that the Home Secretary had overall responsibility for national security, and, again, he mentioned the HIU, which was and is unaccountable in the way that the Police Service here is accountable to the Assembly, yet it does not garner the same opposition that, for some reason, the NCA does.

In responding to the debate, the Minister mentioned a number of issues, one of which was human trafficking. Another was online child abuse, which, hopefully, will concentrate the minds of Members when they come to vote on the issue. He also talked about the targeting of criminals' assets. In an intervention, after he had said that we would have to fill the gaps, as he put it, if we did not proceed to fully implement the NCA, I asked him what the costs of that would be. He said that they would be "quite horrific". Those costs are in addition to welfare reform, the penalties and the IT system, and we are being told by the Justice Minister that costs that will be incurred by those who object to the NCA will be "quite horrific". He also said that SOCA was less accountable than the NCA.

Mr McCartney, who made the winding-up speech on Sinn Féin's amendment, used an ominous term. I took a very close note of his terminology. He said, "We will not allow" the NCA to be implemented without the same accountability measures as the Police Service here. I want to move to my own comments in summary, but the "we will not allow" comment from Sinn Féin means that we will all be faced with the quite horrific bill that the Justice Minister talked about.

That is one thing; the implications and cost implications, severe as they are, need to be taken account of. In addition to that and on a separate magnitude, we have outlined, right across the debate, the extent of the problem. I think that everyone accepts that full implementation of the National Crime Agency in Northern Ireland will not be a panacea. It will not mean that, within a few weeks or a few months, all the criminal gangs and international gangs that have connections here will be wiped off the face of the earth. However, it is absolutely clear to the Policing Board, the Chief Constable, the Justice Minister and most Members that failure to implement the National Crime Agency will certainly mean that those criminal elements — those well-organised criminal gangs — will be better prepared to carry out their illegal activities. There are people on the Benches opposite who can help stop them but are deliberately choosing not to do so. When constituents bring to us complaints about online child abuse and its being manipulated from overseas, we will, unfortunately, know where the buck stops. It will be with those who are prepared to say, "We haven't got our mechanisms in place as yet to stop it". When drug trafficking, fuel laundering and all the other issues that need some form of input from the NCA come back to haunt Members, it will be those who have prevented the full implementation of the National Crime Agency who will have to carry the can.

Much mention was made of the case within the past fortnight of the yacht that was seized off the coast of the Irish Republic. With the assistance of the National Crime Agency, the Government of the Irish Republic were able to apprehend the yacht and, as a result, save thousands of people's lives. What happens if the next yacht is identified off the coast of Londonderry, Ballycastle or Larne? What happens then? What happens if there are thousands, millions or maybe tens of millions of pounds of illegal drugs on board a vessel off the coast of our shores and we are told, "We've got sufficient resources in place to deal with some things, but that's an operation that will require the NCA"?

Are people going to stand on ceremony in the Chamber and say, "We would like a little more accountability, please"? Is that what they are going to say as mothers, fathers and grandparents say, "What about the future of our children being put in jeopardy because some people are standing on ceremony over the implementation of an agency that can help to fight this criminal activity?" It is time for people to call a spade a spade. It is time to step up to the mark, to implement this agency and to engage in real terms with the fight against those who deal in death with our children and our vulnerable sections of our community.

Mr Deputy Speaker: I have been advised by the party Whips that, in accordance with Standing Order 27(1A)(b), there is agreement that we can dispense with the three minutes and move straight to the Division.

Mr Deputy Speaker: The Business Committee has agreed to allow up to one hour and 30 minutes for the debate. The proposer will have 10 minutes to propose the motion and 10 minutes to make a winding-up speech. All other Members who are called to speak will have five minutes.

Mr Flanagan: I beg to move

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I start with a word of congratulations to Mr McCrea on his recent appointment. I look forward to working with him in the future.

We need to move away from our over-reliance on fossil fuels and make the most of the opportunities that present themselves to us in the form of clean, green and sustainable sources of energy. Geothermal energy is an environmentally friendly, sustainable energy source that should be an integral part of the mix of energy sources we have.

Certain parts of the North are very well suited to that type of energy generation, particularly the Mournes, parts of the north coast and County Antrim and parts of south-west Fermanagh, ironically where drilling was proposed for fracking. Geothermal energy works in a very simple way. Geothermal power requires no fuel except for pumps. It is therefore immune from fuel cost fluctuations. However, the capital costs associated with it are very significant, and drilling accounts for over half the costs. The exploration of deep resources entails significant risks. For that reason, we need to ensure that this clean, green industry is supported. Personally, I am keen to see this work being taken forward by an arm of the state, by a company established to search for and extract natural resources in the interest of all our citizens and not to serve a small section of shareholders in multinational companies.

The opportunities present themselves from the resource itself. There is plenty of heat in the centre of the earth, and the deeper you dig the hotter it gets. The core is about 4,000 miles beneath the surface and can reach temperatures of over 4,000ºC. Part of that heat is left over from the earth's formation about four billion years ago. The rest comes from the constant decay of radioactive isotopes inside the earth. From hot springs, geothermal energy has been used for bathing for tens of thousands of years and for space heating since ancient Roman times. It is now better known for electricity generation.

In 1892, America's first district heating scheme, in Idaho, was powered directly by geothermal energy. It was copied in Oregon in 1900. In the 20th century, demand for electricity led to the consideration of geothermal power as a generating source. Prince Ginori Conti, from Florence, tested the first geothermal power generator on 4 July 1904. It successfully lit four light bulbs.

William Thomson — better known as Lord Kelvin — who was actually born in Belfast, invented the heat pump in 1852. In 1912, Heinrich Zoelly patented the idea of using it to draw heat from the ground, but it was not until the late 1940s that the geothermal heat pump was successfully implemented. In 2012, around the world, over 11,000 megawatts (MW) of geothermal power was online across 24 countries. An additional 28 GW of direct geothermal heating capacity was installed for district heating, space heating and agricultural and industrial processes across the world by 2010.

Geothermal energy is cost-effective, reliable, sustainable and environmentally friendly, but has historically been linked to areas near tectonic plate boundaries. Recent technological advances have dramatically expanded the range and size of viable resources, especially for applications such as home heating, which opens the potential for widespread exploitation. Geothermal wells release greenhouse gases that are trapped deep within the earth, but these emissions are much lower per energy unit than those of fossil fuels.

As a result, if widely deployed in place of fossil fuels, geothermal power has the potential to help mitigate global warming. The earth's geothermal resources are, theoretically, more than adequate to supply humanity's ever-growing energy needs. However, only a very small fraction may be profitably exploited. Drilling and exploration for deep resources is, indeed, very expensive. Forecasts for the future of geothermal power depend on assumptions about technology, energy prices, subsidies and interest rates. Deep geothermal energy development is a highly developed industry that contributes to the renewable energy mix in a large number of countries worldwide. The use of geothermal energy is most developed in volcanic regions and countries, such as America, the Philippines, Indonesia, Mexico, Italy, New Zealand and Iceland. They all produce significant quantities of electricity from geothermal power.

