Official Report: Tuesday 24 September 2024

Mr Speaker: The usual rules apply.

Mrs Mason: Irish-medium early years education provides a unique and vibrant educational experience. Many across the Chamber will be aware of the challenges that come with immersive education, but, with the right interventions, we can get it the support that it needs so that it can continue to flourish, giving young people the very best start in life.

I recently had the opportunity to meet representatives of Irish-medium early years providers. Our discussions shed light on a number of key issues, which I wish to bring to the attention of the Department of Education. Those issues need urgent action if we are serious about ensuring the success and sustainability of Irish-medium education at that key, foundational level.

Children who wish their education journeys to be through the medium of Irish must be given proper support to ensure that they are as prepared as other children are to enter rang a haon

That means investing in more Irish language child psychologists and speech and language therapists, and developing a workforce and development training plan. We need to see a more proactive approach to Irish-medium education from the Department. There should be an obligation for language-appropriate resources to be generated and supplied in-house, and for proper engagement with and support for families.

Irish-medium education should not be treated as an afterthought or secondary option; it is an integral part of our education system that deserves the same commitment and investment as other parts of that system. In line with that, there must be structured, ongoing engagement between the Department, Irish-medium early years providers and the families of children who choose that educational pathway. Parents need to feel confident that their children will receive a well-rounded education that meets all their developmental needs.

They should have access to clear, accessible information and support from the very early years.

I remain committed to working with colleagues from across the Chamber to address the challenges facing Irish-medium education. I will continue to advocate for the support, resources and interventions that our young learners deserve. By investing in those children now, we invest in the future of our language, our culture and our society.

Mrs Erskine: Last Thursday, I went along to the pharmacy across the road from my office, Hughes Pharmacy, which is on Belmore Street in Enniskillen. It was staging a day of action for the Save our Pharmacies campaign. The staff were working with the lights out, and many of the people who came in wondered whether there had been a power cut. It was, however, being done to paint a picture of how it could be lights out for many community pharmacies the length and breadth of Northern Ireland if funding streams are not resolved soon.

Local pharmacies are a valuable part of the NHS, playing a significant role in keeping the pressure off GPs and hospitals by providing a range of healthcare services such as urgent care, vaccinations, support with long-term conditions and treatment of common illnesses. The past few years, however, have been extremely challenging. Pharmacies are experiencing severe financial problems due to real-term government cuts to NHS pharmacy funding and rising costs. Right now, there is a funding gap of approximately £20 million for Community Pharmacy NI. New analysis by the National Pharmacy Association (NPA) found that the number of pharmacies closing this year is nearly 50% higher compared with those closing at the same stage in 2023. Between January and April, 177 pharmacies closed, 17 of which were in Northern Ireland. The majority of independent community pharmacies, such as mine, are small to medium-sized family businesses and are therefore especially vulnerable to the financial challenges. With the shrinking network, closures disproportionately affect the most deprived communities.

Last week, Community Pharmacy NI went to Westminster to take its case to the Chancellor. We think of our community pharmacies and the great work that they do in communities. The Health Minister has said that he wants to deal with inequalities in our communities in Northern Ireland. I trust that we will all get behind our local community pharmacies and ask the Health Minister to act now before it is lights out for them.

Miss McAllister: I will highlight the issue of respite services in Northern Ireland. Tonight, a 'Spotlight' documentary titled 'I Am Not Okay' will air on BBC1 NI. The documentary is available on iPlayer, so I took the opportunity this morning to watch it. The distress and the pleas for help that I saw and heard are neither new nor individual, and that is an outright disgrace.

Respite care across Northern Ireland was failing our families long before the COVID pandemic: while what was on offer was marginally better, it was still not good enough. Like many in the Chamber, I too often hear stories of families pleading for help, of parents being forced to take legal action and of desperate calls being made to social workers and trusts, all in the hope of getting some form of help. Indeed, the most recent call for help was made last Friday by a new family in my constituency. The form of help that was offered to them through the trust was a direct payment, so they were forced to look for assistance themselves. The trusts are, in some circumstances, unwilling to give families the help that is desperately needed, because, they claim, they are not able to provide help. They say that they cannot provide the workforce to help those families. How on earth can families be expected to secure that help for themselves at home?

The situation has not developed overnight. There has been long-term negligence in the provision of respite care in Northern Ireland and help for carers across every one of our constituencies. We are at crisis point. Children now need long-term care placement options because families can no longer cope and have been abandoned. That is not a choice that any family wants to make or comes to easily, but there are no options yet available for long-term care placements. We now hear from the Department and the trusts that they are looking for out-of-state care for those children.

That out-of-state care in the Republic of Ireland or the UK could cost upwards of £20,000 per week. It is not about being unable to afford to help those families in their own homes, because we cannot afford not to do it.

Over the years, I have dealt with many families and stakeholders on the issue. I have also brought it directly to the previous and current Health Ministers, both at Committee and through Assembly questions. In fact, in one of those instances, when I questioned the Minister about third-party providers being paid by the trusts to offer services that were not actually being offered, I got a blank face and inadequate answers. That is something that those families face every single day. Those families are not OK. They deserve our help.

Mr Gildernew: I bring to Members' attention the issue of the telecommunications mast that is right at the top of Dungannon town on the historic Hill of The O'Neill site. The site was originally the seat of the O'Neills, chosen for its panoramic views across seven of Ulster's nine counties. It is an intrinsically beautiful site. Over many years, both the legacy Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council and the Mid Ulster District Council have developed the Hill of The O'Neill theatre site and a covered outside space where events can take place. It is the heart and soul of Dungannon town and the jewel in its crown.

In recent months, many people have been calling for the issue of the telecommunications mast to be addressed. Local councillors have raised the issue. The newly formed Dungannon chamber of commerce has raised the issue. Historians and many others have highlighted the fact that the old remaining towers on that historic site are completely overshadowed and blemished by the presence of a massive steel telecommunications tower. I am aware that the local council has been engaging with NI Water, which operates the tower. It is a commercial venture in that sense. The site was previously occupied by the British Army for many years for the same reason, but it is now open to the people of Dungannon town.

NI Water operates the site. Mid Ulster District Council and NI Water had agreed to consult on removing the mast. Recently, NI Water has withdrawn from that commitment, citing budgetary reasons. I am aware that many people in the district, including the chamber of commerce, are working diligently to try to increase its tourism offer. They are being hindered by the mast on that site. I urge NI Water to return to its commitment to work with the council. I hope that Members and everyone will support the removal of the mast from that historic site.

Mr Frew: I rise to, first of all, thank the Assembly for the progress that it has made over the past number of years on legislation to deal with and counter domestic and sexual violence. I have amended many of those pieces of legislation myself. I am grateful to the House for its support in that, but there are still many aspects of domestic and sexual violence and stalking that we have to deal with and combat.

One that I want to highlight today is the fact that, when a victim has to flee their home, they leave behind, sometimes within a matter of minutes, all their possessions — all their belongings. When the time comes that they can pick up the pieces of their lives and the trauma that they have gone through, they find that, when they get a new home, they cannot get those possessions. Usually that is due to the fear of going back to the home. Sometimes it is due to there being a non-molestation order in place — as simple as that. Those victims flee the home and leave all their furniture, storage space and clothes behind. It is very difficult for victims of domestic violence to start anew and afresh when they have nothing but the clothes on their back.

The House and the Department of Justice need to consider further legislation to protect victims of domestic violence so that there are no barriers for victims who flee the actions that they live with every day.

Mr Butler: Many times, when we come to the Chamber, we talk about negative stories, negative impacts on people's lives and the difficulties that pertain for most people in even accessing services, but there are examples of really good practice. I bring to Members' attention that, yesterday, Dr Chris Hall of Hillsborough Medical Practice in Lagan Valley won the GP of the Year award, and Aghalee Surgery won the Surgery of the Year award. Front-line workers, such as GPs and surgery staff, provide a vital service in all of our communities. All too often, they receive letters from some of us about pressures that people face, but that is to neglect the overwhelming hard work of most of our front-line staff, such as Dr Hall and the staff at Aghalee GP surgery. I take the opportunity, on behalf of the House, to congratulate them on their awards, and I congratulate all who perform heroically on our front line.

Mr Kearney: Bhí an Lá Idirnáisiúnta um Pá Comhionann ann Dé Céadaoin seo caite. Is fada muid ag streachailt le pá comhionann as obair chomhionann a bhaint amach. Mar sin féin is lú an luach saothair a fhaigheann na mná ná na fir go fóill i ngach aon réigiún den domhan.

Meastar gur 20% an bhearna phá idir na hinscní ar bhonn domhanda. D’fhógair an Roinn Eacnamaíochta anuraidh go bhfaigheann na mná anseo 7·8% níos lú mar luach saothair ná mar a fhaigheann na fir, beag beann ar an phatrún oibre atá i gceist. Mar sin de, má fhaigheann fear anseo aon phunt amháin as obair a dhéanamh, ní fhaigheann bean anseo ach corradh beag le 92 phingin as an obair chéanna a dhéanamh.

Níl sé dlite ar chomhlachtaí anseo tuairisc a thabhairt ar an bhearna phá idir na hinscní murab ionann is comhlachtaí sna Sé Chontae is Fiche nó comhlachtaí i Sasain. Mar sin de, má chuireann bean isteach ar phost i Luimneach nó i Learpholl, beidh a fhios aici cad é an bhearna sa luach saothair in aghaidh na huaire a fhaigheann na fir agus na mná sa chomhlacht sin agus an bhearna sna bónais a fhaigheann siad fosta. Má chuireann an bhean chéanna isteach ar an phost chéanna i Latharna, áfach, beidh sí dall ar na difríochtaí sin.

Tá Comhaltaí ar gach taobh den Teach ar aon tuairim faoi phá comhionann a thabhairt as obair chomhionann. Ach má tá féin is fadálach an dul chun cinn atá á dhéanamh leis an bhearna phá a chúngú. Ní líonfar an bhearna sa phá anseo go raibh straitéis againn ar phá chomhionann idir na hinscní agus plean againn leis an straitéis sin a chur chun feidhme.

Chomh maith leis sin, ní mór rialacháin a thabhairt isteach ar thuairisciú na bearna pá idir na hinscní ionas go n-éireoidh na comhlachtaí féin ina gcuid de réiteach na faidhbe mar is amhlaidh dóibh é sa chuid eile den oileán seo agus, leoga, sa chuid eile den Eoraip.

Ms Forsythe: I congratulate Kilkeel man Stanley Tomkins on winning the Northern Ireland Pride of Britain award on Friday night past. The Pride of Britain Awards have been honouring our nation's unsung heroes for the past 25 years, celebrating the achievements of truly remarkable people who make our world a better place. Stanley Tomkins certainly fits that description. Now 87 years old, Stanley has been an inspirational part of our community in Kilkeel for decades, and he is still as motivated as ever. He has rallied to lead the way in fundraising for a number of charities, and, in that time, he has raised an estimated incredible £750,000.

Stanley has raised money for a number of charities, including Save the Children and Cancer Research UK, which is particularly close to his heart. Stanley is a modest and humble man who was motivated in his fundraising action after suffering unimaginable personal loss.

Sadly, Stanley's wife died from cancer, and one of his daughters died more recently with a brain tumour.

Another of Stanley's key fundraising efforts has been his support for the JIMS Youth Centre in Kilkeel. I am especially grateful for the centre, as all my children benefit from it. From after-school clubs to summer schemes, drop-in sessions and the Step Up leadership programmes, it offers amazing services. It also provides a vital mental health hub for children and young people in Kilkeel. The centre would not have those great facilities had it not been for Stanley's fundraising. On Friday night, the young people at JIMS were overjoyed as they huddled round the TV to see Stanley win the Pride of Britain award. I got a few wee texts from the girls that said, "Our guy won".

Stanley is an amazing man. He truly inspires all of us to do our part for our local community and charities. He has long been the pride of his family and friends. He is the pride of Kilkeel and the Mournes, and we are all extremely proud to see him crowned as Northern Ireland's Pride of Britain 2024 winner. I wish Stanley all the very best as he travels to London for the Pride of Britain awards dinner. Congratulations Stanley, it is so well deserved.

Ms Nicholl: The Belfast Health and Social Care Trust was awarded the prestigious Trust of Sanctuary award in recognition of its commitment to providing a safe and welcoming environment for everyone, regardless of background, ethnicity or origin. No other health and social care trust has achieved that recognition. The Belfast Trust is also the only trust in Northern Ireland to have a good relations strategy. Its commitment to learning about the experience of newcomers and how to better support and welcome them is admirable. The Royal Jubilee Maternity Service received the Trust of Sanctuary award for its work as well, which is really important.

I was at the awards ceremony last week with the artist Oliver Jeffers. Along with some asylum seeker children with whom we had been working, he has produced the most amazing exhibition. It is called "Seen". If anyone is in any of the well-being centres in Belfast or is at the Royal, they will see some of the artwork. The children were asked to take a piece of A4 paper and draw something that represented them. The very young kids drew things like footballs and food. A lot of them drew pictures of houses and future careers. Oliver then drew a portrait of the child around how they wanted to be seen.

Those children are so vulnerable, and they have suffered so much. They carry such unimaginable trauma, but they just want to be seen as children. The exhibition reflects that and our common humanity. We all bleed the same, we all want to feel connection and we all want dignity and respect. The exhibition is a reminder that those children deserve the same future as any of our children. It is an amazing exhibition, and I am delighted that the trust will showcase it over the coming weeks. Please go and see it. Receiving the prestigious Trust of Sanctuary award is a wonderful recognition for the trust. I look forward to seeing other services getting the same recognition.

Mr Harvey: I pay tribute to the 13 individuals living with dementia who recently joined local members of Rock Choir to record and release a poignant rendition of 'The Climb' by Miley Cyrus as a fundraising effort for Dementia NI. Many will have seen and heard the story over the weekend, as we took time to mark World Alzheimer's Day on Saturday. Those involved in the recording chose that song to challenge commonly held misconceptions about dementia, and they did exactly that.

There are few in the Chamber whose family circle or friend group has not been affected by a diagnosis of Alzheimer's or dementia. Some live with the condition for many years, often feeling disconnected from, and unseen by, the world around them. Music, as we all know, has a tremendous ability to connect and unite people. It is especially powerful when individuals feel isolated and vulnerable. It is vital that individuals living with Alzheimer's or dementia remain an integral part of society and feel valued by it as they find the courage, day by day, to live with their condition.

Mark from Belfast, who took part in the recording, said that the initiative has given a voice to the voiceless. I commend the excellent work of Dementia NI and that latest fundraising effort.

Mr Gaston: North Antrim is blessed with many manufacturers who are leaders in their markets. Last week, I had the pleasure of visiting Wrightbus, and I single it out for praise and make known its importance in shaping our future hydrogen economy here in Northern Ireland.

Wrightbus now employs directly 2,000 people on its Galgorm site, with another 1,500 employed locally throughout its supply chain. Under the previous ownership of the late Sir William Wright CBE, Wrightbus became a global leader in the development of the next generation of cleantech buses in design and manufacture. Adding in Jo Bamford's expertise in hydrogen leaves Ballymena well positioned to continue to lead the design and development of future hydrogen vehicles on a global scale.

Last week, I listened to the debate on the barriers to green energy. I am in no doubt that net zero will be devastating to the agri-food industry in North Antrim, but I recognise the opportunities that it can bring to businesses that are in my constituency, such as Wrightbus. While we are a number of years away from both the roll-out of hydrogen more widely and larger vehicles, the Executive need to step up their efforts now in order to ensure that we have an infrastructure in place to match the future demand. Mid and East Antrim Borough Council had the vision of including Innovation for Change (i4C) in its city deal projects, which will give local businesses the opportunity and platform to trial cleantech products. I trust that the Executive are equally ambitious and will make Ballymena a future hydrogen hub here in Northern Ireland.

Mr Brett: The public health Bill consultation that the Department of Health is carrying out has, rightly, caused concern and confusion across our community. During the COVID pandemic, the public listened to politicians in the House and in other parts of the United Kingdom demand standards of them that those politicians did not believe applied to them. The public had Ministers tell them how they should behave, but those Ministers did not behave in the manner in which they tried to dictate to others. Now the public are, rightly, sceptical of any attempt to upset that delicate balance between individual liberty and the power of government. Central to any democratic society is the power of individual choice, and any attempt to infringe upon that basic tenet will be, rightly, resisted.

The intervention last week by the Health Minister into the consultation that his Department is carrying out only added further to the confusion and concern on the issue. As my party colleague Diane Dodds made clear yesterday, it is the Democratic Unionist Party's view that the current consultation is damaged beyond repair. We on these Benches do not underestimate the difficulty and embarrassment that it would cause to the Department to withdraw that consultation, but in the long-term interest of ensuring legislation that is fit for purpose and commands the support of the House and the Executive, we believe that that is the right step to take.