However, there has been renewed interest in the use of deep geothermal energy in non-volcanic regions, with Germany, Austria, France, Denmark and the Netherlands all showing significant development of their resources, mainly for combined heat and power and direct heating and cooling purposes. We lag behind some of our EU counterparts, who have adopted and supported deep geothermal heat development due to the significant benefits of deep geothermal energy. The geothermal potential of the northern part of this island has been extensively described in numerous studies completed between the 1970s and 1980s and in 2005 and 2008. Based on these studies, the total stored energy is roughly 490 GW of thermal capacity. However, not all of the energy stored can be economically exploited.

GT Energy, one of the leading organisations in this field, estimates that under the policy framework discussed in a document it sent to the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, 81 thermal MW of geothermal energy could be developed by 2020. That represents significantly less than 1% of the stored energy here. However, 81 thermal MW could equate to approximately 31·5% of the current outstanding renewable heat target of 1,300 thermal GW by 2020. GT Energy believes that this is achievable and is supported by international experience in places such as Paris, where, in the 1970s, over 240 thermal MW were installed over 13 years — an addition of 18 thermal MW a year.

Additionally, in Germany, since the introduction of a development framework in 2001, over 21 thermal MW have been installed annually.

A report for the Renewable Energy Association found that a fifth of these islands' electricity needs could be met through deep geothermal energy. However, arguments have been made that that will not happen unless DETI provides the necessary structure and incentive to kick-start that exciting sector. A number of the towns identified as having a high geothermal potential already have a developed gas network or are listed as towns where future expansion of the gas network is planned. Those towns include Coleraine, Ballymoney, Ballymena, Antrim, Magherafelt, Cookstown and Dungannon. As long as legislation exists that supports the protection of the gas industry, uncertainty will remain for the ability of geothermal projects to progress through feasibility to development. That statute obligation is a major barrier to the deployment of deep geothermal energy and other forms of renewable electricity and heat generation.

As part of the solution that it has put forward, GT Energy has urged the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment to install a separate tariff for deep geothermal and to separate it from ground-source heat pumps, which it sees as insufficient to incentivise development. It wants to see a tariff at a suitable level to stimulate the development of the deep geothermal sector. It also wants deep geothermal installations assessed on a case-by-case basis, where proposed projects coincide with an area that is an existing or future gas connection.

If we are serious, as many claim, that we want to move to a low-carbon future, we need to make the most of the opportunities presented by clean, sustainable and renewable sources of energy. The potential for —

Mr Allister: Will the Member give way?

Mr Flanagan: I certainly will.

Mr Allister: I am just wondering whether I am hearing the Member correctly. Is he not the one in the House who purports to be the champion against deep drilling? Has that not been the entire basis of his opposition to fracking? Am I hearing him correctly that he is now advocating deep drilling to whatever depth is necessary in order to tap into geothermal? Are there no bounds to Sinn Féin's contradictions?

Mr Flanagan: Will the Member give way?

Mr Allister: It sounds as if what he is advocating — geothermal — is neo-fracking.

Mr Flanagan: I thank the Member for giving way. I thought that he was going to keep going until all my time was up. There is a huge difference between geothermal energy and hydraulic fracturing. If the Member thinks that the two things are the same, he really needs to read more.

Mr Flanagan: The main difference, Mr McCrea, who spoke from a sedentary position, is that gas is —

Mr B McCrea: Will the Member give way?

Mr Flanagan: No, because I have only a minute left.

Mr B McCrea: I will not take as long.

Mr Flanagan: I do not care.

The main difference is that gas is not sustainable, no matter how many times we get a policy document from the Department telling us that it is. Gas is not a sustainable form of energy.

As the Member raised the issue of fracking, it would be wrong not to reflect on the announcement last week by the Enterprise Minister of her decision not to give Tamboran another extension to its petroleum licence, or its licence for fracking, as it was more commonly known. In terms of supporting the renewable industry and moving us towards our challenging targets for renewable heat and electricity in the future, it was the right decision, and it is a welcome one. However, it is important to point out that it does not reflect a road-to-Damascus conversion by the Minister as she has yet to say that she is opposed to or against fracking. The rationale behind the decision was solely based on timing; the fact that Tamboran cannot get the work done in time to meet the clearly legislated deadlines in its licences played a huge part. Perhaps the fact that there is a big election coming next year may have played an equally big part.

Mr Dunne: I welcome the opportunity to speak on the motion today. I think that we all recognise the ever-increasing costs of energy, with almost 70% of our householders still depending on home heating oil as their main form of heat. We all recognise the need to explore all viable options for providing alternative energy sources.

Energy costs are consistently cited as one of the main challenges for businesses here. Energy is a very important issue that affects everyone across Northern Ireland. Therefore, it is imperative that we continue to look at all possible options to ensure that we maximise our potential in developing and improving our energy supplies. It is also important that we continue to keep focused on meeting DETI's 2020 renewable energy targets of generating 40% of energy from renewables. Renewable energy has a key role to play as an alternative energy source, and it is something that must continue to be developed.

Not only is a strong, indigenous and sustainable energy sector vital for the economy, job creation and security of supply, it is also in the best interests of consumers. Supporting further growth in the sustainable energy sector will mean that Northern Ireland is much less reliant on the importing of fossil fuels and thus less exposed to volatile international prices. However, we must be realistic about the form of renewable energy we can provide here.

The UK does not have the resource potential of volcanic regions like New Zealand and Iceland, but in some locations underground temperatures have limited potential for deep geothermal projects. Therefore, we should give due consideration to the potential of geothermal energy. However, we cannot ignore the significant challenges that exist in this field, not least the financial investment that will be needed to make any project viable and realistic.

Any deep geothermal projects would require all of the necessary planning and environmental impact assessments to be carried out and considered. The depth of the bore holes required would be somewhere between 2,000 and 3,000 metres. That is the depth required to get temperatures in the region of 150°C to 200°C. Water is then injected to ensure fracturing of the rock. Hydrofracturing sounds like fracking to me. Cold water is then pumped down and brought back to the surface as hot water and can be used for electricity generation or district heating schemes.

Mr B McCrea: I thank the Member for giving way. I did not quite hear his point, and he may wish to reiterate it, about fracking and the fact that when you put the water down you have to frack the rock. Does it not sound very like fracking to you?

Mr Dunne: Yes, to clarify for the Member, that is exactly what I said: it sounds like fracking to me. We have got to be frack about it,

it is hydrofracturing — fracturing the rock with hydraulic pressure.

There are shallow ground-source heat pumps being used in Northern Ireland that have benefited from the Northern Ireland renewable heat incentive scheme. I welcome the range of renewable technologies being supported through the Department's strategic energy framework, with a range of renewable electricity and heat technologies all eligible for such support.

To help create sustainable high-value jobs in the renewable energy sector, develop the green economy, which we are all so keen on, and enhance security of supply, it is vital that the Executive do all in their power to ensure that the proposed North/South electricity interconnector is progressed as soon as possible. There is no doubt that renewable energy can have economic and environmental benefits whilst reducing our exposure to volatile fossil fuel prices and helping us to achieve further energy independence in Northern Ireland.

We note the potential of deep geothermal energy to meet some of our heating and electricity needs. However, we have to be realistic about the challenges and barriers that exist in that field. There is room for further research and investigation on geothermal energy to allow it to become part of our energy mix.

Mr McKinney: I welcome the opportunity to contribute to today's debate. I reaffirm the SDLP's support for the development of deep geothermal energy as part of an integrated approach, with the hope that it can positively impact on our over-reliance on fossil fuels and attempt to satisfy our ever increasing energy demands.

As Members are well aware, we are too heavily reliant on imported fossil fuels for our everyday energy needs, and with demand and price ever increasing, we must act now to avoid an energy crisis in the near future. It is clear that, as the prices of fossil fuels increase, so does fuel poverty, which affects the most disadvantaged. Recent reports estimated that some 300,000 households here are experiencing fuel poverty.

In an attempt to curb that, we must be innovative and strategic in utilising alternative, sustainable and renewable sources of energy that will enable us to meet the Executive's targets of achieving 40% of our electricity from renewable sources and 10% of our renewable heat by 2020.

Although we have made some progress over the past number of years, more needs to be done. In that regard, we must stand united in tackling climate change and driving the green agenda, as was suggested, to meet those targets. This is also about creating partnerships, and, in that sense, we must work closely not only in our own Departments but with our colleagues in the Republic to ensure the effective and efficient sharing of resources, with the possibility of cross-border interconnection. The approach taken must be part of an all-Ireland initiative so that consumers, North or South, can benefit from increased sustainable energy supplies at a competitive price. Deep geothermal energy certainly has the potential to be part of that initiative.

I would agree that, following the studies that have been conducted, the process has significant potential here, especially in some of the areas suggested. If the developments in Southampton, along with other models in western Europe, are anything to go by, deep geothermal energy has the potential to provide a large amount of renewable heat and electricity. It will also effectively help with reducing carbon emissions, addressing climate issues, providing employment and economic benefits to local companies and, most of all, driving down prices for the everyday consumer.

Deep geothermal energy is not without its limitations, and it is those that we must overcome. Perhaps the greatest issue facing deep geothermal energy in providing heat and electricity for countless homes is the time that it would take to develop and establish such a system here. As the Cambridge Economic Policy Associates (CEPA) report highlights, the establishment of a system is highly unlikely to happen before 2020, and it will even take a few years for exploration to begin beforehand. Do we have a timetable to push that further and faster?

Deep geothermal energy requires a long-term approach, with further planning, study, consultation and execution required if it is to have a significant impact. A road map must be developed. In that sense, it is unlike other sources of renewable energy that have been tried, tested and established in this region, such as harnessing wind, solar or biomass.

There remain other obstacles to overcome before we could even get going. For instance, we must be progressive in tackling high initial capital investment. It has been asked whether the renewable heating incentive is fit for purpose, so we must work closely to ensure that the proper financial provisions and incentives are in place to provide a competitive market and to attract investment for further growth. After all, it is estimated that it costs just over £3 million for every borehole drilled for exploration and that one plant — in Ballymena, for example — would cost £30 million to develop.

We must also take all steps necessary to limit the geological risk inherent in deep geothermal energy exploration. Further impact assessments are needed, and those must be continuous during exploration and the potential establishment of deep geothermal energy plants to limit any potential negative impact on the environment. In that regard, until we overcome the hurdles of deep geothermal energy, the motion remains narrow, as it will not have any significant impact on our energy demand in the near future. It is only through future planning, proper regulation, further consultation and providing proper financial incentives to investors that the scheme will become a reality and be delivered. Therefore, as the search continues for the most viable alternative to coal, oil and gas, we must also ask ourselves what are the alternatives that can have an immediate impact and strengthen our national grid. We have already seen much debate and consternation surrounding fracking, as has been touched on. Sinn Féin has said no to fracking but —

Mr Deputy Speaker: The Member's time is almost up.

Mr McKinney: — where are the alternatives that can make a significant, immediate impact on our energy demands nationwide?

Mrs Overend: I support the motion. The general public might be somewhat bemused that the Assembly, in the grip of a budgetary crisis that, if not resolved, could result in the collapse of institutions, is clearly debating a take-note motion. That said, in Northern Ireland, energy, particularly the price of energy, is one of the most important issues out there. At the very least, at the end of this debate, the Members present will be better informed about one of the technologies that could help solve our energy challenges and help meet our renewable targets.

Deep geothermal energy is an emerging renewable energy technology that has the potential to help reduce our over-reliance on imported fossil fuels. Deep geothermal plants work by pumping water down to rocks about 5 kilometres below the surface that are at high temperatures of around 200° centigrade. Once there, most of the water turns to steam and is then pumped back up and converted into geothermal electricity using a steam turbine. When cooled, the water can also be reused to produce more geothermal energy on demand, with — it is claimed by green energy enthusiasts — the potential to deliver one third of the UK's heat demand, if heat networks were installed.

The strategic energy framework of 2010 states:

All parties on the Executive signed up to the ambitious target in the Programme for Government to achieve that target. I believe that we are on about 14% at present. It is not just about creating security of energy supply and literally keeping the lights on; it is also about adapting to and militating against the harmful effects of climate change for future generations. The document states:

Studies have been carried out on the geothermal potential in Northern Ireland, with a number of towns identified as having the conditions to be potentially suitable for deep geothermal heating networks. Previous studies have examined the potential geothermal resource in Northern Ireland. In 2005, a study that used both measurements from existing bore holes and model geothermal temperature maps identified areas where deep geothermal heating schemes could be possible. Temperatures of around 90° Celsius were measured at a depth of 2,300 metres in the Rathlin Bay area on the north coast, and higher temperatures of up to 165° Celsius were modelled at 5,000-metre depths in other areas. That study was supplemented by a 2008 report commissioned by Action Renewables, which sought to determine where deep geothermal schemes may be viable by assessing potential heat demand and geothermal conditions. Six towns have been identified as having the appropriate geothermal conditions and the necessary heat demand: Ballycastle, Bushmills, Ballymoney, Ballymena, Larne and Antrim. I hope that the Minister will tell us the latest situation regarding the potential for exploiting the potential of geothermal. I am sure that the residents of the six towns just mentioned will be very interested indeed.

On 1 July this year, the all-party group on renewable energy received a presentation from GT Energy. The presentation mentioned Ballymena and Antrim and associated feasibility studies. However, both projects are apparently on hold due to a lack of financial and regulatory support. Perhaps the Minister will clarify the attitude of the Department in her summing up.

There have been studies, reports and consultation documents, but still, as it stands, no projects have been forthcoming. However, a word of caution: in the strategic energy framework document, the Department estimated that the combined cost of renewable electricity installations together with the cost of the grid investment necessary to meet the 40% target could be between £49 and £83 per household on an annual basis at current prices. When we talk of government grants and incentives for renewable energy schemes, we should not forget that it is the consumer and taxpayer who end up paying through their energy bills.

The policy of the Ulster Unionist Party on energy is that we need to diversify our supply. Onshore wind is not the only option when it comes to renewable energy —

Mr Deputy Speaker: The Member's time is almost up.

Mrs Overend: — and we should not put all our eggs in one basket. Necessity is the mother of invention and —

Mr Deputy Speaker: The Member's time is up.

Mrs Overend: — other emerging technologies should be part of our energy mix in the future.