We will work with the Health Minister to get fit-for-purpose proposals, but we will not engage in an exercise that wastes vital time and vital public resources and undermines public confidence in this place. I urge the Health Minister to withdraw the consultation without delay.

Mr Speaker: The motion is necessary to allow business to continue at 2.00 pm in the absence of questions to the Department of Health. I received a letter from the Minister of Health last night indicating that he is unwell and therefore unable to attend. In exceptional circumstances, we were not able to get another Minister to take his place, but I wish for this not to be taken as a precedent. The normal expectation is that, if a Minister is not available, another Minister steps in. Apparently, that was not able to be achieved.

I want to ensure that Members who were successful in the ballot for today's Question Time still have the ability to have their questions answered. Therefore, I will ask the Business Committee to consider rescheduling questions for oral answer to the Minister of Health in the second Question Time slot next Tuesday. Subject to the Business Committee's agreement to reschedule, the ballot order for both listed and topical questions to the Minister of Health will remain the same for Question Time on 1 October as it was for today.

Mr Butler: I beg to move

Mr Speaker: Before we proceed to the Question, I remind Members that the motion requires cross-community support.

Mr Baker: I beg to move

Mr Speaker: The Business Committee has agreed to allow up to one hour and 30 minutes for the debate. The proposer of the motion will have 10 minutes to propose and 10 minutes to make a winding-up speech. As an amendment has been selected and is published on the Marshalled List, the Business Committee has agreed that 15 minutes will be added to the total time for the debate. Please open the debate on the motion.

Mr Baker: Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle.

It is time to extend voting rights to 16- and 17-year-olds. Every day in the Chamber, we make decisions that affect the lives of children and young people, all without them having a direct role in playing their part in that change. Young people have been at the forefront of delivering real change in some of the biggest political developments of the past decade. Sixteen- and 17-year-olds are not just citizens of the future; they are full and equal citizens now. They are the cornerstone of our communities, and they play an active and valuable role in our society. At 16, you can start work, you can make your own decisions on education and you pay tax and National Insurance, to name a few. The notion that they are not mature or able enough to play a role in the democratic process is nonsense.

In Scotland and Wales, 16- and 17-year-olds have the right to elect their MSPs and their Welsh Assembly Members. In the European Union, Austria, Germany and Malta have all extended voting rights to over-16s. That has meant a more engaged, more vocal and more diverse electorate. In the North and across Ireland, we deny that opportunity to our next generation of voters. When they can vote, 16- and 17-year-olds have higher rates of turnout than 18-to-24-year-olds. They have accessed more information from a wider variety of sources than any other age group, making them a more informed voting group. If you can vote at 16 and 17, you are more likely to vote in the future. Eighteen-year-olds who do not vote can become 50-year-olds who do not vote. Sixteen- and 17-year-olds who vote will continue to vote as they age.

Extending the right to vote would allow a seamless transition from learning about voting to putting it into practice. We have potentially already lost one generation. We cannot deny the next generation of voters, who have studied the democratic process, the right to use that knowledge in council and Assembly elections. That is a missed opportunity. It is only fair that their voices translate into political power. Sinn Féin has always advocated an inclusive, progressive society where everyone has the right to shape their future and where the voices of young people are not only heard but listened to.

Our vision for a new and united Ireland is built on equality, justice and inclusivity. Allowing 16-year-olds to vote ensures that we give a voice to those who have the biggest stake in our future. The decisions that we make today are the ones that they will inherit tomorrow. By empowering young people with a vote, we encourage a lifetime of political engagement. Our democracy will be richer for it, and our society will be fairer.

We must not continue to sideline the opinions of 16- and 17-year-olds. They must have a direct role in shaping their future. I say to the young people listening today, "Sinn Féin is on your side. You should have the right to shape the processes in this Chamber like anyone else". Let us ensure that the democratic process can be open to all. It is time to extend the right to vote to 16- and 17-year-olds. I ask Members to support the motion and the amendment.

Ms Mulholland: I beg to move the following amendment:

Mr Speaker: You have 10 minutes to propose and five minutes to make a winding-up speech. All other Members will have five minutes.

Ms Mulholland: I feel that speaking on the motion is a bit of a full circle moment for me. As a youth worker in 2009, I came to the Building with groups of young people from Belfast YMCA's Youth in Government programme and then with young people from the Where is My Public Servant? programme to advocate and lobby for votes at 16. The only Member who is still standing that I interviewed at that time is Patsy McGlone, so fair play to him for his sticking power. Fifteen years later, I am honoured to stand in the Chamber to speak on behalf of the 16- and 17-year-olds who deserve to have a say in who represents them. Quite a few of them are sitting in the Gallery behind me, so thank you very much.

I will start by laying down a challenge to any MLA who is speaking on the motion today: please, please do not refer to young people as "the future". If you have that phrase in your speech, please delete it. All that does is disenfranchise young people from their place in society here and now. It tells them that they are good enough, just not right now. I want any young person who is listening to the motion and who is up in the Gallery today to hear one thing above all else: your contribution to your community is valued and worthwhile now.

As we consider the possibility of lowering the voting age to 16, it is important to acknowledge that, in the past, particularly in the debate on the issue, first, in November 2012, much of the debate around it was speculative. There simply were not enough examples around the world to guide us, but, over the last decade, that has changed significantly. We now have a wealth of evidence, particularly in Europe and South America and, closer to home, in Wales and Scotland, where 16- and 17-year-olds have been granted the right to vote in various elections. The experiences in those countries offer us really invaluable insights.

Empirical research shows that, by and large, the participation of young people has been really positive in respect of both their political engagement and their civic attitude and change to that. Importantly, there is no indication that lowering the voting age has any negative consequences; in fact, in many cases, it has sparked a new and vibrant discussion around politics, democracy and what it is to be a citizen. The sky did not fall in by allowing young people the chance to have their say. As a young person told me this morning, Scotland did not just create an army of rebellious teenagers overnight. More's the pity, I say.

The evidence that we have should encourage us to seriously consider extending the franchise. The potential benefits to political engagement and to our democratic system, particularly among younger generations, are hard to ignore. Before I get into the amendment, I want to address some of the main arguments that we hear regularly against extending the vote to those who are 16 or 17, because I believe that they deserve careful scrutiny. I do not believe that they stand up to the evidence or the principles of democracy that we uphold.

First, some argue that 16- and 17-year-olds are not mature or informed enough to vote. Let us not underestimate our young people. It is so patronising to tell a young person that they are not mature enough or educated enough to understand the world of politics. The cohort of young people in this generation is the most politically engaged and connected generation ever. They have immediate access to their representatives through social media or email, unlike past generations, like mine, who had to wait until their school visited this Building or they saw an elected representative out in their community.

Young people today grow up in a world where information is more accessible than ever, and many are deeply aware of the issues that affect them, whether it is climate change, education, housing or the economy. At 16, they can leave school, start full-time work, pay taxes, join the military and even make critical life decisions such as getting married or consenting to medical treatment. If we trust them with those responsibilities, why should we deny them the right to have a say in who governs them?

Research from the countries that have already lowered the voting age shows that 16- and 17-year-olds are just as capable of making informed choices as older voters. In fact, studies show that young people who are engaged politically at an earlier age tend to carry that civic engagement into adulthood, which is what has been shown in Scotland. By giving them the vote, we nurture lifelong democratic participation. That is a habit that we should be encouraging not postponing.

Another argument is that young voters are more likely to be swayed by emotional appeals or lack of experience than older generations. If we are being honest, this place knows more than most about that in respect of our adult generation. The idea that more experience guarantees better decisions is unfounded. As a young person said this morning:

Initial scepticism about lowering the voting age was based on assumptions drawn from low political engagement of the slightly older 18-24 age bracket, leading to fears that younger teens are even less likely to be engaged. However, data from Austria, Germany, Argentina and Scotland shows a different picture. Studies reveal that there is often a higher turnout among 16- and 17-year-olds than 18- and 19-year-olds, partly due to the former's being in more stable environments, such as living at home and attending school. In the likes of Austria and Brazil, enfranchising young people at 16 has been shown to establish long-term voting habits.

This debate is not just about extending the vote to 16- and 17-year-olds and not just about fairness; it is about strengthening our democracy. By empowering young people, we ensure that our democratic institutions are truly representative, inclusive and forward-looking.

I now want to address the amendment that we have tabled. The amendment builds on the motion, which rightly calls for the voting age to be lowered. However, we have to recognise the need for all young people to be equipped with the knowledge and understanding to fully engage in the process. While there will always be young people who are knowledgeable and engaged, we need to make sure that we deliver an equitable opportunity for understanding. The amendment endorses a key recommendation from the Institute for Public Policy Research's 2023 report, 'Out of Kilter', which highlights the importance of combining votes at 16 with high-quality civic education in all schools. It calls on the Minister of Education to consider:

By doing so, we would not only lower the voting age but ensure that young people are prepared to participate meaningfully in our democracy. While there will always be naysayers, this is the right thing to do.

The Minister of Education has advocated autonomy at school level, but I believe that there is a duty on his Department to create a consistent approach to nurturing the civic journey of this generation. Enfranchising all young people without equipping them with the tools to fully acknowledge their rights, responsibilities and the political system would be a missed opportunity. Civic education should go beyond the basics of how elections work. It has to foster critical thinking and understanding of the issues that affect society. In essence, our amendment strengthens the original motion by linking the right to vote at 16 with the educational tools needed to foster lifelong political engagement. I hope that Members will support it.

I will leave any Member who wants to vote against the motion with the views of some of the young people whom we met this morning from NUS-USI, the Secondary Students’ Union of Northern Ireland, the Northern Ireland Youth Forum, Politics in Action, the Shared Island Youth Forum and One Young World. This is what voting at 16 means to them:

I hope that the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, the Rt Hon Hilary Benn, will be tuning into this debate online. I hope that he plans to progress the extension of the franchise, as he indicated recently to me and my colleague Kellie Armstrong. I will write to the First Minister and deputy First Minister to ask that the Executive consider writing to Westminster to ask that those powers be devolved to Northern Ireland, because it is right that we make decisions for ourselves in the House. Hopefully, the one- and two-year-olds in 2012, when the Chamber last discussed the issue, will be able to, in the 2027 Assembly election, select who will sit in these seats.

Mr Kingston: This is always an interesting topic, and I recognise that there are sincerely held views on different sides of the debate. However, ultimately, one has to reach a considered position, and the position of the Democratic Unionist Party is that we do not support reducing the voting age. Throughout the world, voting rights are generally reserved for adults, and 18 is the internationally recognised age of adulthood, including by the United Nations. Few in the Assembly would claim that young people are being suppressed by their not being able to perform a range of activities until they are 18. Such activities include taking out a mortgage; serving on a jury; becoming a police officer; fighting in our armed forces; getting married without parental permission; watching certain movies or content; buying alcohol, tobacco, fireworks or a gun; and participating in gambling.

Young people mature and grow into adulthood over a number of years, but there needs to be a point at which they legally become an adult. We agree that that should be at 18 and that that should be the age of enfranchisement. There are already too many pressures on young people to grow up fast. Childhood should be respected and have certain protections from the pressures and responsibilities of adult life, which will come soon enough to those young lives.

Why have those who want to lower the age of voting below the age of adulthood picked the arbitrary age of 16? Why not 15, 14 or any other age?

Ms Mulholland: Will the Member take an intervention?

Mr Kingston: No. I do not have the time that you had.

One serious concern is that lowering the voting age to 16 would put schools on the front line of party political campaigning. The focus in schools should be on education and broadening the mind, not on vote capturing. There would be the potential and temptation for some teachers to become election campaigners.

Some may point out that the law enables a young person to take certain decisions at the age of 16, whether it be to leave home or school or have consensual sex. Generally speaking, however, government policy does not actively promote doing those things at 16, whereas exercising the right to vote is proactively encouraged.

Extending the vote to 16- and 17-year-olds has potential impacts on the health and well-being of those in that age group, and we should not pretend otherwise. A significant proportion of 16- and 17-year-olds still live at home and go to school. Have those advocating a change to the voting age considered the external forces that would come into play? Just imagine the online barrage of political advertising that that group would face.

There are forums and platforms that young people of any age can use to influence politics and, indeed, decisions by adults before, during and after an election. That is where our focus should be: on enabling children and young people to make their mark without rushing their development or, indeed, placing obligations on their shoulders.

Without prior investment in education that reflects a young person's new rights and without ensuring that young people hear a wide range of views, 16-year-olds will not be ready to make an informed choice. The Alliance amendment to the motion acknowledges that. We still do not believe, however, that the overarching aim of votes for 16- and 17-year-olds is the right one.

In summary, our considered position is that we do not support lowering the age of enfranchisement below adulthood — the age of 18 — as is internationally recognised. Let children enjoy their childhood without their having to take on all the pressures of adulthood.

Mr Butler: Members, today we will debate a matter that could, in a very positive way, copper-fasten our ambition and secure Northern Ireland's democracy for generations. The voices of our young people, particularly those aged 16 to 17, are growing louder. Our young people are more informed and passionate than they have ever been. Those young citizens are not only the leaders of tomorrow but active participants in today. They care about their future, and they care about our future. They care about climate change, mental health services, education and equality, and it is time to entrust them with the vote, just as we entrust them with so many other responsibilities in their life. In Scotland and Wales, 16- and 17-year-olds already enjoy the right to vote in national and local elections. With their higher voter turnout, they are proving that young people, when given the chance, engage seriously with the political process.

Mr McNulty: Will the Member give way?

Mr Butler: Absolutely, if you keep it brief.

Mr McNulty: I thank the Member for giving way. This morning, I spoke with a young voter, who is a constituent of his in Lagan Valley. She expressed her disillusionment at not being able to vote in the Brexit referendum and how the outcome might have been different — we could all still happily be in the EU — had 16-year-olds been allowed to vote in it.

Mr Speaker: The Member has an extra minute.

Mr Butler: Thank you. On that point, we were all ill prepared for that vote, and look at how it turned out. The critical point about that is the education piece, which I am going to go on to, and I thank the Member for his intervention.

In Scotland, studies have shown that voter participation among 16- and 17-year-olds exceeds that of 18- to 24-year-olds, largely because younger voters are still embedded in environments like school and in the family, which promotes socialisation and civic responsibility. Extending the vote to younger citizens is crucial to cultivating lifelong voting habits, ensuring a vibrant and enduring democracy.

Young people today are eager to be empowered. Granting them the right to vote at 16 must be supported by high-quality, universal and accurate education before they reach that age: that is from the voices and mouths of those young people. That foundation of education is essential, not only to encourage greater participation from this cohort in the democratic process but to ensure that they are equipped with the knowledge and critical thinking skills necessary to make those informed decisions. By fostering a deeper understanding of civic responsibility and political systems, we can ensure that young people wield the power of their democratic will with a level of insight and preparedness that surpasses many of the generations before them, including my own. Empowering youth through education is key to cultivating informed engagement and engaged citizens who will actually shape our future.

The idea that young people lack the maturity to vote is outdated and baseless. At 16, they can join the armed forces; they can pay taxes; they can even get married. Most concerning, perhaps, is the fact that, in Northern Ireland, from the age of 10, young people can be held criminally responsible. We entrust them with these enormous responsibilities that I have mentioned, yet we deny them a say in shaping the laws that govern their lives. The argument against lowering the voting age falls apart when we consider the contradiction that those who resist votes at 16 often shy away from, which is to address the glaring imbalance with the criminal age of responsibility.

Politics in Action and the Northern Ireland Youth Forum, in particular, are at the forefront of the movement for votes from 16, advocating passionately for the rights of their young people. Those organisations have highlighted the fact that young people are already politically aware, engaged and capable of making informed decisions. They are leading campaigns that speak truth to power and are demanding that Northern Ireland catches up with its neighbours. We must not stifle that energy nor waste the opportunity. The time has come to give young people the democratic voice that they deserve. Let us lower the voting age to 16 and, in doing so, build a fairer and more responsible and representative society for all.

Ms McLaughlin: I put on record our strong support for lowering the voting age to 16, and I thank the proposers of the motion and the amendment.

To me, from the outset, the biggest reason for lowering the voting age is our young people themselves. Our next generation has ambition in spades for themselves and for Northern Ireland. They care deeply about the world around them and about the biggest social, economic and justice issues of the day. On all progressive causes, they are all too often four or five steps ahead of where our politicians of the day land. Let us not forget that these young people will be forced to live with the consequences of today's decisions and have often known little else but instability in our politics and skyrocketing costs of housing, transport and basic essentials.