Mr Lunn: I am happy to support the motion. It is fairly limited and just asks for appropriate legislation and incentives to support the potential development of the industry. That is fair enough. I must confess that I have listened with interest today to the various experts on the topic; it is not something that I know much about. I listened to Professor Flanagan, Mrs Overend and Mr Dunne with interest.

I think that we are moving in the right direction. A geological survey and other evidence tell us where the hotspots are. We have heard them mentioned several times. They are certainly around County Antrim, particularly north Antrim, and perhaps into south Derry. I know that the Committee has already looked at this area in some detail, so we are in no doubt about the potential.

There may be some time pressures. We are in a long-term project to try to improve our energy supply, costs and prices, but we could find ourselves competing with other parts of the UK. Extraction will, effectively, be a private enterprise, and, at least in part, we need to know how to prioritise the areas of opportunity around County Antrim because the same investors who might be looking there will also be looking at the Grampians, Cornwall, Yorkshire or other areas where potential exists. So we need to make it attractive for investors. That is all that the motion asks. We should be in no doubt that we need to deliver on energy costs and supply in this country. What we have at the moment is far too fragile and too dependent on others.

I heard the discussion about the comparison with fracking. Again, my lack of knowledge will come to the fore, but it seems to me that it is really not the same thing. Both involve a hole in the ground, but, beyond that, I cannot see how pumping water down a hole so that it heats up and pumping it back up again is the —

Mr Frew: Will the Member give way?

Mr Lunn: Absolutely — inform me.

Mr Frew: This is a point of information for the Member. First, a borehole has to be drilled. Water then has to be pumped down and go through fractured rock at about 120°C before coming up through a second borehole to hit onto a motor or generator. So, to all intents and purposes, it will have to go through fractured rock.

Mr Lunn: Yes, I understand that, but I still do not think that it has the potential for as much destruction to the environment in terms of producing gases. That is what fracking is all about. I would certainly be prepared to give it a fair wind. It is worthy of more exploration. Look at the countries around the world that have gone with this: are Iceland or New Zealand regarded as environmentally unfriendly? I really think that we should look that this very seriously and not accept that it is just another form of fracking, because I do not believe that it is.

Inevitably, when the time comes, if we ever get round to it, there will be a lot of local opposition. You can already see it forming here. That will happen not least because, if we go ahead with this sort of exploration, it will be in some of our most scenic locations. I wonder whether the proposers of the motion, and indeed everybody else here, are prepared to commit to supporting exploratory drilling without seeking local political gain. Let us face it: every time that we have had an environmentally friendly energy proposal — wind turbines, waste incinerators, hydro schemes and wave power — a head of steam, if I can say that, has built up in opposition to it. I wonder whether that will happen again, even if it is proven that this is liable to be comparatively environmentally friendly.

I would like to hear more from the Minister about incentives already available and any further potential incentives, given the obvious lack of potential for committing extra funding just now.

I will leave it at that. As you can tell, I am not convinced one way or the other, but I think that it is certainly worthy of further exploration.

Mr Frew: I am grateful for the chance to speak in the debate, which is a very important one for moving forward. There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that we will need a greater mix of energy generation in the future. That is a no-brainer, and we have to be prepared for that. We certainly cannot lump all our eggs in the one basket that is wind power. It is simply not reliable enough. Until we get to a point at which we have the storage capacity to save energy, we need to have as wide a mix as possible.

With that mix comes all sorts of responsibilities. We will definitely need our own domestic energy supplies. Deep geothermal energy may well be one of those answers. We should explore the possibilities of getting that up, out and to the public so that they can have a real, tangible benefit. Hopefully, we will also reduce energy costs indirectly.

What amazes me here today is Sinn Féin. Its members are meant to be the guardians of the environment, the people who fought the good fight against fracking in Fermanagh and were against all holes being bored in that beautiful countryside. I ask this question: why is it OK to test, explore and drill in my constituency of North Antrim but not in Fermanagh? Is it the case that the proposer of the motion is simply saying, "Right, OK — we are not going to have fracking in Fermanagh, but why not have boreholes all over the place in North Antrim? Why not let them pick up the tab and take on the burden of responsibility when it comes to fuel mixes?"? That is basically what this sounds like today.

Mr Flanagan: I thank the Member for giving way. Maybe he was not listening, but I said that there was actually potential for that in Fermanagh as well, so it is not as though I am opposed to boreholes in my own area. The Member will be well aware that this is not going to happen in his constituency because of the protection that is afforded to the gas industry and because a gas network is enabled in the parts of the constituency where this is a viable runner. That is blocking it.

Mr Frew: Some who listen to this would even argue that the motion would be classed as sectarian because of the interest of north Antrim and of course Fermanagh with regard to fracking. What is the difference between fracking for shale gas and fracking for geothermal energy? I will quote from the Department of Energy and Climate Change's geothermal energy report, which states that deep geothermal power:

Now, the key words in that are "fractures in hot rocks". They are the key words. I am not opposed to the exploration of new energy mixes. Is Sinn Féin actually coming to the realisation now that this will have to be looked at? Is it coming to the realisation that we cannot rely on the existing sources of energy as they are now? Will that spirit generate itself into helping to push forward the other main key issue in all of this, which is interconnection? Will Sinn Féin push hard for the North/South interconnector in order that we have a greater mix of power being generated on this island to support the people of Northern Ireland and to also have connection to the greater UK, the British Isles and Europe?

This is a party that has, for so long, been one of no progress. I would love to see the day that it gets on board and actually tries to do something positive for the people of Northern Ireland. We can all bury our head in the sand and say that we do not like that; it is too risky or too dangerous. Let us explore it and see what benefits it will bring people. Let us see it getting on the ground because it is the only way that people will benefit from it and be able to have a greater degree of flexibility in their energy costs and resource. It will help and aid businesses. I am glad that Sinn Féin is starting to realise that we need this.

Mr Attwood: A couple of hours ago, the Minister, other people and I were in west Belfast to acknowledge the work of Delta Packaging. It now has 250 people supplying headline businesses in Europe and other places. Terry Cross, the chair of the board, made the point that his business model was beginning to address obviously the issue of recycling. I know from other conversations that his business model is trying to address the issue of renewables.

I make that point because, whatever the difference might be around whether there is frack-free thermal energy, the purpose of the debate should be whether we in Northern Ireland are going to recognise that our economy, if it is to be sustainable and thrive, has to have a niche market profile in the global conditions, one of which is what Terry Cross was talking about a couple of hours ago: whether the profile of our industry for recycling and renewables gives us a competitive advantage. I make that point because, whatever about thermal energy, unless we in Northern Ireland shape our energy mix and go down the road of renewables in a much speedier way, we will lose our space in the global market.

Whatever about thermal energy, Mr Frew, as I have said many times before, the biggest economic opportunity this island has is not just in our wind but in our wave and tide. That is where science and engineering are at their most advanced stage, and that is where the biggest opportunities exist. If we are to compete in the global market, if we are to one day be energy sufficient, if we are to one day export to national and international grids, it is around wind, wave and tide that we will be able to first build that business model and that energy model. That needs imagination, and my concern about the shape of current government strategy is that there is not enough imagination to scale up in the way that we can. We have the imagination. As I always say, 30 miles from here, in Strangford lough, is the world birthplace of modern tidal power. The world birthplace of modern tidal power sits in one of the most protected waters in Europe. You can be imaginative, you can be world leading and you can do it in a way that protects the environment. That, in my view, is the real issue in the debate. Whatever about thermal energy mixing in with wind, wave, tide and solar, do we have the imagination, do we put the money in and do we have the capacity to live up to that challenge? That is why I ask the Minister, given the current consultation on the Northern Ireland renewable obligations certificate when it comes to solar PV, whether she has a view on reducing, as outlined in the consultation, the ROC payable in that regard from 4 to 1·6. If the ROC was reduced to a level of 1·6, then, in a moment, the solar PV industry would be dealt a crushing blow.

Mr Frew is wrong: whether there is a frack-free model of thermal energy — Mr Agnew from the Green Party will talk about that, I am sure — you miss the point. The point is that, whether you frack or not using thermal, it is about whether you can do it safely and responsibly. The evidence in respect of hydraulic fracking is that it has not been done responsibly in America. The safety issues around where the gas goes and what the health impacts are —

Mr Frew: Will the Member give way?

Mr Attwood: I will give way.

Mr Frew: Does the Member agree that nobody here is suggesting that we go down a route where we do unsafe fracking of any sort to get any sort of energy resource? No one in this room has even suggested that.

Mr Attwood: I note that comment, but, until last week, you might have drawn different conclusions from the current Minister's viewpoint. The Minister went to the Middle East — I think it was to Oman, but I might be corrected on that — and issued a statement saying that fracking was being done OK there, so why can we not do it in Fermanagh?

Mrs Foster (The Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment): On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker.

Mr Attwood: The point is that —

Mr Deputy Speaker: I will take a point of order. The Member will resume his seat.

Mrs Foster: The Member might like to reflect on what he has just said, Mr Deputy Speaker. At no time did I mention fracking in the Middle East.

Mr Attwood: I think that the public record will say otherwise. If I am wrong, I will correct the record. However, I recall the Minister, on one of her investment trips, saying that if fracking was being done safely in another place it could be done safely here.

I am glad that there has been a change of heart. Whatever the motivation, whether it is the imminence of the Fermanagh Westminster election or whether it is a genuine change of heart, I welcome it, but do not confuse fracking that might relate to thermal with hydraulic fracking for gas, where there are health, safety, water and seismic consequences.

Mr Wilson: I have no doubt that the Member who proposed the motion has great knowledge of the whole idea of geothermal energy. He knows all about being put under pressure and then having steam coming out of your ears. Anybody who listened to 'Nolan' this morning will know all about that. He is right: the deeper you dig, the hotter it gets. As Nolan dug into his knowledge of the events budget and welfare reform, he certainly got a lot hotter, and people got a lot more light as to how little Sinn Féin knows about some of the issues that it debates.

This has been an interesting debate. We are seeing turnarounds and contradictory positions already. On one hand, the defenders of the Fermanagh countryside against the ravages of fracking now say that fracking is OK on certain occasions. Mr Attwood now seems to be converted to renewable energy. This was the man who said that, if there had been a waste-to-energy plant for Belfast, he would have stopped it. He stopped the Rose Energy project, but now he is converted to renewable energy.

Mr Attwood: Will the Member give way?

Mr Wilson: Yes, I will give way.

Mr Attwood: Check the record. Unlike in your time in the DOE, the profile of approvals for wind turbines, both commercial scale and farm-located, was far in excess of anything that you achieved. Where there were environmental consequences that were too grave in respect of energy plant, of course I refused it. Would any other position be responsible?

Mr Deputy Speaker: The Member has an extra minute.

Mr Wilson: That was the SDLP's contribution to energy in Northern Ireland. The fuel poor have had imposed on them some of the most expensive forms of energy that we could have. It is three and a half times more costly than what is generated at Kilroot or Ballylumford. I do not think that that is a record to be proud of, especially when 42% of people in Northern Ireland live in fuel poverty.

Let us look at the issue. First of all, we have a proposal that we should have a form of energy that requires fracking. People can deny it all they want, but 'The Economist' said that "geothermal is the new fracking". It involves drilling vertical wells up to 12,000 ft deep, then horizontal drilling, then putting water and chemicals under pressure, and the pressure and the chemistry shear the deep, hot rock. Shearing or fracking, it is all the same. Of course, Sinn Féin now supports it in places like the Mournes, Rathlin and Lough Neagh. What is significant about all those areas? They are tourist areas. In those tourist areas, you will have boreholes, drilling rigs, pumping stations and maybe even a power station having to be built close to the well in areas where tourists —

Mr Agnew: Will the Member give way?

Mr Wilson: Yes, I will give way.

Mr Agnew: How many wells on average does fracking require, and how many wells on average does geothermal require?

Mr Wilson: The whole idea of fracking is that you go down through one well and then you have lots of branches off it. All you have on top of it is a barn-like structure that is no bigger than a farmer's barn and can be integrated into the countryside. The impact would be far less than having to dig a hole in the ground, with another one coming up and a power station on top of it. There is a huge difference. Not only has Sinn Féin now been converted to fracking, but it has no concerns about these installations being in tourist and agricultural areas.

The third thing is that this has been presented as a panacea.

Mr Flanagan said that people need to read more. I think that if he had read the NICVA report he might not have got into the trouble he did this morning, mind you. If he would even read the DETI document, he would know that 0·5% maximum of our energy can be produced in this particular form. We are still going to be reliant on the main source of energy that this society depends on: fossil fuel. Indeed, a well to release gas is likely to produce far more energy to produce electricity than a well that goes down to release hot water. Of course, it will be much cheaper than geothermal energy as well.

In a country where we are looking, first of all, for reliable and cheap energy that will meet our needs for the future, to come up with this idea that you can turn your back on fossil fuels and on drilling for natural gas underneath the surface and that you can rely on geothermal power, which even at the best estimate will produce one two-hundredths of our energy needs —

Mr Deputy Speaker: The Member's time is almost up.

Mr Wilson: — just shows the nonsense that Sinn Féin's energy policy is.

Mr Agnew: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. And now for something completely different.

Geothermal energy is a clean, reliable source of energy; it is a renewable source of energy that we can access in Northern Ireland. Unlike fossil fuels, as the previous contributor said, it is not finite and it is not running out any time soon. It is renewable, so if we are talking about energy security, let us not talk about today or tomorrow but about the long term.

I question some of the previous contributor's figures. Geothermal energy has the potential to meet up to one third of our renewable heat targets by 2020, so it can make a significant contribution to producing heat. Those of us who have read and understand the science know that we need to move away from our dependence on fossil fuels. Unlike what the previous contributor may claim, we need to tackle climate change because it is caused by human activity and only the actions of human activity can stop irreversible climate change.

As things stand in Northern Ireland, we do not provide sufficient support for geothermal energy for it to be exploited. It is a new form of technology in the UK, although, as has been pointed out by other contributors, it heats up to 90% of homes in Iceland.

Mr Wilson: I thank the Member for giving way. Would he accept that when he talks glibly about not giving enough support to geothermal energy, what he is really saying is that the hard-pressed electricity consumers already, through their bills, provide subsidies to the industry, so putting up their energy bills?