All those challenges are in the context of an uncertain future, both for this place and for the planet. I do not blame young people who look at how long it can take for Northern Ireland to get its act together about virtually everything and think that politics is not for them. Fortunately, that is not how this generation has responded. There are so many young people in this generation who, instead of stepping back from politics, have stepped up and stepped into politics. They have found campaigns on everything, from youth mental health to poverty. They organise in their communities and in their schools. They march, they protest and they mobilise for their own rights and for the rights of their peers. They care about the future and they care about each other.

Those young people can work, pay tax, serve in our armed forces and get married. Those young people have a right to have a say in the future that we are trying to create for them. They have a right to help shape that future through voting. I cannot help but think that perhaps, if they were able to vote, our politics might take more notice of them and their needs. Perhaps we would have taken action on the climate crisis more quickly. Perhaps we would have legislated for abortion rights or marriage equality in the Chamber instead of leaving it to London. Perhaps we would show more urgency in tackling the housing crisis, including how it affects renters.

For anyone who opposes this step, it is worth looking back at the debate when the age was lowered from 21 to 18. The same moral, illogical panic that comes from some very conservative quarters now came from the same quarters back then. No one would argue that the age should be raised or that the reduction should not have taken place. Some say that 16 is simply too young, but there is no one age, as the expert panel in Wales found, at which rights are totally conferred. Therefore, why not let those capable, talented, motivated young people vote? We need more of them to get involved, and we have no time to waste.

In the interests of all those young people, today's motion should actually go further. It is all very well to ask the current Government to introduce legislation —.

Mr McGrath: Will the Member give way?

Ms McLaughlin: Yes, certainly.

Mr McGrath: Does the Member agree that many 16- and 17-year-olds are frustrated by the lack of progress? While there are good intentions behind the motion, it simply calls on the British Government to do something. Why are we not mandating our Executive and First Minister and deputy First Minister to act? As an Assembly, why are we not telling the Executive that they must seek the powers to make the change, instead of simply leaving it, once again, as a debate that might lie on the table for another eight years?

Ms McLaughlin: I totally agree with the Member. We need to get the job done, and we need to get it done closer to home. We need to join the other devolved nations — Scotland and Wales — that have lowered the voting age.

The First Minister and deputy First Minister should seek the devolution of the required powers to introduce the legislation. Of course, we want this right for every young person in the UK, and I hope that the Prime Minister lives up to his commitment to introduce the right to vote for 16- and 17-year-olds. If he does, our MPs in Westminster will be first in line to vote for it, but we need to be able to make the decision here in our devolved Assembly for the young people here. Lowering the age from 18 to 16 is the next staging post on our journey to expand the electorate and ensure that everyone has a say in the decisions that affect their lives.

Today, let us act in the interests of the 45,000 young people aged 16 and 17 in Northern Ireland by giving them the say that they deserve in their society and in democracy.

Ms Sheerin: I support the motion and the amendment. I take on board the point that the Member for North Antrim made when she proposed the amendment. She said that we should not refer to children as "the future", and I totally understand what she was saying. However, I find it impossible to disagree with Whitney Houston. I believe that "children are our future", but it is what you infer from that. It is not about saying to children that the future will be theirs at some stage and that they should just wait until that time. Instead, it is about recognising that our young people should have a say in what their future looks like, and that gets to the heart of what the debate is about.

We in Sinn Féin believe that we should extend voting rights to 16- and 17-year-olds because they work, pay taxes and contribute to the system, and, therefore, they should have a say in how we are governed. This is fundamental to many of the debates in the Chamber about equality, inclusion and rights: in order for us to recognise people's views, they need an opportunity to have their say. We cannot govern for people and take on board their particular perspectives if they are not included in the democratic process. For that reason, 16- and 17-year-olds should be able to vote.

We know that teenagers now face pressures that most of us could not begin to imagine. I will counter that by saying that I might be closer than some in the Chamber to understanding their particular pressures. Look at, among other things, social media, the prevalence of bullying, peer pressure and the rise of drug and alcohol abuse in our communities.

We do not know how to tackle those pressures, and we need the views of our young people when we are trying to do so. For that reason, they should be included in the electoral process.

In other examples around the world, we have see how, when progressive voices are included at the table, we have more progressive politics and better and more informed solutions to problems that we face. That is another reason that our 16- and 17-year-olds should be granted the right to vote. They have an important contribution to make to society, and that should be reflected in our electoral system.

I agree with those who have spoken in favour of extending voting rights. Obviously, Sinn Féin, coming, as we do, from a place in the world where, at one stage, the right to vote was not even granted to every 18-year old, a right that a civil rights campaign eventually saw extended, would like to see more people involved in our democratic process and the franchise being extended. I urge Members to support the motion.

Mr Harvey: There has been an interesting debate so far on an issue that engages the interests of a specific cohort of young people. I am always delighted to go into schools or to address school groups that are visiting the Building and engage with them on a wide range of issues. Some of those 16- and 17-year olds remind me of a much younger Harry Harvey — a political anorak with strong views and an interest in the political system. I must admit, however, that they are very much in the minority. Most young people are concerned with their studies, their hobbies and the prevailing youth culture at any given time. It is fair to say that the young people who are campaigning for change on the issue are already politically aware and engaged, which is wonderful to see. However, the vast majority of those who stand to be affected by such a change will not fall into that category.

There has been an obvious failing across society and the education system to equip young people for civic life, That is a failing that we should address much more readily regardless of today's debate, which is something that the Alliance amendment seeks to acknowledge. Whilst civic education is most definitely lacking, simply enhancing the curriculum to better address topics such as voting, the political system and general politics will not in itself create a change in adolescents' behaviour and attitude towards engagement with the political system. An inherent maturity is required before an individual is both willing and capable of partaking in the political process. Today's debate is, therefore, where we believe the line should be drawn and what indicators we should look at to draw that line appropriately.

There is no doubt that, when met with such articulate and engaged young people as those involved in this campaign, the issue before us is difficult. However, when faced with a difficult issue, we have to reach an objective and rational position. We must, therefore, look at the facts. Across the globe, voting rights are generally reserved for adults. Eighteen is the internationally recognised age of adulthood. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child defines children as:

Much has been made throughout the debate of which rights and responsibilities are enjoyed at 16 and which are reserved until the legal age of adulthood. It is worth remembering that many of the activities that have been mentioned, such as joining the army, getting married and leaving home, are restricted by parental consent, which is legally required. The age for the overwhelming majority of activities and decision-making on issues that involve individual autonomy remains 18. They include, to name but a few examples, jury duty, unrestricted driving, alcohol and tobacco consumption and even the rental of some films and computer games. It is somewhat ironic that some parties in the House that argue to give 16-year-olds more responsibility by allowing them to vote are those that argued for and supported raising the smoking age to 18 and sought to put further restrictions on young drivers and drinkers for their own safety. There is an irony there.

Those who seek the extension of the franchise often advance the well-rehearsed argument that young people are affected by decisions taken in this place or at Westminster. That is absolutely correct, but the youngest of children are also impacted by decisions that politicians take. The childcare scheme that the Education Minister recently announced will impact the life of 12,000 children. Do we extend the franchise to them because of that? Additionally, consideration must be given to the impact of any reduction in the voting age on the mental health and well-being of impressionable teenagers and to how likely they would be to make informed individual political choices, be unduly influenced by parents and teachers or be impacted by peer pressures.

Regardless of our individual views about where the line is drawn on the issue —

Mr Speaker: The Member's time is up.

Mr Harvey: — any politician who is worth their salt will listen to the developing views and voices of young people, whether or not they can vote.

Mr Speaker: As this is Michelle Guy's first opportunity to speak as a private Member, I remind the House that it is the convention that a maiden speech is made without interruption. However, if you choose to express views that provoke an interruption, you are likely to forfeit that protection. I call Michelle Guy.

Mrs Guy: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I am genuinely honoured to stand here as the new MLA for Lagan Valley. I extend my sincere congratulations and thanks to the formidable Sorcha Eastwood MP, who occupied the seat before me. Sorcha, you leave big shoes and brightly coloured handbags to fill, but as with you and our Lagan Valley colleague, David Honeyford, our cause is simple: to make this place the best version of itself now for everyone who lives here.

I also extend my thanks to our amazing councillors and members of the Lagan Valley association for encouraging me to go for this opportunity and for their help and support since my selection. You really are a special group, and I will do all that I can to be worthy of the faith that you have shown in me.

I love the motion. I love its objective and what, evidence tells us, will be its outworking: more engaged, civically aware and active young citizens who will contribute more because voting gives them a greater stake in our society. If it is delivered — rather, when it is delivered — it will be a hugely significant change that will be transformative for our democracy locally. Extending the franchise to a new cohort is a big deal, and history tells us that it is something that too many people were denied in the past for very dark reasons. The movement for votes at 16 does not fall into that bracket. Arguably, resistance to the move can be categorised as ignorant, maybe patronising and certainly ill informed, given the evidence base that it is a positive move for democracy. To my knowledge, no country that has extended the franchise in this way has since reneged on it.

As a group, our young people are anything but ill informed, and they are certainly not passive citizens. They volunteer in our communities, participate in our workforce and are carers. They increasingly inform and help to co-design policies that impact on them, but they have no right to express their verdict democratically on those same policy outcomes in the way that the rest of us can by voting in elections.

This being my maiden speech, it feels appropriate to mention my own two young people. My Dan is only 13, so I reckon that he is more concerned with FIFA packs and his under-14 championship final this Friday. Good luck, boys. I would, however, let Caitlin vote tomorrow. This is the girl who was 10 at the last US elections and, on results night, came down the stairs, even though she was quite tired and should have been sleeping, to ask whether there was any word on Pennsylvania. [Laughter.]

She is informed and engaged, and, when she turns 16 in a couple of years' time, she has the right to express herself democratically.

I sit on the Education Committee, and our amendment calls for:

alongside the introduction of votes at 16. It is important to emphasise that that recommendation is not about inserting some form of conditionality on extending the right to vote; rather, it would be a complementary measure. Not only is it recommended in the 2023 Out of Kilter report but our young people tell us that provision in that space is inadequate.

A Secondary Students' Union report in 2023, 'Let Us Learn', states that nearly 80% of students said no when asked whether they had been taught about democracy and active participation in learning for life and work (LLW). Furthermore, our amendment calls expressly for high-quality provision, and that is important. The all-party parliamentary group on Votes at 16 report in 2019 stated that civic education was important but not all forms of civic education worked equally well and that ill-conceived measures may be counterproductive.

I want to bookend the speech by thanking my family. It was a wee bit too risky to do that earlier in case I got emotional. To Chris, the kids, my parents, sisters and close friends, who know that I am doing this, in their words, for the right reasons and who have supported me through so much this year in particular, I say, "Thank you, and I love you". [Interruption.]

Oops, sorry. That was dramatic at the end. [Laughter.]

Mr Gaston: I start by congratulating the new Member on her maiden speech. It is certainly not easy to rise after that, but I will do my best.

I oppose the motion for three simple reasons. First, in setting the voting age at 18, the UK is very much in line with international practice. If you look at the situation across the democratic world, you see that the average voting age is 18·03 years. While there are 16-year-olds in the workplace, the vast majority are still in education or vocational training until the age of 18. It is important to remember that, when it comes to issues such as signing a legally binding contract, one cannot do so until one is 18. Let us remember that you need to be 18 to buy alcohol, 18 to buy cigarettes and 18 to buy a knife, but those who tabled the motion want a 16-year-old to be able to vote.

Secondly, it would be remiss of me not to note the irony of the motion's origin. Sinn Féin is in no position to lecture anyone on democracy. On its Benches, albeit from time to time, sits the Old Bailey bomber, Gerry Kelly. Let us not forget today that that bombing resulted in Frederick Milton dying from a heart attack and 150-plus being injured. Let us ask ourselves why that attack was carried out: because, on the same day, a border poll was held in Northern Ireland, and Mr Kelly knew that he would not like the outcome of that poll. On that same day, a young soldier, 21-year-old John Green, was shot by the IRA while guarding St Joseph's Primary School on the lower Falls. Why was he guarding the school? Because it was being used as a polling station. Yet, Sinn Féin, in the motion, wants to lecture us on democracy.

Those are not the only points about the motion that I find ironic, which brings me to my final reason. Those who will trip through the Lobbies in support of the motion in a few moments' time are also the most passionate advocates of the protocol, an arrangement that means that, when it comes to 300 areas of law — note that I said "300 areas of law" and not "300 laws" — no one in Northern Ireland, regardless of their age, has any vote on them. That is a democratic obscenity, yet those who champion votes for 16-year-olds loudest are silent when it comes to being ruled by people whom no one in Northern Ireland voted for.

We are just over a month away from the largest disenfranchisement operation of modern times and the facilitating of the first majoritarian vote in Stormont in over 50 years. It will also be the most controversial majoritarian vote in Northern Ireland's 103-year history, a vote to disenfranchise 1·9 million people in 300 areas of law. A vote resigning to the idea that the laws made —

Mr Speaker: Let us get back to voting for 16-year-olds, Mr Gaston, please.

Mr Gaston: Yes, Mr Speaker. If you give me time, I am just getting back to that.

It will be a vote resigning us to the idea that the laws made in those areas will be made for us by the Republic of Ireland and 26 other states and not the UK or Northern Ireland's MLAs who sit in the House; a vote that unbundles the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland's single market for goods in favour of an all-Ireland single market for goods; and a vote that violates the cross-community consent and democratic provisions of the Belfast Agreement as international law, treating the people of Northern Ireland with complete contempt. Do not argue that the protocol is just and then lecture us on votes for 16-year-olds. It just does not wash. The real democratic deficit in this part of the UK is the failure to honour the biggest democratic mandate in British history: the mandate to leave the EU.

Mr Carroll: Currently, young people's needs and interests are being left out of most political decisions made here, and we have a general problem, right across our society, with most categories and communities of people switching off from official politics and, thus, from voting. In many ways, when you hear some speeches and read some legislation and see how it is worded and purposefully made complex, that is no surprise.

However, it is worth saying that politics is not just about what happens in this place or Westminster. Politics is all around us, and young people are engaged in it every single day. They are involved in campaigns every single day. Look at the campaigns for Palestine. Young people have dominated those on our streets across these islands. They protested against education maintenance allowance (EMA) cuts. Disgracefully, EMA has not been increased in 20 years; I still cannot over that mental fact. Young people are political, and the current barrier should be lifted so that young people are allowed to vote.

It is worth mentioning that social inequality obviously affects voter turnout, and those in deprived communities, generally speaking, are less likely to vote. That is understandable when you see what Governments tend to prioritise — what they do and do not do. However, that is not true for the 16- and 17-year-olds who voted in the 2021 Scottish local elections, where class, which is a determining factor for most things in life, was not a factor for those under the age of 18 who voted. That only became a factor after the age of 18 and among people in their 20s. I remember, during the campaign around the Scottish independence referendum, that some of the best voices — generally for independence — in the debate were young people who were passionate and articulate, so I do not buy the idea that young people are not interested, are not political or are too stupid or naive, as some people suggest.

It is no surprise that the DUP does not want the voting age to be lowered, because that party does not want a greater cohort of people to cast their verdict on its disastrous policies, its support for the Tories, its support for banning puberty blockers, its objections to relationships and sexuality education (RSE) and its attitude towards the LGBTQ+ community and migrants — the list goes on and on and on.

Despite the fears of conservatives here and in Britain, not everyone aged 16, 17 and 18 is a radical socialist — yet — but they certainly tend to have better positions on political questions than parties here and those that have been in government in Westminster, including on climate change and Palestine. The list goes on. Therefore, they absolutely should be allowed to vote.

I will paraphrase Frederick Douglass: power concedes nothing without a fight. Working-class people had to fight for the right to vote through a Chartist movement in Britain and other campaigns across the world. The suffragette movement had to fight to get votes for women, and that was a fight and a struggle. The civil rights movement here, as has been suggested, and in the US had to fight to get votes for people who were discriminated against and were not allowed to vote. Young people should not be forced to fight in the same way, but the same principle applies. Added to the votes at 16 motion and the point about the Secretary of State, the fact that migrants, asylum seekers and refugees cannot vote in our society but live here and contribute here is also a disgrace, and I call on the Secretary of State to make legislation quickly to resolve that matter as well.

I pay tribute to everybody who has campaigned to highlight the worthy Votes at 16 cause. Politics in Action, the Northern Ireland Youth Forum and the National Union of Students - Union of Students in Ireland (NUS-USI) — a former employer — support the motion, and my message to those young people is to keep up the fight and keep campaigning. Like those people in the past who were denied the right to vote, I think that you can get the right to vote as well.

Mr Speaker: I call Kellie Armstrong to make a winding-up speech on the amendment.