Mr Deputy Speaker: The Member has an additional minute.

Mr Agnew: The former Minister will be well aware that there is no energy to speak of being produced in Northern Ireland that has not to be subsidised in some shape or form. For example, we are giving £32·5 million to the gas industry to bring gas to the west, so we are subsidising energy and we will do so. The question is this: which energy should we subsidise? Which energy will provide the best long-term solutions in terms of security of supply, sustainability and price for the consumer?

Renewable energy is the only form of energy that can tick each of those boxes. We need to look at each technology, but we also need to start from the basic principle that renewable energy is the way forward. That is where I take on Mr Flanagan's point. I suspect that one of the problems with geothermal energy is not to do with some of the distraction that has been created around the idea of fracking but the fact that the Department has a statutory duty to promote the gas industry. To incentivise the exploitation of geothermal energy would be a threat to the gas industry because, of course, it wants gas to be our main form of heating. The potential of renewable heat through geothermal energy is a threat to the gas industry and, therefore, it could be argued that the Department would not meet its statutory duty.

Clearly, we need legislation to regulate geothermal energy and I have argued for the regulation of the other industries. Equally, the renewables industry should be a responsible industry and it should be regulated, but we also need to change the legislation that gives priority to gas. By virtue of the fact that we have a renewal heat incentive and renewable obligation certificates, we are acknowledging that we need to move away from fossil fuels and that we need to incentivise renewables. If we start from that basis, the statutory duty for gas no longer stands any justification in Northern Ireland.

I come now to the point that was raised about whether this is fracking. Fracking can be part of the process in geothermal. It can, but it is the exception rather than the norm. The vast majority of geothermal exploitation across the world has not involved hydraulic fracturing. Where it does not involve it, we do not need to have this debate; where it does, we need to look at it. The question of hydraulic fracturing is a question of risk and benefits. What are the risks of fracking for gas? The risks are the possible release of methane and the contamination of water through the chemicals used. During the debate, somebody said that the same issue of bringing water back up to the surface would be required in the geothermal process. That is not the case. It is a closed-loop system, so we do not have the huge pools of contaminated water that you would have with gas fracking.

I will answer the question that Mr Wilson did not answer. It was proposed to have thousands of wells: 1,200 across Fermanagh and thousands across Ireland, north and south across the border, to frack that area. You would need one to three wells for a similar geothermal process. So, it does not involve the industrialisation that we would have seen if we had fracked Fermanagh. I should have started by welcoming the Minister's decision to terminate Tamboran's licence.

Mr Wilson: Will the Member give way?

Mr Agnew: I do not have time; apologies. The differences are marked, but there are benefits. As I said, there is a cost-benefit analysis. The costs of geothermal are less, and the benefits are much better, because we get a clean, green fuel without carbon emissions beyond the process of extraction.

Mr Deputy Speaker: The Member's time is up.

Mr Agnew: We get much greater benefits. We get a long-term, clean, green, reliable renewable source of energy.

Mr B McCrea: Mr Deputy Speaker, rarely have I heard such twaddle or such uneducated, uninformed, misinformed information from these Benches. You sit and say, "This is not fracking" or "This is fracking by another name". I invite you to read a book that you will find in the Library. It is by one Daithí McKay. I am not sure if it is the same Daithí McKay, but he was a chief scientific officer. The book is 'Sustainable Energy — Without the Hot Air'.

One thing that I want to understand is what Fintan Warfield has to say about it all. Come on. What does Fintan Warfield have to say? I cannot ask him, because I do not know the Sinn Féin mayor of South Dublin County Council personally, but maybe Members here do, because that council has given full planning permission for all of this. It has had an entire seismic report done of the Dublin/Newcastle basin to see whether it can go through and to see if it is possible. Full planning permission was granted in January 2011, and, since then, there has been nothing.

Mr Flanagan: Will the Member give way?

Mr B McCrea: I do not think I will, because the Member was not quite so generous when I wanted to come in earlier. I ask him to get his facts right. I will address this to Mr Agnew as well, because I am a chemical engineer, and I chair the all-party group on science and technology. We have had quite a few discussions on this issue, including discussions with experts who came from across the water to talk to us about the issue. It does not seem possible to me to bore three or four kilometres down into the ground without cutting across aquifers or other fault lines, which may release methane or radon, particularly if you are in the geological hotspots driven by granite. You are going to do exactly the same thing that you were going to do with fracking.

I cannot understand why we have the hypocrisy in this place to say, "We oppose fracking because we don't know what it might do" and then say, "But geothermal might be OK".

Mr Agnew: I thank the Member for giving way, and I have a couple of questions for him. You do not release radon; you bring it to the surface, which fracking has the potential to do but geothermal does not. No water is produced, unlike in fracking, so that is another difference. Does the Member accept that there are two types of geothermal energy? There are the enhanced geothermal systems that require fracking and the normal geothermal system that requires no fracking.

Mr Deputy Speaker: The Member has an extra minute.

Mr B McCrea: I am tempted to respond with "Will the Member give way?", because that was something of a speech. Let me quote something from the body of evidence in the research paper. This was said by a representative of the company that are going to do it. He said that there are two types:

That will put pressure on the systems. He then said:

The real issue in all these matters is that, if you do not have sound geological data, you should not proceed. However, where you have it, you can do it safely. That is the real problem with the whole argument. People expound on emotion and do not look at the facts. They do not come down and see what the science says. Of course, if it is not safe, you do not do it, but, where you have scientific evidence that it is safe — as it apparently is in the South Dublin with its Sinn Féin mayor — you should give full planning permission and get on with it. I come to this issue —

Mr McMullan: Will the Member give way?

Mr B McCrea: Yes.

Mr McMullan: When the Member mentions the planning permission given in South Dublin, does he know exactly what he is talking about when he mentions geothermal heating and the type that it is? Perhaps he can tell the House that. Secondly, can I ask the MP for East Antrim how many applications have been made for geothermal heating schemes in his constituency?

Mr B McCrea: I am not sure that you are allowed to redirect your questions through me to other people. If you feel that you are in the Chair, fair enough. There is a touch of debating hydrofracking there, I think, where we have gone down and gone across.

The information that I see here is on the website. Take this document and have a look at GT Energy to see what it has said about drilling in Newcastle. I got excited for a while, because I thought that it was Newcastle, County Down, but it turned out to be Newcastle, County Dublin. I read on, and I looked at what it said. There is a full seismic analysis, and full planning permission has been granted. The information is all there for the Member to have a look at.

Other places have tried this. Southampton has a geothermal system operating, but one of the issues that arises is that it is only part of the solution. Even there, it produces only 17% of the heating input to the district heating system, so you need to have some integrated form of dealing with the issue. The big thing that I really want to say is —

Mr Deputy Speaker: The Member's time is almost up.

Mr B McCrea: The reason why I will not be so hard is that I would like people to start saying yes for a change. That is what got the anger in all of this.

Mr Deputy Speaker: The Member's time is up.

Mr B McCrea: People who said no, no, no are now saying yes. For goodness' sake, we have to do something.

Mr Deputy Speaker: The Member's time is long gone.