Ms Armstrong: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank Sinn Féin for tabling the motion on votes at 16. I used my first Member's statement during this term of the Assembly in advance of the International Day of Democracy to call for votes at 16. It is a long-standing policy of Alliance and other parties in this House that those changes should take effect. However, it is accepted that, according to paragraph 12 of schedule 2 to the Northern Ireland Act 1998, the Assembly has no power to introduce that change, so it needs to happen on the Floor of Westminster. I think that we will say very clearly today to the Secretary of State, the Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, that this Assembly does want that change to take effect. We want to be the same as Scotland and Wales, and we want our 16- and 17-year-olds to be able to vote. It would be an absolute privilege for many people who will stand in the 2027 elections if 16- and 17-year-olds were able to do that for the first time.

I am not surprised that some Members have reiterated their opposition to the motion. For clarity, why was the age of 16 chosen as the starting age for National Insurance? We have 16-year-olds who pay National Insurance and have a National Insurance card, yet, for some, they are not good enough to vote. I believe that 16- and 17-year-olds in Northern Ireland are every bit as good, intelligent, progressive and politically intelligent as those who live in Scotland and Wales. In Scotland, 16- and 17-year olds have been able to vote for 10 years. Are we not part of the devolved nations? Why are our 16- and 17-year-olds treated differently? When we have the opportunity to ask for votes at 16, we should take it. Together, we should push the Secretary of State to move that forward.

Ms Ennis: I appreciate the Member's giving way. Perhaps she has noticed throughout the debate, as I have, that those arguing against the motion and the amendment have cited all the dangerous things that people can do when they come of age at 18, but including more people in the democratic process is not dangerous or something that anybody should fear.

Mr Speaker: The Member has an extra minute.

Ms Armstrong: Absolutely. We all know that each party in the House has a youth wing. I find it disingenuous for Members to say to someone who joined a political party at a young age, and who may hold membership of that party, that they are just a political "anorak" and are not equipped to know anything about politics.

The concerns about having education that provides support for young people is completely unfounded. At Key Stage 3, there is learning for life and work. We can include voting as part of the local and global citizenship topic. That is easy enough to do. It will tell people how to vote, when votes happen, how the process works and all that. For goodness' sake, it will even help them learn how the counts are worked out. High-quality and expansive civic education in schools will provide that. It will also manage political campaigning. Politicians are only invited into schools; we do not go and campaign in them. That is fair. We can create a system that educates young people and helps them decide for themselves who they back and want to vote for. I am disappointed that the Minister of Education left the debate — I am sure that he has other business to do — as there are a lot of young people here who would have loved to hear his reaction to the idea for a review of the national curriculum to include something like politics within learning for life and work, but we will not hear that today.

Our young people are excellent. They are not just political anoraks. They want to know about the globe. They want to know how they can improve life across the world, across this island, across the UK and across Northern Ireland, so why are we preventing them from doing so? Many of them have said that they do not feel represented by government. We have the Northern Ireland Youth Assembly, but do we have its Members coming to the Chamber with any motions? No. They are barred from doing so. We could give those intelligent young people, whom we celebrate, the right to vote. Why do we celebrate their GCSEs and A levels and say that they are doing so wonderfully well but tell them that they are not good enough to vote? That is wrong.

Voting earlier means that people will go on to vote longer in life. All of us in this place should want that. Rather than play TUV bingo, we should talk up the opportunity to have more voters. After all, the jobs of each of us depend on them. The more people who vote, the better Northern Ireland can be. In fact, this morning, I heard that, when the franchise changes, society improves through more representation. Unless Members think that our young people are not good enough and are not as good as Scottish and Welsh young people, why would they vote against the motion? I appreciate that it is their party policy, as the DUP's Brian Kingston MLA said, but, guys, you are on the wrong side of history. You have been on the wrong side of history so often. It is time to recognise that, long ago, people were able to vote only at 21, but the age was changed to 18. At this stage, it is right that, in Northern Ireland, our intelligent, productive and effective young people can vote from the age of 16.

Mr Speaker: I call Pádraig Delargy to make a winding-up speech on the motion.

Mr Delargy: Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle.

I thank all those who contributed to the debate, during which several key themes were raised. The first was access to democracy, which Robbie Butler touched on initially. One area of broad consensus throughout the debate was that this is not just about the future but about now. It is about empowering young people now and ensuring that they have a voice. We are all aware — I am very aware in my role as Sinn Féin spokesperson for further and higher education — of the fact that many young people who are in apprenticeships and work, and thus paying National Insurance, face the consequences of policies that are made here, yet they have no right to vote. That is fundamentally wrong.

The second broad area of discussion was on the higher rates of young people utilising their vote. Both Danny and Sian touched on that. We looked at Scotland and other international examples. There are many examples that we could look at, but that of Scotland is a particularly interesting one, because it is in a situation not dissimilar to ours. This is about increasing civic engagement and giving young people, in every forum across society, a voice and ensuring that that voice is heard. Sinéad and Michelle touched on the remarkable political activism that there is.

Fundamental to the debate is the fact that we are not speaking to young people but with them and ensuring that they can speak at the ballot box and that their voices are heard not just through voting but in the Chamber. We would all like to see a more diverse Chamber and the opportunity to have a more diverse politics for women, young people and many other groups across society. I joined the Assembly as an MLA at the age of 25, but I had been a political activist for 10 years prior to that. Emma Sheerin and I both entered politics through Ógra Shinn Féin and have both been politically aware from a young age, and I am sure that many in the Chamber have had a similar experience. I am proud that Sinn Féin is leading the way. I am proud that we are a party that does not just talk about young people leading but has young leaders up and down the country and right across Ireland. That is something of which to be very proud. I know that many other parties do the same, and I hope to see every party in the Chamber doing so in future. From looking up at the Gallery, I can see the young people who have come here today. Members can look at the issues that are prevalent in their constituency and see that young people take the lead on all of them. The campaigns for change, progress and inclusivity are all led by young people, and that is very positive.

We will support the amendment. It is important that the role of the Department of Education was noted in the text of the amendment, and I share Ms Armstrong's surprise and disappointment that the Education Minister is not here, because there was a lot of discussion about the role of schools in the debate. As a former teacher, I hope that the role of education staff is not being discredited, because their role is vital. Our schools have an important role to play in developing our young people holistically, in every sense of their education. It is therefore important that the Department of Education be represented at the table.

The language that we use is important as well. We have to be conscious of the need to ensure that education staff are not discredited in anything that we say to or about schools or about young people.

To summarise —.

Mr Carroll: Will the Member give way?

Mr Delargy: No. I do not have time.

I will summarise by saying that this is not a niche or fringe topic. As my colleague Emma said, it is a fundamental human right. It is about an entitlement for young people and about giving them a voice and the opportunity to be heard. There are challenges that are specific to this generation. Those challenges are unique, and the best way in which to hear about them is directly through the voices of those who are impacted on: young people.

I will now set out our party position. Sinn Féin is very clear that it is time to lower the voting age in the North from 18 to 16. We are very clear about that and are proud to advocate an inclusive and progressive politics, where everyone has the right to shape the future. I encourage all Members to support the motion.

Mr Speaker: I remind the Member that, when he tabled the motion, he did not request a ministerial response. That is why there is no Minister here, be it the Education Minister or another Minister. I just point out to him why that is the case.

Mr Speaker: I ask Members to take their ease before we move to the next item of business.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Before I call Deborah Erskine to move the motion, I remind Members of our rule on being quorate in the Assembly Chamber. Please carefully take note of the numbers that we have in here. I do not want to have to ring the Division Bells to get Members back in. I encourage you all to remain here for the debate.

Mrs Erskine: I beg to move

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): The Business Committee has agreed to allow up to one hour and 30 minutes for the debate. The proposer of the motion will have 10 minutes in which to propose and 10 minutes in which to make a winding-up speech. As an amendment has been selected and is published on the Marshalled List, the Business Committee has agreed that 15 minutes will be added to the total time for the debate. Deborah, please open the debate on the motion.

Mrs Erskine: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. The development of mobile infrastructure is key to ensuring that our communities are more connected and that technology can play a role in boosting our business and civic life. Unfortunately, I am aware that planning applications are stuck in the system, which means that the roll-out of the Shared Rural Network is stunted. I am aware that, to July 2024, in council areas across Northern Ireland, seven mobile infrastructure planning applications have actually been pulled out of the system by investors because of how convoluted the process was, the delays and the time that it was taking to get through the system. That means that seven areas in Northern Ireland have been held back from getting the infrastructure that they need and deserve and the connectivity that they need to be able to meet the demands of the 21st century.

Mobile UK is an association for the UK mobile network operators EE, O2, Three and Vodafone. Its aim is to identify barriers to progress and work with all relevant parties to bring about change. One of the main issues that it has identified is the planning system. It recognised that there is a workforce crisis in the system, whether that is in the planning departments or related to statutory consultees. It also found that uncertainty around planning policy and delays in decision-making are causing private investors to go elsewhere. Often, planning decisions for mobile infrastructure in what are known as "hard-to-reach areas", which is a term that I hate — rather, I detest it — can take up to two years to complete. We need to change that narrative.

There appears to be a lack of awareness and weighting in the planning system of the social and economic benefits of mobile connectivity to society, leading inevitably to objections in the planning system. Mobile UK has been trying to put that case to the Minister, I believe. So far, however, it has been unable to do so. Despite Mobile UK's being a member of the task force, it appears that its concerns have largely been ignored so far. We cannot continue to point only at the mobile action plan (MAP) and the barrier busting task force (BBTF) when there is a blatant need to review the likes of permitted development rights and planning issues. Such a review would unlock connectivity and improve the Shared Rural Network.

While my party will support the amendment, I find it interesting that Sinn Féin has removed criticism of its Minister. However, I welcome the inclusion of the Economy Minister, given that it is a cross-departmental matter. It seems that there is a lack of leadership in building mobile infrastructure: planning sits with the Department for Infrastructure; telecoms policy sits with the Department for the Economy. Therefore, there seems to be no clear lead to resolve the issues that are affecting further roll-out. Yes, permitted development rights were updated in 2020, but the changes were superseded by those in Scotland and England. Their changes to permitted development rights took into account the need to speed up roll-out and technological changes.

If we overcame the challenges in roll-out, it would be a game changer for the Northern Ireland economy, which is now a leader in the likes of broadband roll-out. We could do that again. The Future Communications Challenge Group (FCCG) estimated the economic impact of 5G roll-out. It expects that, by 2023, it could be worth £164 billion to the UK economy and that the sectors most likely to benefit would be manufacturing, construction and agriculture. We are lagging behind on that investment in our economy.

My party is committed to ensuring the transformative aspects of better mobile connectivity across Northern Ireland. It was a commitment in our manifesto. Certainly, I would like to see better mobile connectivity in my household and, particularly, in my rural constituency of Fermanagh and South Tyrone. It is imperative that we tackle the digital divide between urban and rural parts of Northern Ireland. As I said, we simply cannot hide behind or point towards the Northern Ireland barrier busting task force oversight group. Yes, the mobile action plan was published in June 2022, and the task force first met in December of the same year. However, since then, the planning subgroup, which was tasked to deal with and deliver specific barrier-busting themes, has met only twice. How can we say that a key barrier to getting better provision is being tackled if it has met only twice since then?

The amendment points to the work of the Department for the Economy in leading the barrier busting task force, but when I asked for a timeline for the completion of the mobile action plan through the task force, there were no specific dates. I was told that it would be discussed at the next meeting.

I do not want to see Northern Ireland being left behind. We need mobile infrastructure for the reasons previously outlined. When it comes to health, our ambulance drivers need it for life-saving technology and equipment. We are also starting to look at the implementation of the all-island strategic rail review. 5G is being developed for rail, and it would be good to look into that when we are looking at building more and better rail links. We will need to include that in our delivery plans or else we will have rail systems in Northern Ireland that will need to be updated before tracks are even laid.

I trust that you can see the need to act. While it takes, as I said, criticism about the lack of engagement on the planning-related issues regarding mobile infrastructure out of our motion, we will support the amendment, as it is imperative that we all work together on the matter.

Mr Boylan: I beg to move the following amendment

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): You will have 10 minutes to propose and five minutes to make a winding-up speech. All other Members who speak will have five minutes. Over to you, Cathal.

Mr Boylan: Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

As a rural MLA and someone who lives in a rural area, I know all too well about the issues that rural dwellers face in relation to poor mobile coverage. As we know, in some areas, the coverage is non-existent. The lack of high-quality mobile coverage in rural areas causes everyday problems for local people. I welcome the opportunity for us to highlight those issues, look at the work that is ongoing to address the problems that exist and look at the work that still needs to be done.

In many cases, the services that many rural dwellers pay for relating to their mobile phone signal coverage do not serve them well when they are at home, which is, quite possibly, the place where they spend most of their time. I do not imagine that that is an issue that is experienced by people who live in more urban areas. Constituents often remark on the fact that they are paying for a service that they just do not get to use, which leaves them worse off than those who do not reside in rural areas.

There is work for the phone network providers to do to ensure that local issues are worked on and addressed in a bid to provide more and better coverage for their rural customers. The Shared Rural Network aims to improve geographic coverage to 79% of areas of natural beauty — up from 51% — across these islands. However, the investment in the North alone will not address all the issues that we are aware of in our rural communities. The scheme is heavily focused on rural Scotland, which leaves the North without its fair share.

Where areas have little to no mobile phone coverage, local people have become reliant on broadband coverage and on using Wi-Fi for calling and messaging. However, many Members will be aware of the shortcomings of Project Stratum, which has not yet made it into many local communities, leaving people without broadband coverage. That further compounds the issues that people —.

Mrs Erskine: I thank the Member for giving way. He will understand that £150 million was secured for Project Stratum. What would have happened had that £150 million not been secured for rural areas?

Mr Boylan: I appreciate the Member's intervention, but, as one who dealt with the situation when it presented itself, I know that thousands of people were left out of the original scheme. We welcomed the scheme, but, as the Member said in her opening remarks, there are gaps out there. We tabled our amendment to try to address those gaps. Nobody has criticised Project Stratum, but it has left people out, which is why we are having this debate in the Chamber.

Many Members will be aware of the shortcomings of Project Stratum, which has not yet made it to many communities. That has left people without broadband coverage, which further compounds the issues that people face with mobile coverage.

The motion highlights the fact that the planning system is an issue when it comes to progress being made on rural mobile coverage. As in previous debates in recent weeks, I do not refute the fact that there are issues in the planning system. However, it is important to remember that applications such as those that deal with phone signal masts are dealt with at council level. It is important that motions that come before the Assembly do not go over the heads of or undermine our councillors in the important part that they play in the planning process to overcome issues and get to an outcome that has the support of communities.

Our amendment aims to recognise the ongoing work with the Department for the Economy's barrier busting task force, which has a dedicated subgroup that looks at the planning issues. That group works to identify barriers relating to the planning system and investigate best practice for future mobile network development. It is chaired by the director of planning for Belfast City Council, which is important, given that those issues, as I mentioned, fall to our councils. It is important that the group, which works across the Department for Infrastructure and the Department for the Economy, is given the space needed to collect and consider information relating to perceived delays in processing those types of applications.

Ensuring that all our rural communities are not left behind is imperative. Local reps and councils must work with others, continue to do all that they can to overcome any planning challenges and ensure that a focus is put on developing high-quality mobile phone coverage right across rural areas. We must work to ensure that people who live in rural areas have the same access to services as everyone else. I ask Members to vote for the amendment.

Mr McMurray: I support the spirit of the motion and the amendment.

High-quality mobile coverage is important to our economy, communities and public services. Improving rural connectivity is particularly important. Some rural areas in Northern Ireland are still held back by poor connectivity. That affects business, investment and access to distance education and remote jobs and services. High-speed networks can provide access to important public services like remote GP consultations. New technologies such as agri-tech and virtual reality rely on 5G. Those technologies are particularly relevant for the agriculture and tourism sectors, but 5G is still not widely available in rural areas of Northern Ireland. It is important that our rural economies benefit from those innovative technologies as much as possible.

Depending on how it is measured, the extent of 4G coverage by at least one network is, in percentage terms, in the mid to high 90s in rural areas here but is lower in rural areas of Newry and Armagh, south Down and west Tyrone. We need to make sure that areas that do not have indoor access to 4G through any networks are connected as soon as possible. For 5G coverage, the difference between rural and urban areas is much bigger. 5G coverage by at least one provider is rolled out to only about 50% of rural Northern Ireland compared with 80% of urban areas. The UK Government, who are responsible for telecommunications, have a target of delivering stand-alone 5G coverage to all populated areas in the UK by 2030. It is fair to say that our rural areas have some way to go to meet that goal.

I recognise that 5G technology presents particular challenges in rural areas. Environmental and aesthetic considerations are also important in rural areas and need to be given due weight. I do not want to see 5G masts installed in any place at any cost, but we still need to ensure that we remove any unnecessary barriers to the technology where possible. Telecommunications are a reserved power, but the delivery of mobile infrastructure projects often overlaps with our devolved planning powers. Updating communications infrastructure often involves building new masts or making existing masts bigger, which requires planning permission. That is typically dealt with at council level.