Mr B McCrea: Trust the science, and, please, let us do something together.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr McCrea, resume your seat, please. The debate has certainly generated a lot of steam, some of which I was not able to control very well.

Mrs Foster: I welcome the opportunity to respond to the motion on geothermal energy for heating and electricity. It is important that we look at both those elements, and that goes back to a point that Mr Agnew raised in his interjection just a few minutes ago. It is a pity that we did not have a pump available today in the Assembly, because we would have got quite a lot of hot air. I think that you recognised that, Mr Deputy Speaker.

In pursuing the Executive’s targets of 40% renewable electricity and 10% renewable heat by 2020, we have put forward a framework that is technology-neutral. That allows the market to bring forward the most cost-effective renewable energy technologies. That is a very important consideration — Mrs Overend also made the point — as we are asking consumers to contribute to costs through their electricity bills. I am pleased that we are well on track to deliver our interim target of 20% renewable electricity by 2015. Contrary to what Ms Overend said, our figures are in for last year — April 2013 to March 2014 — and show that we had 19·5% of our electricity from renewable sources, so we are very close to the 20% target that we were to hit by 2015.

Deep geothermal energy, both for power and heat, is a low-carbon sustainable resource that has the potential to play a role in our future energy mix, although, at present, it does not feature in our energy mix. Power generation requires higher geothermal temperatures than for heat, and it remains a very capital-intensive technology. Whilst there is some potential, there is less so than in the more volcanic regions such as Iceland, North America and New Zealand. Nevertheless, electricity generation from deep geothermal energy is eligible for incentives, although you would think, hearing some of the people in the Assembly today, that there are no incentives available. There are incentives available in the form of renewables obligation certificates, although, as I have said, no schemes have come forward thus far.

Mr Agnew: I thank the Minister for giving way. Can she explain why the incentive of two ROCs set in Northern Ireland is considerably below that in GB?

Mrs Foster: I wanted to take up this point in relation to Mr Attwood's solar PV consultation, which has just closed. As the Member will know, we put forward the appropriate ROCs depending on the evidence that comes forward to us in consultations, and that is certainly the case for the solar PV. It has been an evidence-based consultation. I have been very clear with the industry that, if they have evidence that requires us to intervene in the fashion that we have been intervening in, they need to bring us that evidence. It is back to Ms Overend's point that incentives have to be paid for by the consumer and, if we are over-incentivising solar PV or, indeed, any other technology, we are doing a huge disservice to our consumers.

Can I just clear up the issue about Oman and fracking? As if I would talk about fracking in Oman. They do not need to frack in Oman. Actually, I was talking about Qatar, if the Member wants to go back to the actual discussion that we had. I said that the gas that they found off Qatar had made it the richest place in the world. I never mentioned fracking. I said that they had a fabulous natural resource there and that is what they were using. Mr Attwood needs to get his facts right before he comes to the House and accuses me of things like that.

The ROCs mechanism will close to new applicants from April 2017, and large-scale renewable electricity generation, including deep geothermal, will then be supported under the UK-wide feed-in tariff with contracts for difference.

Energy from ground sources already plays a role in heating our homes and businesses through the renewable heat incentive. Ground-source heat pumps utilise shallow geothermal and are already in use to heat many local businesses and homes. Examples are the new library at Queen's University and the Lyric Theatre. The Northern Ireland non-domestic renewable heat incentive scheme provides incentives for businesses to install geothermal heating systems through the tariffs set for large ground-source heat pumps. Whilst there are none installed to date, I look forward to seeing suitable projects come through under the RHI in due course.

Much has been made across the way of our statutory objective to promote the gas industry. That objective does not impair the future development of deep geothermal energy, as the RHI does not differentiate by geography. A renewable installation in a gas area will receive the same incentive payments as an equivalent installation in a non-gas area, and the development of the natural gas market and the increase of renewable levels are both essential for Northern Ireland to enjoy a more diverse, secure and sustainable heat market.

I was interested to hear Mr Flanagan's comments in relation to the natural gas market. First of all, he was opposed to gas for the west; then he came online and said that he was in favour of gas to the west; and today we are hearing again that he may not now be in favour of gas to the west. His constituents, particularly those in Derrylin, will be interested to hear his comments today.

Mr Flanagan: On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker.

Mrs Foster: No, thank you. My current assessment is that —

Mr Deputy Speaker: Point of order.

Mr Flanagan: I want to clear up the allegation that the Minister just made. Neither today nor previously have I said that I was opposed to the gas network being extended. Perhaps the Minister, in her infinite wisdom, will come to the House prepared with facts instead of making silly allegations.

Mrs Foster: The record of the House will show very clearly that, in the past, you thought that —

Mr Deputy Speaker: The Minister will resume her seat, please. I remind Members not to make remarks from a sedentary position. I also remind Members that courtesy and good nature are the key hallmarks of the Assembly, so there is no need for any vocabulary that is otherwise.

Mrs Foster: Mr Deputy Speaker, I remind the Member that he thought that the gas pipeline to the west was some sort of Trojan Horse for fracking in the south-west of Fermanagh. He is on record as saying that, so I do not know what he is talking about. In relation —

Mr Deputy Speaker: I am sorry, Minister, I have to ask you to resume your seat again.

My remarks to Mr Flanagan apply equally on this side of the House: no talking from a sedentary position.

Mrs Foster: In relation to Mr Agnew's point that we are providing —

Mr Frew: I thank the Minister for giving way. Despite Phil Flanagan's opposition and despite him being at odds with his party policy, would the Minister like to elaborate on the difference that gas to the west would make to businesses there?

Mrs Foster: Gas to the west is hugely anticipated by businesses there, particularly by those that are very energy-intensive, such as some of our agrifood companies and the former Quinn glass factory.

In any event, I want to move on. Mr Agnew said that we were giving incentives to the gas pipeline to the west. We are giving a one-off grant of £30 million for gas to the west. Last year alone, the renewable industries received over £50 million in subsidies. That is an annual figure, and the money comes from consumers. We need to be honest with people and say that that is the case instead of trying to hide away from the matter.

I recognise that the lack of legislation and corresponding regulatory system may be a potential barrier to the development of deep geothermal energy in Northern Ireland. Of course, we all know that stable and effective regulation is necessary for investor confidence, as is underground access for directional drilling. That issue came up in Fermanagh, and people were concerned about it. Geothermal legislation is desirable, but it is not an issue that I am in a position to address now. The rest of the UK is looking at geothermal legislation. There is nothing in place at the moment, but I understand that the coalition Government want to introduce legislation in 2015 on directional drilling below 300 metres both for geothermal and for oil and gas. I understand that, although the Republic of Ireland has —

Mr B McCrea: Will the Minister give way?

Mrs Foster: Yes, very quickly.

Mr B McCrea: Minister, will you clarify whether there is an issue with the ownership of the land when you go below 300 metres? Is that the issue that needs to be addressed?

Mrs Foster: No, the issue that needs to be addressed relates to when you go down and then across. There is some concern about ownership, and people have the right not to consent to that. We need to discuss that.

The Republic of Ireland has prepared a geothermal Bill, but there is no timescale for its introduction.