In 2022, the previous Minister for the Economy established a barrier busting task force to identify and address the barriers preventing the fast and efficient deployment of mobile connectivity in Northern Ireland. It includes a planning subgroup that looks at barriers related to the planning system. The Minister for Infrastructure said in July that the group had met twice since 2022 and is at an early stage in its deliberations. It has been nearly two years since that group was established, and we would be interested to know when we can expect deliberations to come to a more mature state.

The Minister also advised that we should wait for evidence from the task force before making policy changes. The Alliance Party has always supported evidence-based policy, but the failures of our planning system are extremely well researched. I spoke in the Chamber only last week about some issues in relation to renewable energy infrastructure. The barriers are the lack of progress on local development plans; capacity and skills shortages in planning departments in statutory consultees; the financial sustainability of the planning system; a lack of cooperation between organisations; and poor-quality planning applications. Wind turbines and 5G masts have a lot in common, and I expect that the planning system fails them in similar ways and that many of the problems that our planning system faces have nothing to do with the type of structure in question. Will the evidence from the task force give significant insight, or are we are merely kicking the can down the road?

The Alliance Party has long asked for fundamental reform to create a sustainable and functional planning system. Pre-application discussions and checklists for major applications will help to reduce waiting times, as will statutory time frames for determining applications and a sustainable funding model for the planning system.

Mr Stewart: On behalf of the Ulster Unionist Party I support the motion and the amendment. I agree with much of what was said by those who proposed both.

Mobile coverage is something that most people in Northern Ireland take for granted in 2024. However, sadly, as we heard from the statistics cited today, a significant minority of areas in Northern Ireland still do not have it. That is extremely frustrating for them. We have heard about the economic impact that not having mobile phone coverage can have in those areas. We hear about the community impacts as well. We often hear at the Infrastructure Committee about how many road traffic collisions happen on rural roads. Many of those rural roads do not have mobile coverage, and that provides an additional safety impact.

The proposer of the motion talked about "hard-to-reach areas", which is a frustrating term. I totally agree with her: there should not be any. I declare an interest, Mr Deputy Speaker: I live in a hard-to-reach area. I sympathise with the many people who are west of the Bann, but I live in east Antrim, and, where I live and in the houses surrounding mine, there is zero mobile phone coverage. It is not an issue that affects only the west of the Province; it affects many people across Northern Ireland.

Mrs Erskine: I thank the Member for giving way and for sympathising with the likes of me, who has to put on Wi-Fi calling just to get a signal. We are obviously aware that some masts have had 3G switched off, but we are not seeing the infrastructure coming in behind it, as happens elsewhere in the UK, to be able to continue the roll-out of better 4G and 5G networks. That is a real problem. The motion points to rural areas, but we see that impact in some urban areas as well.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): The Member has an extra minute.

Mr Stewart: The Member makes a valid point. It is frustrating when people are in touching distance of that infrastructure but, for whatever reason — it may not be switched on — the service is not being provided.

I agree with the proposer of the amendment, as well, about the processes in planning. We devolved that power to councils. We ask not to interfere with that but that the processes are streamlined and that there is an understanding of how essential the infrastructure is. I cannot imagine that anyone particularly likes to look at a mobile phone mast. In the same way, I do not like to look at an electricity pylon in my garden, but it is a vital piece of infrastructure on which we all rely daily. They are an essential evil, and they must be provided.

The proposer of the motion talked about the Mobile UK framework and the feedback that it has given. It talks about some delays. The proposer mentioned the seven applications that have been withdrawn recently after suffering such delays. In Fermanagh and South Tyrone, one planning process took over 720 days. There has to be scrutiny and process, and planning committees and planners must be given time, but that seems to be excessive for something that, we all accept, is a vital infrastructure asset. The people impacted most by that are the 8,000 or 9,000 people living in that area who required it most and are relying on other technologies.

I support Mobile UK's six-point plan. There is not a great deal to oppose about increased funding for planning services; recognising the importance of mobile infrastructure in the planning process; hiring digital champions to support the planning process; attracting and retaining talent, which is vital; improving planning policy frameworks; and fostering proactive digital leadership from councils. We could all get behind all of those points and support them.

There are many new and emerging technologies that would go hand in hand with and support that. It is vital, whether it is led by the Infrastructure Minister or the Economy Minister, that all of us get behind supporting that future technology. I have had to avail myself of it in my area, and I know that many others are doing the same. It is important to look towards that technology and make sure that the processes are in place to support it as well. As I said, we will support the motion and the amendment.

Mr Durkan: I am a bit unsure about the motion, which levels unfounded, in my view, criticism at a Minister. I remain unsure about what efforts the Minister has made — [Interruption.]

I do not know what efforts the Minister has made to engage with the mobile infrastructure industry or, to be fair, what efforts the industry has made to engage with the Minister. I am sure that he will inform us. On the other hand, we have a Sinn Féin amendment that looks to give credit to another Minister and his barrier busting task force. I have not seen much, or any, evidence that the work done by that group is actually busting barriers or that mobile coverage has improved; in fact, I would argue that it is the opposite. From personal experience and anecdotal evidence, there appears to be an increase in the number of not spots.

I want to focus on how we resolve the practical issues and how the lack of coverage impacts on people daily, rather than play the political blame game. I, for one, am fed up with tit-for-tat motions that distract and detract from the issues at hand.

Mr McGrath: I thank the Member for giving way. It is on an issue that I have not heard raised at this stage. I understand that lots of people are in areas where they cannot receive a signal, but I do not know whether, in rural constituencies, people have the frustration that I have that, when driving from point A to point B, you used to have a signal and you used to be able to have a phone call, but, all of a sudden, the phone signal drops right across areas. I had one phone call with a constituent, and, in the space of about five miles, the phone call dropped eight times. That did not happen before, and I hope that the Minister might be able to put some pressure on the phone companies to find out why they are reducing the services and making them worse in areas rather than better.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): The Member has an extra minute.

Mr Durkan: I thank the Member for his intervention.

Quality mobile coverage has become a tenet of any modern society. Bridging the connectivity gap could prove utterly transformative for rural communities. A report carried out by FarrPoint highlighted the game-changing impact of its 4G sites in the Scottish Highlands as being essential for business, transforming local industries and driving tourism opportunities, education and social inclusion.

The past few years have served as a masterclass in the opportunities of mobile connectivity. Many of us, even the older generations, have got a grip, eventually, on new technologies, ensuring that we can stay in touch with loved ones via Zoom calls. Hybrid working brought significant flexibility in the worlds of employment and learning, offering new opportunities also for people struggling with mobility, through disability maybe, caring responsibilities or location. Mobile connectivity removes barriers and promotes a better quality of life for all and helps us all reduce our carbon footprint. However, many, especially those living in rural areas, have been excluded from the chances afforded by modernity and have been left isolated geographically and by sub-par infrastructure.

The North ranks lowest in 4G coverage and voice call coverage for premises, trailing behind other regions. The Derry City and Strabane District Council area has the lowest coverage of any council area and has been revealed to have the worst mobile coverage in the UK. The north-west, which is not entirely rural, ranks even lower than the Shetland Islands and the Isles of Scilly. Given their remote and geographically challenging locations, we might expect those archipelagos to be disconnected, but, once again, the Bann seems to be the biggest barrier of all to equality of access. We need Departments to work together to resolve the issues, but that does not mean absolving DFI of its responsibility, for example on guidance and support to councils.

It is clear that planning delays are hampering infrastructure improvements across the board and leaving many areas underserved, but what are the additional barriers to planning? One barrier that has not been mentioned yet is public perception and, I suppose, the view that 5G masts are detrimental to public health. People should be furnished with the full facts as part of the planning process. Some have genuine concerns, while others have been guided by online theories, ironically relying on 4G and 5G coverage to suck them down those rabbit holes, but that is beside the point. What I am getting at is that communication is key, not just telecommunications but communication with the public by Departments and providers.

We will support the amendment, as it recognises that the issues require buy-in and cooperation across Departments. I welcome the opportunity to discuss the issues on the Floor today, but people need to see and hear improvement. We need to work harder to close the urban/rural divide.

Mrs Dillon: I thank the Members who have spoken already, because some of them have covered my points. However, it is worthwhile talking specifically to the lack of mobile coverage in some areas of Mid Ulster, the rural community that I represent.

Mobile service is vital for everyday use and for people to make phone calls. If you are doing so on the road, I certainly hope that you are using hands-free. It is important for business. Business in Mid Ulster tends to be in rural areas. Many of our big engineering companies are in rural areas, and it is vital for them to have that connectivity. As others have outlined, it is also extremely important for those who need to get in contact urgently with any of our blue light services. Whether it is for a business or a resident in the Washing Bay area of Killeen or Derryloughan or whether it is in an emergency on a rural road, mobile connectivity is a lifeline.

In speaking to the motion, it is important to address the key issues: the responsibility of mobile providers and the role of the planning process. First, I emphasise that the planning process exists for a reason. As others have outlined, it ensures that we maintain a balance between the need for infrastructure and the rights of residents and rural dwellers. We cannot bypass those protections in a rush to build more masts or roll out new infrastructure. We must consider the impact on local areas and the residents who live there. They deserve to be part of the conversation about how infrastructure is developed; Mark Durkan mentioned that. It is about communication and talking to those communities. They are up for it, but they need to understand what is happening and why. Planning safeguards are critical to ensuring that mobile masts and other infrastructure are introduced in a way that respects local character, the environment and the well-being of residents.

That said, the real issue lies with the mobile providers. In Mid Ulster and, particularly, Killeen and Derryloughan in the Washing Bay area, there already is the physical infrastructure, but the mobile companies are choosing not to upgrade or properly invest in it. That goes back to points that have been made around collaboration and everybody working together. Mobile providers are choosing not to invest in rural areas. They need to be answerable as to why that is. Whether it is in a rural area in Mid Ulster, Strabane or Derry, it creates a digital divide that is leaving our rural communities behind. Our local council has been very supportive of residents in areas that have no mobile coverage, but, thus far, there has been no satisfactory response from the companies responsible. The lack of investment from mobile phone companies leaves rural areas with substandard service compared with urban areas, and we cannot allow that urban/rural divide to grow. The providers reap the benefits of serving urban customers — I acknowledge that there are issues in some urban areas too — while neglecting many of our rural communities and thus the businesses and residents who depend on it.

Reliable mobile coverage is crucial for emergency services, as I have outlined. In rural areas, where the response times can be longer, the ability to make a phone call in a crisis can make all the difference.

Again, however, our residents are left vulnerable because of the lack of infrastructure and lack of investment from mobile providers.

I welcome the amendment and acknowledge the work that the Department for the Economy and the barrier busting task force are doing. I have no doubt that more work needs to happen in that area, but, again, it comes back to what we have talked about: collaboration between all the stakeholders, including Departments, councils, mobile network companies and local communities, about which we have talked.

The amendment reinforces the idea that:

It emphasises the need for a well-rounded approach that ensures that rural communities receive the mobile coverage that they need. As I said, that will be done only through collaboration by all stakeholders, including government, councils, elected representatives and the communities that we represent. The communities need to be part of the conversation. As I said, they are always up for improvements being made and for moving forward, but they need to be involved in the conversation.

I thank the proposer of the motion and the proposer of the amendment.

Mr K Buchanan: Access to reliable and fast digital connectivity is essential to our rural communities and rural economies in all areas. It also allows people to stay in touch with friends and family. That connectivity should be affordable, and it is essential that we work collectively to deliver for our constituents. Constituents should have adequate coverage whether they live in rural, suburban or urban areas. Coverage varies in different parts of the country, with urban areas having better coverage, broadly, than rural areas.

I have recently been in contact with O2, Virgin Media and Vodafone about coverage in Mid Ulster, and I will continue to liaise with all providers to ensure that not just constituents but those in the whole of Northern Ireland receive the necessary service. I have noticed recently that, in areas that once had it, good coverage has now disappeared. As Colin mentioned, we are all aware of the roads on which we will need to say to the person to whom we are talking, "I will ring you back, because I am going to lose signal".

Something has changed. Things are happening, but I am not sure what. The signal has disappeared in areas where it was once good. For example, the A29 corridor had perfect coverage, but the signal now completely disappears on part of it. Something is changing. Areas such as Tobermore, Killeen, referred to by the Member who spoke previously, Ballyronan and Moneymore, to name but a few, have always had poor or no coverage. On a number of occasions, constituents trying to access their GP or a hospital have not been able to connect or their signal has dropped during the call. That is unacceptable. No region of the United Kingdom should be left behind. No part of Northern Ireland should be left feeling abandoned and disconnected.

During the general election campaign, my party included in its manifesto the need for and benefits of the Shared Rural Network initiative, the aim of which is to ensure high-quality mobile coverage from the four main operators. In my constituency of Mid Ulster, however, my office consistently deals with cases in which mobile coverage is poor or non-existent. It was my party that secured the £150 million in 2017 and spearheaded the provision of full fibre broadband across Northern Ireland. We will continue to ensure that that roll-out is completed by the end of 2025.

I will pick up on Cathal's point from earlier and say that a lot of places did not make it on to the whitelist. The Department of Finance can maybe answer the question of why its system did not put houses there on to a list, as they would then have gone on to the whitelist. I appreciate that that is a problem across Northern Ireland, but a lot of those buildings there did not exist on any list. The Department of Finance did not send that list across to the Department for the Economy. That is for another discussion on another day, however.

We must build on this and ensure that we have proper and adequate mobile coverage for all communities. The provision of high-quality mobile coverage is essential in rural areas. It will not only help individuals make personal calls but allow businesses to stay in touch with suppliers and customers, whilst making everyday banking and electronic payments more accessible. Councils need to have clear guidance and the capacity to handle planning applications that are integral to developing SRN projects and investing in new digital infrastructure in rural areas.

We need coverage, but we do not need unnecessary masts, which Andrew and John touched on. Providers are moving from traditional hilltop masts to roadside poles. I am no telecommunications engineer, but I know that recent applications to Mid Ulster District Council were not optimising the mast share or site share part of the policy. Everybody seems to want their own. Providers are not site sharing or mast sharing as they should be, and councils are not aware of the issue. It is not for every provider to have its own mast. We see that in the move from traditional hilltop to roadside masts, which is being done to prevent payment to landowners, and that reduces signal quality. It is something of which councils are not aware, so a wee bit of work needs to be done on that.

I look forward to the Minister's comments on the issue and the steps that he, along with Executive colleagues, can take to address the problem.

Mr McNulty: Today's motion and amendment feel a bit like déjà vu all over again, with the leading parties in the Executive jockeying to pat their own Ministers on the back while expressing disappointment in the Ministers of their partners in government: so much for joined-up working and collective responsibility. I am curious as to why we are asked to acknowledge the work of the Department for the Economy in leading a planning subgroup that it does not actually lead, a fact made more curious when you consider that the group in question has met only twice that we know of since it was formed. Before I join the chorus of applause, I would like to know what the subgroup has achieved.

Also lacking is a specific call for a robust rethink of the mechanisms for engagement with communities to identify appetite and secure buy-in for mobile infrastructure development. One recurring issue for me as a constituency MLA in Newry and Armagh, which is largely rural, has been balancing the need for enhanced coverage with local objections to conspicuous development in areas of outstanding natural beauty (AONBs) and with safety concerns about proximity to masts. If the call today is for an overhaul of processes, I would like the Executive to show more thought about how they propose to bring communities into the process more meaningfully.

The DUP wants to update planning guidance to prioritise mobile infrastructure. How will that chime with existing planning guidance on rural development? How do the Executive plan to avoid a two-tier planning system that prioritises development of rural mobile infrastructure while leaving family farms and rural housing out in the cold? Bizarrely, the motion and the amendment raise more questions than they answer. Neither the task force nor its planning and publicly owned assets subgroups have published any meaningful work since they were established. The communications subgroup seems to be the only one that has conducted any substantive work. It signed off a stakeholder engagement strategy and communication plan, and, by last August, all 11 of the North's councils had identified digital champions/coordinators. None of the strategies or plans has been published, and the subgroup does not seem to have had any outworkings since August 2023.

Today's motion and amendment feel an awful lot like a group of students jointly presenting a class project that they have cobbled together on the school bus on the way in. There is a lack of joined-up thinking, a bit of exaggeration about who is in charge of what, a lack of evidence of continuous working and some finger-pointing on who is to blame for the confusion. If I were marking that work, it would be with qualified support and, "Must do better".

Mr McReynolds: I speak as an infrastructure spokesperson for the Alliance Party and as someone who had the wisdom and good sense to marry a woman from Strabane five years ago this November, so I speak to the motion as someone with family outside Belfast who are affected by poor mobile connectivity. As has been articulated by my party colleague, Andy McMurray, we support the principle of the DUP motion and the amendment from Sinn Féin, which rightly acknowledges the role of the Department for the Economy when it comes to increasing high-quality mobile coverage in rural areas in Northern Ireland.

Some 75% of Northern Ireland's rural areas are designated as total 5G not spots, meaning that, in three quarters of rural areas, you cannot access the 5G network. That is evidence of a significant digital divide between our rural and urban communities that contributes to the regional imbalance that has emerged west of the Bann, a problem of which we speak regularly in the Chamber and that I also regularly hear about from family. All our communities deserve access to high-quality, affordable and secure digital infrastructure to ensure that every person can benefit from fast and reliable communication networks.

The impact of 4G in rural areas is overwhelmingly positive and well documented: it is improving productivity, spearheading innovation and driving economic growth.

As the mobile action plan identifies, no Department has overall responsibility for mobile and digital roll-out. There is a need to work collectively to deliver parity of service across Northern Ireland. That also relies on a number of factors, of which planning is one. I recognise that the planning system can present a barrier to the expansion of mobile coverage by preventing the installation of infrastructure, thereby threatening to maintain regional disparities.

It is for that reason that mobile networks are built on a local basis, with the construction of one piece of infrastructure that requires one application to one planning authority. A planning application for a 5G mast is not considered regionally significant, so councils are central components to ensuring that telecommunications infrastructure does not become significantly delayed. It is largely under the remit of councils to adopt policies that address important planning considerations in their local development plans (LDPs). I would appreciate an update today from the Minister on the work that he has been doing with his departmental officials to aid the progression of the LDP process and on the engagement that he has had with the NI barrier busting task force planning subgroup — I had not said that out loud before, and it is a bit of a mouthful.

On the issue of mobile phone coverage, like the proposer of the motion, I was aware from responses to questions for written answers that the subgroup had not met as frequently as the Economy officials. I am keen to hear from the Minister why that is the case.

As has come up frequently in the Chamber, planning and planning reform are major concerns for developers, businesses and residents across Northern Ireland. I suspect that it will be a key area for discussion tomorrow morning when the Minister joins us at the Infrastructure Committee. We have to make sure that those involved in planning are doing anything and everything that they can to maximise opportunities for all who live here. It is about achieving a balance, yes, but, all too often, I hear that a logjam of applications is forcing the system to grind to a halt.

We have a responsibility to nurture the right environment for investment in and the roll-out of mobile infrastructure, and that extends across public perceptions, planning, costs, public assets and the barriers that the mobile action plan NI identified. I look forward to the Minister's update on the work that he has been doing in that area and how he is making sure that his officials are doing all that they can to ensure that the planning process plays its part in ensuring that our rural communities are not left disconnected.

Mr McGlone: I welcome today's motion and the opportunity to highlight the need for better provision of high-quality mobile coverage in rural communities across the North, but this is not exclusively about rural communities, as I will come to in a moment or two. People need mobile coverage, whether it is to check on kids at school, make an appointment with the doctor, do everyday business or help to promote their businesses. In an area such as mine, many people are self-employed and are on the move quite a bit, and they need a decent mobile signal to help them to run their business.

I represent a mostly rural constituency, and, as other rural representatives clearly outlined today, we are kindred spirits when it comes to our constituents' experiences with the mobile signal. I frequently get complaints, more so recently, from across the constituency about the poor quality of the mobile signal and areas where the signal drops out. There is another element that others and I have noticed, and my colleague Mr McGrath referred to it in his contribution: a previously reasonable or half-decent mobile signal that has deteriorated and dropped off. I do not know the technological reasons for that, but it is happening. I have had complaints from people in Magherafelt, the Coagh area and Cookstown about the deteriorating signal. I cannot understand why that should be the case, but it is clearly happening.

Whether the Assembly chooses to criticise the Infrastructure Minister, as in the motion, or opts to praise the Economy Minister, as in the amendment, people's experience will not change. They want to know what is being done to improve the signal so they can get on with their daily lives and businesses.

The reality is that from the publication of the 'Mobile Action Plan for Northern Ireland (MAP NI)' on 23 June 2022 until February of this year, there was no Infrastructure Minister or Economy Minister. However, the barrier busting task force has apparently met during that time. Its oversight group, which includes members from DAERA, the Department for the Economy, the Department of Education, the Department of Finance, the Department for Infrastructure, the UK Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, the Full Fibre NI Consortium, Mobile UK, local government heads of planning and Ofcom, has met seven times. Its communication subgroup has met 11 times, the planning subgroup has met just twice, as has been referred to, and the publicly owned assets subgroup has only met twice.

Earlier this month, in response to an Assembly question for written answer, the Economy Minister stated that he had asked his officials to discuss a delivery framework with all task force members at the next meeting. He also said that he would publish that when it was available. Perhaps a member of the Executive could provide an update on the progress of that delivery timetable — I do not know whether the Minister is in a position to do that today, but we will hear later on — because it is clear that it is an Executive issue. It is not an issue solely for the Infrastructure or Economy Ministers.

Rural communities are being left behind in digital connectivity, as was the case with the roll-out of high-speed broadband. Unless the task force starts to deliver on addressing the barriers to extending the 4G and 5G mobile networks in rural areas and some of the rural towns, the Shared Rural Network will continue to come up against those barriers. If the issue is planning, let us see the task force proposals to address that. If putting masts on publicly owned assets will improve mobile coverage in rural areas, let us see the task force proposals on that too. If there are other issues, let us see the task force proposals. A continued failure to deliver will mean that rural communities, rural villages and rural towns will continue to endure poor-quality mobile coverage. It will also mean that they — by that, I mean "we" — will continue to be left behind by the Executive.

I look forward to hearing the proposals, I look forward to hearing about the work of the oversight group, and I look forward to hearing from the Executive on what is happening to address the deficiencies in what many in other areas regard as an everyday service.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Minister, you have up to 15 minutes, but we will be stopping at 1.00 pm.

Mr O'Dowd (The Minister for Infrastructure): Thank you, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

I welcome the opportunity to respond to the motion on the very important topic of mobile infrastructure in rural areas, and I welcome the contributions from Members during the debate. I fully agree with the need for high-quality mobile coverage in rural communities and, indeed, in urban parts of the region too. A modern and efficient telecommunications infrastructure is an essential and beneficial element of everyday living for our people and our visitors. Improving our digital infrastructure is vital to our economy, and planning has a crucial role to play in supporting the delivery of that infrastructure and facilitating appropriate proposals that deliver a high level of connectivity, while ensuring that the provision of such infrastructure is sited and designed to keep environmental impacts to a minimum.

I fully support the public investment in, and roll-out of, the 4G Shared Rural Network initiative, and I am pleased to note the considerable progress that has been made by participating network operators. Ofcom is responsible for measuring each operator's coverage to ensure that it has met the individual requirements under its licence obligations. On 12 September, Ofcom published a statement on mobile network operators' compliance with their SRN geographical coverage obligations for June 2024. Members will be pleased to learn that Ofcom noted that BT, EE, Virgin Media O2 and Vodafone met the 88% UK-wide threshold, including coverage obligations for the North. I expect that Ofcom will update its assessments in the coming months to confirm that Three has also since met its obligation threshold. I also suspect that the gains made so far will improve mobile coverage in our rural areas.

I turn now to the suggestion in the motion that major delays in the planning process have jeopardised the Shared Rural Network initiative. The planning system and the council planning authorities have played a key enabling role in the delivery of telecommunications infrastructure over recent years. Members will be interested to note that official planning statistics for the period April 2021 to March 2024 indicate that 165 planning applications for telecoms development have been approved. That demonstrates that the planning system is supporting appropriate proposals.

It is worth pointing out that we have a planning system that is based on the rights of the applicant and of the objector, concerned resident, neighbour or whoever it may be. We could have a 100% success rate for any application if we simply had a planning application process in which someone applies and gets approval. On the other side of that, we could have a situation in which, if someone objects, nothing goes ahead. However, that is not the system that we operate. We have a system in which an applicant is invited to submit an application. The key to the success of that application, in my opinion, is that it is fully formatted and has all the information that is required when it is submitted. It then goes through a number of processes to ensure that it meets planning policy and regulations etc. Any objections that are raised are also assessed. Some of those objections may be major or minor, but they have to be fully interrogated and investigated before a decision can be made. I understand why people would want to have a speedy planning process. That is perfectly justifiable for a variety of reasons, but we also have to have an effective and efficient process.

It is worth noting that it is right to deliver for rural communities across the North when it comes to increasing mobile network coverage, but it is also right that our planning system is capable of protecting communities and long-term public interests from inappropriate development proposals. My Department maintains a positive working relationship with mobile operators, and my officials remain committed to working constructively with the industry and other key stakeholders.

I will turn to the criticism of me in the motion. Criticism of a Minister or a Member is fair enough, and, when justified, it is even fairer. Nevertheless, I want to put on the record that I have had two invites to meet from the telecommunications industry. One was from the umbrella group, which I did not fulfil, and senior officials attended it. The other one was from Vodafone UK, which I did fulfil, and I met that group. I have had no other correspondence from any other representatives of the mobile phone industry on their concerns about the planning system or about my role or the role of the barrier busting task force. If they wish to write to me again, I will give it due consideration, as I do all invites to meet.

Since 2019, officials have continued to sit on the SRN working group, building a constructive working relationship with Mobile UK to help ensure that the initiative is progressed across the region. The Department was previously represented on a DFE cross-sectoral working group that led engagement with the industry and oversaw the publication of the mobile action plan on 23 June 2022. The mobile action plan sets out eight actions, including the creation of a DFE-led barrier busting task force, which commenced later that year.

My Department is represented on that body, and officials have participated in the planning subgroup of the barrier busting task force. That is, rightly, chaired by local government, which, in this instance, is a representative from Belfast City Council. Both groups also include industry representatives. I note Members' concern about the fact that the group has met only twice. Following the debate, I will undertake to go back and see what barriers there are to the barrier busting task force's meeting. I will see whether we can ensure that the group meets more regularly and that the issues that are at the heart of concerns are dealt with in a way that they can be.

I suspect that some in the industry are seeking permitted developments for new masts etc, but I do not think that that is the road to go down. Some Members expressed concerns about the visual impact that telecommunications masts can have in rural communities. Some residents have also had concerns that, in some instances, have been ill-informed. It is only right and proper that, when new significant development is proposed in an area, communities have a right to raise their concerns and that those are dealt with appropriately through planning legislation.

Mrs Erskine: I am sorry. I know that time is against us, so I thank the Minister for giving way and for his commitment to go back to look at the barriers to that group's meeting, because that is essential. Although his officials attended the umbrella group meeting that he did not, I am sure that he was apprised of some of the planning issues that were brought up at that meeting. Hopefully, all those issues can be taken forward when reviewing the barriers to the task force's meeting.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Regrettably, time has run away from us. The Business Committee has arranged to meet at 1.00 pm. I propose, therefore, by leave of the Assembly, to suspend the sitting until 2.00 pm. The debate will continue at 2.00 pm, when the Minister will resume his remarks.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): We return to the motion on high-quality mobile coverage in rural areas. Minister, you have seven minutes remaining in which to respond to the motion.

Mr O'Dowd (The Minister for Infrastructure): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. In response to the Chair's comments, just before we broke for lunch: the matters raised by the umbrella group for the mobile phone industry were the same as the issues raised with me by Vodafone UK when I met it, and we had an opportunity to discuss those.

As I said, there is a push for permitted development. I think that that is a mistake, but, as I committed to earlier, we will continue to work with the mobile phone industry and others to ensure that everything is being done so that we have appropriate development of that and other industries across rural and other areas.

Under the review of public administration, the Executive agreed to transfer significant planning functions to local government, a decision that remains right and proper as it allows communities to hold their councils accountable for how they discharge their planning functions. Councils, as individual, sovereign political authorities, therefore have a hugely important leadership role in delivering the main operational aspects of the system. That includes taking decisions on all planning applications for telecommunications development and producing local development plans, including local policies for telecommunications development, a process fundamental to the reform-led system and for the effective enforcement of planning control.

As has been said, planning authorities rely on the expertise of statutory consultees to ensure that important public interests, such as road safety and environmental impact, are properly taken into account in planning decisions. Many of my ministerial colleagues will, therefore, also have a role in directly contributing to the effectiveness of the planning system. The mobile phone industry has an important role to play in site selection, the quality of applications entering the system, and timely and adequate provision of information.

A number of Members made comments about their perception and experience of poor phone communication in certain areas. The comments from Keith Buchanan were particularly enlightening in respect of more use of poles instead of dedicated masts and perhaps a perception that mobile phone companies are moving away from having masts on private land to where they do not have to pay land rent, which may have an implication for the quality of phone communication in some areas. It has to be said that communications companies are individual companies in their own right, and they will make commercial decisions that they believe to be in the best interests of their company.

Concern was raised about applications for individual masts rather than shared masts. There is a belief that there should be more sharing of masts among companies, which would mean not having the same amount of infrastructure spread across the countryside. Where there are existing telecommunication masts, we do have permitted development whereby changes can be made without the necessity for a fresh planning application.

I mentioned that my officials are involved in the DFI-led barrier busting task force. I have listened to Members' concerns about the failure of that group to meet more regularly. I will play my part to ensure that the group does meet on a more regular basis and that issues that impact on the applicant or community are fully addressed and lessons learned. Where required changes are to be made, I will drive those changes forward to ensure that we have a modern telecommunications system in line with our modern planning policies and principles.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Thank you very much indeed, Minister. I call Áine Murphy to make a winding-up speech on the amendment. Áine, you have up to five minutes in which to speak.

Ms Á Murphy: Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

As I make a winding-up speech on the amendment, I thank the Members opposite for bringing the motion to the Floor today. As we have heard throughout the debate, better connectivity in rural areas is absolutely vital.

I want to take the opportunity to highlight the importance of our rural communities, and many in the Chamber have heard me wax lyrical about rural communities over the past number of months. They are sewn into the very fabric of our society. Access to services is more difficult in those areas, and a perfect example of that is the lack of access to proper mobile coverage. There are huge pockets in my constituency and, indeed, in other rural constituencies where people cannot make a phone call from their home due to a poor signal. Entire towns have no ability to either make or take calls.

Rural communities have a proud history of entrepreneurship, from farmers to craft producers and from manufacturers to tourism operators. To expand, compete and thrive, rural businesses require access to high-quality mobile coverage. Expanding mobile coverage in our rural areas will bring local businesses into the global marketplace and ensure that rural businesses can continue to drive our local economies. Addressing that issue will also be a factor in addressing regional imbalance, and I welcome some of the steps that have taken place in relation to the roll-out of fibre-optic broadband and the commencement of Project Gigabit to capture those properties that are, unfortunately, not included in the initial roll-out.

It would be remiss of me not to mention the many factors that are at play in relation to mobile coverage. They have been touched on throughout the debate, and they include planning, commercial interests and maintenance, to name a few. Those issues have been articulated very well by Members who spoke previously, and, like many challenges facing rural communities, a one-size-fits-all approach will not address the lack of mobile coverage.

In conclusion, cross-departmental working and sectoral inclusion will be key. I acknowledge the work that is being carried out by the Department for the Economy through the task force. Of course, there are issues that we need to be cognisant of, particularly those relating to planning and concerns that are raised throughout the planning processes. It is incumbent on all local councils to take stock of those concerns and, of course, work with all stakeholders to reach appropriate decisions.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Thank you, Áine. I call Stephen Dunne to make a winding-up speech on the motion. Stephen, you have up to 10 minutes.

Mr Dunne: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Along with my colleagues Deborah Erskine and Keith Buchanan, I welcome the opportunity to bring this important issue to the House today on expanding the provision of high-quality mobile coverage across rural areas and also across every corner of Northern Ireland. We have had a useful and productive debate, and there has been a clear recognition and a signal — pardon the pun — from across the House that we need to see further progress on improving access to high-quality mobile coverage. We thank the Minister for taking the time to be in the Chamber today.

We have seen real progress on the roll-out of ensuring that our country is more digitally connected, and, as has been mentioned, the £150 million investment through the delivery of Project Stratum has been a game changer for so many right across our country, in both business and residential terms. While there has been significant progress, we hear what everybody has said about how there is more to be done. However, that project has transformed Northern Ireland, and we now have the highest coverage of full fibre networks right across our United Kingdom, with nine in 10 residential properties — 91% — now able to access full fibre networks. We can be proud of that, and rightly so. It shows that we are very much open for business, and digital connectivity is so crucial for the economic growth and prosperity that we all want to see. A modern society demands reliable and fast communication networks to drive economic activity but also for social purposes such as leisure and social media. There are so many modern means of communication, and affordable and secure digital infrastructure is essential for businesses and individuals.