I mentioned the difference between district heating systems, which use shallow geothermal and sometimes go throw porous rocks, and electricity. I did so because the generation of electricity from enhanced geothermal systems would require the drilling of boreholes to between 3 and 4 kilometres and a form of fracking. Anyone who listened to 'Talkback' last Wednesday will have heard an expert from Keele University point out that geothermal energy means fracking granite, not just shale gas. There is an element of fracking, and we have to be honest with ourselves and say that. Frankly, we cannot have a hysterical reaction every time that fracking is mentioned, with people going into a tizzy about it. We need to look at the science, the facts and the evidence.

I will finish with the ending of the Tamboran licence. Some of us do take decisions on evidence; some of us do look at the science; and some of us do look at the facts. I know that some Members opposite may have difficulty with that. Some of them seem to live in their own special little world. However, I took that decision on the evidence that was in front of me, and it was all about the facts. When this is all over, that will be abundantly clear to everyone in the House.

Mr Hazzard: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank my party colleague Phil Flanagan for bringing this timely motion to the House. I am thankful for the opportunity to speak on what is a very important issue.

We are discussing the need for a sustainable energy supply, the effects of fuel poverty and the negative effects of the destructive exploitation of the earth. I was fortunate enough — or unfortunate enough — to see at first hand in Brazil this summer the results of extensive and thorough logging and the effect that it is having on a precious rainforest habitat. It is only when you see the effects that humans can have on the earth that a light is shone on the issue. That is certainly what it did for me.

Where do we turn today with this motion? I think that the Member for South Belfast has made it clear that, as an island, we need to have an all-Ireland approach to this. I ask the Minister to make sure that this issue is put on the agenda of the North/South Ministerial Council and work with her colleagues in the South to ensure that the issue is taken forward.

As has been outlined by various Members, Ireland has a productive mix of geological settings from the powerful seas around us to the high winds and the granite rock formations, such as the Mournes, that may hold great potential for such geothermal systems. It is only right that we start to examine and explore to see what potential that geothermal energy could have for us.

Mr B McCrea: Will the Member give way?

Mr Hazzard: Yes indeed.

Mr B McCrea: I am interested in his point about cross-border work. The GT Energy report states that, now that planning permission has been granted in south Dublin, the only thing that they are waiting for is for RECIT, which is their equivalent of investment in renewables, to give them some sort of incentive. Given that the Member's party has representation, not only in south Dublin but in the Dáil, what has he done to make sure that the all-Ireland aspect of this is furthered? It appears to me that they are ahead of us and not behind us.

Mr Hazzard: I thank the Member for his intervention and indeed for his recent interest in Dublin City Council politics. The Member was unable to update the House as to what type of system this was. I am aware that this may involve the sea like the application at Larne, although it may be geothermal energy from the sea base, which is different from what most of us are referring to today. However, I will come back to that point later on.

We hear plenty about the need to rebalance our economy, which is right, but we also need to do the same with our energy mix. We need to do that in a sustainable way. The point that Alex Attwood made was very important as well. As a Member for South Down, I see at first hand the very imaginative approach taken in what has been done at Strangford lough with tidal wave energy. This is exactly what needs to take place.

I will outline some of the points made in the debate today. Mr Flanagan talked about the need for a more green and clean energy mix to really start to explore the opportunities that we have. He gave a far-ranging historical background to the issue of geothermal energy and talked both of the dangers and the opportunities in energy consumption, but also outlined that DETI needs to provide structure and actively demonstrate support for a renewable energy mix. I suppose that that is at the crux of what we are saying here today: enough of the noting and acknowledging that there may be potential; let us see some structure and a legislative base on which to move forward.

Gordon Dunne said that energy was an important issue for everybody, and that renewable energy is becoming increasingly important but that we need to have sustainable growth. Fearghal McKinney talked about an integrated approach being needed to reduce over-reliance on fossil fuels. Sandra Overend questioned the timing of the motion, which I was slightly disappointed at. As I outlined at the start, there are very few issues that are more important than the future sustainability of the earth and of fuel poverty and our energy supply. It is a timely motion at any time of the year. She went on to say that there is a need to tackle those issues and outlined the problems of fuel poverty and tackling climate change.

Trevor Lunn said that we are moving in the right direction and that we need to deliver on energy costs and supply. He also said that it is an issue worthy of exploration. Again, I was slightly disappointed with Mr Frew's contention that the motion may have been sectarian. I do not think that there is anything about the motion today that is sectarian and I am sure that the Member would want to take that back. He went on to talk about the need to have a varied and good energy mix.

As I outlined, Mr Attwood talked about the need for a competitive advantage and the fear of losing space in a global market. That can be seen with the strength of Marine Scotland and what it is doing with tidal wave energy in Orkney. We need to embrace that in Ireland. We are a small island that is surrounded by tidal power and we need to harness that power going forward. I used the word imagination, and we need to lock into that.

We learned that Sammy Wilson listens to 'The Stephen Nolan Show'. He also said that geothermal energy is somehow being presented as a panacea. I want to dispel that. No one is suggesting that geothermal energy, or any particular source of energy, will be a silver bullet in itself: it will not. We will need a mix. That is the way forward.

Mr Agnew talked about geothermal energy being clean and reliable. He compared it especially to fossil fuels and said that it is not running out. This is about a long-term vision, and the Assembly needs to look at it. We are not talking about this month, next year or even, for the most part, the next decade. This is about looking decades into the future and growing a sustainable fuel supply that we can all tap into.

Mr Frew: I thank the Member for giving way. Whilst he is right about the mix, it will have to be balanced by the costs of renewable energy, which will trundle down to our people. Unlike welfare reform, has Sinn Féin costed that out?

Mr Hazzard: I thank the Member for his intervention. I certainly do not have a costed paper for geothermal energy in front of me. That is what we are asking for. Let us move it to a space in which we can see the hard evidence and facts, so that we are able to build that sort of opportunity that, as an Assembly, we can all —

Mr Wilson: Will the Member give way?

Mr Hazzard: Go ahead, yes.

Mr Wilson: Would the Member accept that some costs have been done and that the Department of Energy and Climate Change in the United Kingdom has worked out that the emphasis on renewable energy will add 40% to fuel bills by 2030?

Mr Hazzard: I thank the Member for his intervention. These interventions do not get to the point. What is the cost of not doing it? What will be the cost to our environment and our future if we do not look at renewable energy? We have to look at that.

Mr B McCrea: Will the Member give way?

Mr Hazzard: No, I have given way for the last time. Thanks very much.

Mr B McCrea: You did not quite go —

Mr Hazzard: Yes.

Mr Agnew went on to say that geothermal energy has the potential to comprise one third of our renewable heat targets by 2020. That is not an insignificant amount. Most importantly, he outlined some of the differences between hydraulic fracturing and geothermal energy. It is very important to bear those in mind.

We are looking forward to moving from noting and acknowledging the potential of geothermal energy to putting it on to a proper legislative footing. Even the Minister recognised that a lack of legislative opportunity acts as a barrier to utilising all the potential. It is important that we have that recognition by the Minister that a lack of legislation is a destabilising factor in the process.

Let us move beyond noting and acknowledging the potential to seizing the opportunity. Let us give people the potential to harness this very important energy.