The importance of small businesses has also been mentioned, and mobile coverage is essential for them as well. They should never be forgotten, given that they are the backbone of our economy right across our town, city and village centres. While broadband has been improved in so many places, paying for broadband can, in some cases, be a bill too far. Many microbusinesses, for example, rely on mobile coverage for their card machines to work. I was speaking to a colleague in the neighbouring constituency of Lagan Valley recently, and there is a village there that has been experiencing very poor signal over the past weeks. That colleague highlighted how a small butcher's shop simply cannot afford to have Wi-Fi. The shop depends on mobile coverage, which highlights the fact that we definitely need to do more on it. So many industries rely on mobile coverage to create opportunities for our rural communities to develop their business.

Mr McGlone: I thank the Member for giving way. He will have seen a case study of a farm that was carried out by one of the providers here, which found that 5G-enabled sensors helped the farm to reduce its chemical usage by 30% and improve efficiency by 15%. I am sure that that does not apply to every farm, but those of us who are interested and who have followed DAERA in its pursuit of the Lough Neagh action plan could look at the likes of that and its potential to reduce the usage that contributes to some of the pollution problems in Lough Neagh.

Mr Dunne: Thank you, Mr McGlone. I certainly concur with that approach. It highlights again the real issues in our rural communities. The problem is not specific to the digital mobile coverage that we are talking about today.

It is crucial that we tackle the digital divide between urban and rural parts. We welcome the Shared Rural Network that is helping to transform communities across our United Kingdom. As a party, we are committed to ensuring that its benefits are harnessed to boost our economic competitiveness.

Exactly one mile behind the very Building in which we stand or sit is the rural townland of Craigantlet, in my constituency of North Down, which links Bangor to Holywood, Belfast, Newtownards and Dundonald. The Craigantlet area has been continuously plagued by very poor signal for many years, with no 3G or 4G coverage at all in many parts, much to the frustration of commuters and residents alike. That has an impact on economic activity, because microbusinesses are simply unable to use mobile technology to do business and communicate in our world today. That highlights how the problems are not exclusive to the west of the Province. There are challenges in every corner of Northern Ireland. The Seahill area off the A2 between Holywood and Belfast is another notorious black spot, or not spot, despite being positioned on such a key link road between Bangor and Belfast with over 35,000 daily vehicle movements.

Operators have a responsibility to ensure that their network upgrades are located in appropriate areas. I welcome the Minister's commitment to continue to work on that issue. I have recently seen an increase in applications for masts to be located in built-up residential areas. That causes concern, and many of the concerns are genuine. Anybody who engages with residents who have those concerns knows that they need to be listened to during that process. As my colleague Mr Buchanan mentioned, these wealthy companies seem to have a desire to install the masts on publicly owned footpaths as a cost-saving measure rather than invest in private land, which would traditionally have been the model. That causes concern for many residents. It is important to strike a balance. As the Minister highlighted, the planning process is there for a reason — to take both views into account — and it is important that that continues as we seek to ensure that high-quality mobile coverage across Northern Ireland is improved. That is why we tabled the motion and why our party has focused on delivering change as a number-one priority in so many ways.

I will comment on Members' remarks. Opening the debate, my colleague Deborah Erskine highlighted the importance of planning issues and rightly pointed out that planning is a cross-departmental matter, with several Departments being responsible. She highlighted that it is important that Northern Ireland is not left behind. She also made a valid point, which was echoed by several Members, about emergency services relying on mobile technology. We think of the accidents on our rural roads, for example. The emergency services rely on having adequate and connected mobile coverage.

Cathal Boylan said that phone networks have work to do and highlighted that there are still gaps, including in broadband provision. He warmly welcomed our £150 million delivery on broadband — thank you for that, Mr Boylan — but yes, there are still areas that need investment. He highlighted the work that there is to do on the barrier busting task force.

Andrew McMurray said that barriers to mobile coverage need to be removed for the agriculture and tourism sectors. He made the important point that, in many parts of Northern Ireland, there is still work to be done on local development plans.

John Stewart said that it is not just an issue for the west of the province and that he wants to see a streamlined planning process. Mark Durkan highlighted the fact that there are still many not spots, particularly in the north-west, and said that he does not like tit-for-tat motions. Given that that is his policy, we may now see fewer SDLP motions being tabled. [Laughter.]

We would welcome that. He also talked about hybrid working and the importance of offering those with caring responsibilities or disabilities opportunities. That point can be lost: this is not just about businesses but about people struggling with caring responsibilities and disabilities.

Linda Dillon mentioned some areas of Mid Ulster and the need for a balance to be struck between building infrastructure and listening to residents' concerns. My colleague Keith Buchanan also mentioned Mid Ulster and highlighted the importance of being able to access GPs and hospitals and of site sharing, which is something that can be built on.

Justin McNulty talked about the subgroup and the need for better communication. Peter McReynolds talked about the impact of 4G in rural areas and about the need to work together to improve our planning processes, which is something that we can all buy into.

Patsy McGlone talked about small businesses on the move and highlighted the deterioration in service in some areas over the past number of years. That is an important point, and we urge the Minister to continue to make representations to the industry about those areas where we have seen a reduction in service, because that is not something that we should be seeing happen.

We have had a useful debate. I welcome the Minister's commitments on this important issue, which is one that we should keep to the fore.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): In conjunction with the Business Committee, the Speaker has given leave to Nuala McAllister to raise the topic of child poverty in North Belfast. You have up to 15 minutes, Nuala.

Miss McAllister: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I thank the Minister for Communities for coming to the Adjournment debate, and I thank MLAs, particularly those from outside North Belfast, for staying for it. I am sure that a lot of the issues that we will discuss today are not new to anybody, but it is important that we highlight them and make them a priority, particularly as this debate follows the publication of the draft Programme for Government (PFG), the report by the Northern Ireland Audit Office (NIAO) and the Cliff Edge Coalition briefing on child poverty in Northern Ireland, not to mention the fact that child poverty is not decreasing.

I will focus for a moment on the Audit Office report. It highlights the fact that 29% of children are living in poverty in North Belfast. To state that in even more stark terms, that is 7,200 children. In our constituency offices, we see that manifest in many ways. We also see it manifest across the board and across every area of Executive responsibility. I will take the opportunity to focus on some of those elements of the report. I hope to hear from the Communities Minister, but I also hope to put pressure on all other Ministers to make tackling child poverty a priority.

I will start with housing. There was an Adjournment debate on housing in North Belfast some months ago. Carál Ní Chuilín secured the debate. Issues were raised in it that were not new to all of us. One such issue was the outcomes and consequences of poverty. We cannot help bring people out of poverty if we do not give them suitable housing in which to live. We hear every day in our constituency offices about people living in housing poverty, and many of those affected are children and young people.

If a young person has no suitable safe place to sleep at night — somewhere that is their haven — how can they be prepared every day for school or interactions with their peers when they live with the pressures at home and see those through the eyes of their parents or caregivers?

We also see many health inequalities when it comes to poverty, and I will talk about some of them. Air pollution is more rife in impoverished areas, for example, in areas of North Belfast, than it is in affluent areas because of dense inner-city living, and that can exacerbate health inequalities. We might not see it now in the kids who come to our constituency offices with their parents, but you can bet that, in 10 to 15 years, some of them will have conditions such as COPD. I know that a lot of us get a lot of constituents coming through our offices who are dealing with that, and some of it is because of where they live.

Another issue is speech and language development. We know that it is important to read to children and to engage and have eye contact with them. However, when families across all constituencies are faced with problems and difficulties every day, it is not so easy to tackle those issues, especially if you are on your own.

Below my office in North Belfast is a Sure Start. Sure Starts are invaluable in every constituency. I pass one every day on my way to my office, and I see the people coming and going from it. I speak to the staff there, who often refer people upstairs and vice versa. They have told me about the health inequalities such as obesity, for example, because of the rising price of food and the fact that people are not able to afford the right food to cook for themselves. There is also a rise in malnutrition. In fact, over two years ago, a leading consultant at the Royal Victoria Hospital said that she had witnessed a young child stuffing food down their nappy in order to keep it, which is horrific. This is not just something that is talked about on the news; we see it in North Belfast.

That brings me to my next point about food parcels, food banks and vouchers for food parcels. We all give those out at our constituency offices. I do not know about the rest of you, but it is increasing in my office every day. The people whom we see time and again are single mothers, more than any other category in North Belfast. We do not just offer food parcels; we offer referrals to the family support hubs at the Vine Centre, the Ashton Centre or the citizens advice bureau in Rathcoole. Across North Belfast, there are people willing to help, but they are not going to get to the root of what causes poverty and how to lift people out of it.

The Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) has tried to put a focus on the fact that poverty results in more health inequalities. It said that, per 1,000 live births, the regional infant mortality rate in the most deprived areas — North Belfast is number two — was 1·1 percentage points higher than in the least deprived areas. That is a sad indictment of our failure to deal with child poverty.

The Department for Communities' 'Northern Ireland Poverty and Income Inequality Report, 2022/23' said that 24% of children were living in relative poverty in 2022-23, compared with 18% in 2021-22. It would be interesting to see whether the Department has statistics that further drill down into each of the constituencies. I know that the Audit Office report and the Cliff Edge Coalition's briefing had those statistics. It is important that we collect that data, because it informs our policies moving forward.

I have talked about housing and health, but education also has a role to play. I know that many of us are contacted by constituents who are not able to access free school meals. How somebody is not able to access free school meals nowadays is beyond me, but it is because they were not aware of it and are not able to access the tools online at home. The fact that they have to come to the likes of a constituency office to do that is really sad. However, we do that every day, because it is important that everyone gets the help that they deserve and absolutely need. That safety net is and should be there.

As I said, it is not just a single-Department issue. I know that we have the Communities Minister here, but I am talking about social services as well. One in 20 young people in the Water Works ward in North Belfast is under the care of the state. That is one in 20 people. Think about it: a classroom has 30 children — some have 20 if they are divided amongst two — but that means that at least one child in every class in that ward is under the care of the state.

A lot of the time, they are in state care due to poverty and their families not having the tools to help themselves.

Another issue is mental health and addiction, which is another effect of poverty and the fact that we do not have the right services to help people. I am glad that the Minister has come to the Chamber, but, as I said, it is also an Education, Health and Justice piece. Most importantly, we need to ensure that the anti-poverty strategy is implemented and prioritised across the board and that Sure Start, the pathway fund, Bright Start, Toybox and all the other schemes that are so important get the recognition that they deserve and the investment that they need. Investment does not necessarily mean more money; it can mean raising awareness of what people are able to access.

Yesterday, Alliance launched our policy paper on universal credit and the five-week wait. In North Belfast, more people are migrating to universal credit, so we have more cases and are helping more people with that. Those people, who are on the poverty line, are waiting for five weeks and being pushed further into poverty. We have proposals that are not just about cash injections but about helping people to become more aware of the contingency fund, for example. Let us face it: the two-child cap on benefits and tax credit needs to go. The Government have a role to play. Despite what they said about not wanting to abolish the two-child tax credit limit, the Labour Government need to look again at the people whom they represent and make the move. It would be one of the biggest ways to help lift children out of poverty.

I speak today about North Belfast because it has the second-highest level of deprivation, but I also want to reflect that West Belfast has the highest level by four percentage points. It is even worse than North Belfast. It is important to every one of us. When you see it every day in your constituency office and all that you can do is help people in the short term, it is not enough. We need a long-term solution. I look forward to hearing from the Minister on any of the short-term and long-term measures that can be implemented. I also want to hear how we can, on an all-party basis, through the entire Executive using the Children's Services Co-operation Act (Northern Ireland) 2015, use all the tools to tackle and end child poverty, not just in North Belfast but in every constituency.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Thank you very much, Nuala. All other Members from the constituency will have six minutes in which to speak. Every other Member will have five minutes.

Ms Ní Chuilín: Thank you, Nuala, for securing an Adjournment debate on the issue. I am sure that Nuala and others would agree that providing an anti-poverty strategy and resolution is a cross-departmental issue: it absolutely is. Certainly, DFC is taking the lead on it, but this goes as far back as the Good Friday Agreement — half of those in the Chamber probably will not remember it — which included a section on bringing forward an anti-poverty strategy. It is another outstanding commitment that we have been waiting for. Certainly, the current British Government appear to be following in the footsteps of their Tory partners. Their announcements on the winter fuel payments, not scrapping the two-child benefit cap and all the rest just do not augur well for people who are living in already challenging circumstances.

Poverty levels in the constituencies of North Belfast, West Belfast, as Nuala pointed out, and Foyle — Sinéad is here from Derry — have remained persistently high and in the top 10% of the most deprived. It will take an all-Executive approach to eradicate poverty. In our constituency of North Belfast, New Lodge 1 is ranked fifth; seventh is Crumlin 2; ninth is Ardoyne 3; fourteenth is New Lodge 2; fifteenth is New Lodge 3; nineteenth is Duncairn 1, and twenty-first is Water Works 1. It is a depressing read. Hopefully, the Minister will bring the strategy forward under the social inclusion strategies soon. I look forward to hearing what he has to say today.

The cost of living has been discussed in the Chamber and others across the board. It has been incrementally increasing since 2018. Six years later, things are not getting any easier. Wages have not gone up. People are having to wait for five weeks to migrate from different benefits to universal credit (UC) and rely on food banks and, perhaps, loans. That is pushing people into poverty.

The humiliation of poverty is long-lasting. I remember growing up in a house in which most of the women worked because men could not get jobs. I am not being political as such, but there were few jobs for people like my father, who was a skilled engineer, because he was a Catholic. That was a fact when we were growing up. He had to go elsewhere to work. I remember getting what was then a blue dinner ticket for access to free school meals. I remember feeling embarrassed standing beside people who had a pink or green dinner ticket; the stigma of poverty was there. For me, like many of my friends and the people whom I grew up with, that became a way of life.

We are all passionate about different aspects of this. Nuala mentioned something that I have also seen, and it is horrendous. The education maintenance allowance (EMA) for teenage children was removed, but, when it comes to participation in sports, arts and other things, there are children who do not have access to the necessary equipment, even though there are clothes banks, sports banks, music banks and all sorts. That means that a lot of children will not even have aspirations in those areas. There is poverty of aspiration, which is debilitating and horrendous.

Brian will know that, although it is taking a bit of a hammering at the minute, good relations work in North Belfast will, as usual, bounce back. A lot of the youth good relations programmes have food built into them. It is not just about getting the kids in; health and safety and food are now built into those programmes as well, because children are coming to them hungry.

Housing and health are other aspects. There could be three or four generations under one roof, with teenagers and young children sharing one or two rooms. That is humiliating and horrendous. That has been the custom and practice, and I desperately ask that we change it. Accessing affordable housing is a massive challenge across all constituencies, but, in areas where there is big demand, landlords — I will not repeat what I think of most of them — use market forces to squeeze families out. That is horrendous, and it is greed. The impact of that on children's physical and mental health is huge.

Nuala mentioned speech and language. In our constituency, there are long waiting lists for children to access autism assessments, speech and language therapy and dentists. The oral and dental health is horrendous. There is also childhood obesity. In addition, a number of children are on individual education plans while —

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Carál, will you bring your remarks to a close, please?

Ms Ní Chuilín: — they await diagnosis.

Minister, this is not just your responsibility, but you have the privilege of bringing something forward to address it. We look forward to hearing what you have to say.

Mr Kingston: I thank Nuala McAllister for bringing the topic to the Floor. As she referenced, the Public Accounts Committee conducted an inquiry into child poverty in Northern Ireland, with the Audit Office publishing the report in March this year. The report stated that the percentage of children in Northern Ireland living in relative poverty is 18%, with 8% having lived in persistent poverty for at least three of the past four years. We note also, as was referenced, that the Cliff Edge Coalition submitted a briefing to the Public Accounts Committee that stated that the number of children in North Belfast living in poverty is 29%, which, after West Belfast, is the highest percentage in any constituency in Northern Ireland. We are aware of the welfare benefits issues relating to that, and we have had debates on those matters, including the two-child limit for those claiming child tax credit, universal credit and the overall benefit cap. We have had debates about whether the Assembly can mitigate and compensate for the decisions made by the Government at Westminster. However, we do not have the welfare benefits budget; that is retained at Westminster. Mitigating those benefit restrictions would cost tens of hundreds of millions of pounds, which would come from the departmental budgets for public services in Northern Ireland. Not surprisingly, no Minister is saying that they could offer such spare finance.

Of course, many initiatives seek to address disadvantage, reduce poverty, promote personal and community development in North Belfast and assist people to move out of poverty. As others said, it is a multifaceted issue, and it requires action from all Departments in association with the voluntary and community sector and the private sector. It is important to recognise that the circumstances in which people grow up can vary greatly. Some will be fortunate and have generally supportive circumstances, whereas others will have more challenging circumstances due to family, personal or community issues. The Assembly's overall aim should be to help everyone to achieve their potential in life and to provide extra support where it is needed to compensate for challenging circumstances.

Child poverty touches many levels of government, as well as the community and private sectors. When it comes to employability, the Department for Communities, as, I am sure, the Minister will mention, provides jobs and benefits offices. I visited the one on the Shankill, and I saw that its staff have genuine care for their clients. They provide one-to-one support for people who are seeking employment. Those offices are supported in the community sector by job assist centres and through the dedicated support of Belfast Works Connect, which reaches people who are deemed to be economically inactive, far from the labour market and in need of the extra support that will help them into training and employment. We all share the concerns about the Shared Prosperity Fund, which is ending at the end of the year. We want to see that extended and renewed in the long term.

Many family support services are also relevant. Under the Departments of Health and Education, at a community level, social services and projects like integrated services for children and young people support families with additional challenges. There is also Sure Start, which supports those essential early years in a child's education. We recognise the dedication of staff and teachers in our nurseries and primary schools and in special needs provision, with the opening of Harberton North Special School and the units in many mainstream schools that now provide for special educational needs. At post-primary level, 11 schools in North Belfast participate in the area learning community, and Belfast Metropolitan College focuses on helping people to achieve their potential in life. In fairness, both Ulster University and Queen's University Belfast have a renewed focus on community outreach and improving the accessibility of higher-level education, which we will all want to work with them on.

In the Department for Communities, the neighbourhood renewal partnerships work in the most disadvantaged 10% of areas, and all of us, as North Belfast representatives, will work with our neighbourhood renewal partnerships and support the desire for a North Belfast community partnership. As was mentioned, housing is a massive issue. At lunchtime, members of the all-party group on homelessness met Grainia Long, the chief executive of the Housing Executive, highlighting the shortage of emergency accommodation and social accommodation. The number of those presenting as homeless increased by 7·3% in Belfast over the previous year alone.

Under the Executive Office, there is support through the social investment fund and Urban Villages. My time is running out, so I will briefly mention the Department of Justice's support for interface and intercommunity work, which is a particularly acute issue in North Belfast at times.The Department for the Economy recognises the importance of developing industrial land for employment purposes and working with the private sector to encourage the creation of good jobs. We recognise that many companies care about corporate social responsibility. The work of voluntary and community sector groups is essential. The city council supports community development, employment agencies and leisure and exercise spaces. The Department for Infrastructure and DAERA —.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Will the Member bring his remarks to a close?

Mr Kingston: The work of providing a positive local environment and public realm is important.

The issue of improving people's opportunities in life and addressing child poverty and poverty generally crosses so many sectors of government, and it is one that we will all continue to work on.

Mr Kelly: I also thank Nuala for bringing this important issue to our attention again.

The term to use for child poverty in North Belfast is "staggering". The statistic is that 29% of children live in poverty, as reported by the End Child Poverty Coalition on the basis of research from Loughborough University. In the North, over 20% of children, across all the constituencies, experience poverty.

Several factors contribute to child poverty, as we know, including high housing costs, which has been mentioned a number of times. There is a shortage of available housing, and there are restrictive policies such as the two-child limit on benefits. That policy alone affects over 45,000 children here, pushing larger families into economic hardship.

The growing housing crisis compounds the challenges. There were over 47,000 applicants on the housing waiting list in March this year. The shortage is driving families into unsuitable temporary accommodation such as B&Bs and expensive private rentals. That places financial strain on families, deepening their poverty and widening social inequalities. The lack of stable housing also impacts mental health, particularly for children who face the anxiety and stress of frequent relocations and overcrowded living conditions. Those circumstances not only hinder children's access to education but prevent access to essential healthcare services, perpetuating a vicious cycle of poverty and poor social outcomes. Secure housing is foundational to improving living standards and combating poverty.

For children, poverty leads to a higher prevalence of chronic conditions such as asthma, obesity and malnutrition. Studies consistently show that children who live in poverty are more likely to face developmental delays and mental health issues such as anxiety and depression. Poor housing conditions such as dampness and mould further worsen respiratory illnesses such as asthma.

The intersection of poverty, housing insecurity and chronic illness in North Belfast underscores the urgent need for comprehensive solutions. Addressing those interconnected issues must be a priority for various Departments, as a number of Members have said, to ensure that vulnerable families have the opportunity to escape the cycle of poverty, improve their health and secure a brighter future. Key to that is the anti-poverty strategy, and I take the opportunity to urge the Minister for Communities, as others have done — his is the lead Department — to bring the strategy forward as a matter of urgency and to ensure that it is not only effective but sustainable. That will require buy-in from all Ministers in a joined-up approach to policy development and, importantly, in resources.

The Economy Minister, Conor Murphy, is moving to give our young people the skills, training and opportunities to reach their full potential. That can be achieved by addressing long-standing regional imbalances, investing in our communities and ensuring that employment opportunities pay a real living wage to help raise living standards. Each of those issues is covered in Conor Murphy's economic vision. Since he took office, it is clear that delivering positive change for workers and families is a priority for the Minister.

The anti-poverty strategy is due to be published by the Communities Minister, who must ensure that it, too, contains commitments. The anti-poverty strategy must tackle the widening gap between people's incomes and the cost of living, which has been exacerbated not only by the ongoing cost-of-living crisis but by years of cuts and the gutting of our public services by the British Government.

Policies such as the five-week wait for universal credit, which was mentioned by Nuala, and the two-child limit on benefits have undoubtedly contributed to the rise in child poverty, with over 45,000 children across the North of Ireland directly impacted. It is imperative that we challenge those harmful policies, as the British Government's cuts to social support and underfunding through the block grant formula are deepening poverty.

The First Minister and deputy First Minister and the Finance Minister are pushing the British Government to provide increased resources for the Executive to be able to properly fund our public services.

Ensuring that people have access to advice is essential, particularly during transitional periods and when managing debt. I pay tribute to the incredible work done in my constituency by organisations such as the Ardoyne Association, the Wolfhill Centre and Tar Isteach. A number of other organisations were mentioned, so forgive me for not having the full list. They all do very hard work and very important work. I urge the Minister to ensure that the anti-poverty strategy is bold and forward-thinking. While lifting individuals and families above the poverty line is an essential step, it is equally important to focus on fostering economic growth and creating opportunities that help to break the cycle of intergenerational poverty.

Mr Butler: I thank Nuala McAllister for securing the Adjournment debate. It is a really important topic. I will speak not from notes but genuinely from my heart on this issue because poverty is an issue that we have debated in this Chamber since I started in 2016. When you think that we live in, perhaps, the fifth biggest economy in the world, it is ridiculous that, in 2024, we have pockets in this country — given its size; we are not very big — where we see young people at birth, pre-birth and through their early lives faced with inequalities that should not exist in this society.

Poverty has many and diverse, but strange, bedfellows, unfortunately. If you are born into poverty, your life expectancy is already reduced. I speak from the position of having family who live in West Belfast, which, obviously, borders Lisburn and Castlereagh, Lagan Valley and North Belfast. I share the name with those family members; they are the Butlers in Highfield, in Belfast. Statistically, because I live in Lisburn, in Lagan Valley, I am expected to live somewhere between 10 or 11 — maybe 13 — years longer than them. I hope that that is not the case, but it is absolutely ridiculous. It is a postcode lottery, and it really is wrong.

I really am glad that we have a Programme for Government. I have no critiques about the content, but I certainly have some critiques about the omissions. I suppose that our Executive can be forgiven for that because we had a compressed time frame to put it together so we had to list a number of priorities that we are going to tackle. However, the Executive cannot be forgiven for this: the missions all begin with the letter "P" — it is like Presbyterian alliteration — and we have "people" "planet", "prosperity" and "peace", but there is not a particular target on poverty. If poverty were there as a particular target, I think that the rewards would be off the charts. As many Members have said, if you live in poverty, you are more likely to suffer from poor mental health. If you live in poverty, you are more likely to be suicidal. If you live in poverty, you are more likely to have a physical disability or a learning disability. If you live in poverty, you are less likely to achieve educationally. If you live in poverty, you are less likely to have a suitable home. If you live in poverty, you are less likely to be contributing to the environmentally friendly nature of climate protection. Poverty has strange and many diverse bedfellows, but none of those bedfellows is worthy of pursuit.

In saying this, I will remain apolitical. I have listened with interest for many years, and I know that Carál Ní Chuilín is absolutely passionate about quality homes. I have loved working with Carál on that issue on different all-party groups. Poverty is a political choice. Everybody is right to point to the previous Conservative Government, their austerity agenda and the changes that have been manifest, but if we do not look at ourselves in this Chamber, when we did not sit for five years out of eight, we neglect the responsibility of political failure here. We are as responsible for the political failure to tackle poverty as any other political agency on these islands, and we need to learn from that. At the weekend, the leader of the DUP hinted that he perhaps would not be bringing the Assembly down. I hope that that applies for any reason, and I hope that, perhaps, at some stage, the Sinn Féin leader can also give this country confidence that tackling poverty and promising our young people a better future will the number-one political priority.

Last night, there was a meeting of an all-party group on political engagement for young people, and the topic was housing and quality homes. Every Member who has spoken in this debate has touched on that issue. That tells me that our young people, who are suffering the burden of poverty, inequity and inequality in respect of suitable accommodation, see that as a pressing priority for the Government.

We have only two and a half years left to get on the rails. We all accept that ending poverty has to be our political aim. It will take time, and it will take political stability, a political will and a singular purpose among everybody in the Chamber. By the end of the debate, I am sure that we will all agree on the sense of direction. I hope that we can keep things on the rails in the Chamber and deliver for the people of Northern Ireland.

Mr Brett: I apologise for not being here for the entirety of the debate: I had some Committee commitments that I could not miss.

North Belfast usually gets a reputation as a place where the political representatives disagree, have different ideals and do not share a common goal. Although I missed much of the important contributions made by the Members opposite and other Members, I guarantee that they raised the exact same issues that I plan to raise. Those are the issues that our communities and constituency offices deal with daily. The five Members elected by the people of North Belfast work together daily on tackling poverty. The North Belfast community groups, which other Members may have mentioned, regularly bring elected representatives from the parties together to tackle poverty. We come together to discuss the collective ambitions and issues faced by those whom we are honoured to represent. Be they from Tiger's Bay, the New Lodge, Rathcoole, Glengormley or anywhere in between, the issues that they face are exactly the same.

With your indulgence, Mr Deputy Speaker, I will highlight a number of things. The community and voluntary sector in North Belfast is made up of the best people who freely give their time daily to try to improve the lives of all those who call North Belfast home. I must pay tribute to Ministers and political parties of all hues who have put together many strategies and initiatives across North Belfast that are making a lasting impact. I think of the neighbourhood renewal partnerships that continue to deliver daily for those most in need. I think of the Building Successful Communities programme that operates in parts of our constituency. It builds much-needed homes to tackle poverty. It invests in education, which is key to ensuring that our young people are lifted up. It also invests in the fabric of our community organisations, which, day and daily, provide the service that all our constituents need. I think of the Urban Villages programme, which my colleague Brian Kingston is heavily involved in. It operates in the Old Park district electoral area across Ballysillan and Ardoyne. It is sponsored by the Executive Office but, day and daily, delivers programmes and community assets that are used to tackle the issues that are rife in our community.

It is important to recognise that progress has been made but that there is much more to do. Nuala, Carál, Gerry, Brian and I will continue in that spirit of cooperation to try to ensure that no person in North Belfast experiences what they have in the past and that, together, we can ensure that North Belfast continues to be the best place to live, work, invest and raise a family.

Ms McLaughlin: I, too, commend Nuala for securing the Adjournment debate. Poverty is a blight on our society, whoever it affects and wherever it is found, but it is fair to say that it has a particular effect on children. We know that the first thousand days of a child's life are absolutely crucial to their cognitive and emotional development. That has been powerfully and passionately spoken about by every contributor to the debate. Poverty stifles children's life chances before they have even had a chance. It sets children back from the start of their very young lives and traps the next generation into a vicious cycle of intergenerational poverty that repeats and repeats and repeats.

It is also right to say that North Belfast is plagued by poverty more than most areas in the North. Like the Members for North Belfast, I come from a constituency that is plagued by poverty. It is fair to say that the Members present from North Belfast, as well as Members for West Belfast and Members for my constituency, know all too well the debilitating impact of poverty in our respective constituencies. That is why I talk so much about achieving regional balance. The regional imbalance that we have is often not, as some people would say, between the whole of Belfast and the whole of Derry. It is the difference between the richest areas, concentrated geographically, and the poorest areas. Sometimes, I am asked what that imbalance looks like in poverty terms, and in child poverty terms in particular. For me, it looks like poor children, who are four times more likely to develop mental health issues by the age of 11. It looks like a gap in healthy life expectancy of up to 15 years between the most and least deprived areas, as Robbie said earlier. It looks like a 24% gap in GCSE attainment for children receiving free school meals.

Members from the poorest areas, which are often in North Belfast, West Belfast and Foyle, can all be charged with raising our constituencies every single chance that we get. That is not just because we love our cities and the places that we are from but because they require intervention. We should not be competing with one another. The problem is poverty, and, although the solution is different in the New Lodge, Ardoyne and Creggan, it is a stain on our society that government has not addressed. How therefore do we address it? We invest where the need is greatest, which includes looking at the areas of greatest deprivation and making sure that every single policy, strategy and plan that is produced in this Building is screened on that basis and included on the basis of an assessment. That is policy responsibility and accountability, which is sorely needed and sorely not present.

It means having an overarching policy in the first place. We have no stand-alone child poverty strategy. Although I appreciate that the anti-poverty strategy is part of the social inclusion strategies included in the draft Programme for Government, it is still true that poverty is not one of the Government's nine priorities. It is shocking that it is not a priority, and if it is not a priority, poverty will not be ended for children in North Belfast, West Belfast, Derry or anywhere else. We need to get serious about this. We need to have meaningful and measurable targets and put a plan in place. The Executive must get on with that job and end child poverty once and for all.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Minister, you have up to 10 minutes.

Mr Lyons (The Minister for Communities): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I sincerely thank the Member for North Belfast, Miss McAllister, for securing today's Adjournment debate. I appreciate the contributions that have been made. I have listened to them all very carefully and hope to address all the points that have been raised.

Let me say at the outset that poverty is a curse. At its core, poverty is the needs of our people not being properly met. It is a curse on society, and poverty impacts on everyone, everywhere. Members may think that that is a strange statement for me to make, but poverty impacts on all of us, because we are all impacted on by our friends' and our neighbours' situations. We are impacted on as policymakers and decision makers in this place, and there are some things that we might like to do in society but cannot, because of the damaging impacts that poverty brings with it. Tackling poverty, in all its forms, is a key priority for me, and today's debate allows me the opportunity to revisit my commitment to tackling it in a deliberate and decisive way.

There has been much talk about North Belfast in particular, as one would expect during an Adjournment debate on child poverty in North Belfast.

I hope that Members will not mind that I am not going to repeat the statistics that have been outlined today. Child poverty is, of course, a serious issue across Northern Ireland, but I understand that it is particularly acute in North Belfast and the other constituencies that have been mentioned. It exists throughout Northern Ireland, unfortunately, and that is why my approach will be to do everything that I can to tackle it everywhere, in every part of Northern Ireland. That will, of course, apply to North Belfast.

I do not intend to go over the work that is already being done. Mr Brett mentioned excellent work that is being done, especially through the community and voluntary sector: significant actions that are alleviating some of the worst impacts of poverty on North Belfast. More work has been done through the neighbourhood renewal programme, which has provided sustained support to areas of deprivation across North Belfast in 2024-25, with £3·8 million having been invested across 45 projects. Lots is being done, but we all know that there is a lot more work to do.

I will get straight to it and talk about what I intend to do to tackle this issue in North Belfast and across Northern Ireland. I am pleased to announce to the House that I have agreed the next steps on the anti-poverty strategy. I have written to all Departments and stood up the cross-departmental working group so that we can get the buy-in from other Departments that is necessary to make sure that we work collectively to address the issue. That has been raised time and time again during today's debate. Tackling poverty in Northern Ireland is not solely my responsibility. I am in a position to work with Executive colleagues to bring forward the draft strategy that we now have, and we are going out to the other Departments to get their buy-in so that we can move it forward. I hope that it will be agreed by the Executive early in the new year. I want that buy-in from other Departments so that we are ready to go and can start to tackle the issues that we face.

How are we going to do that? There will be three main areas in the strategy. First, I want to make sure that we minimise the risk of falling into poverty. There are a number of ways in which we can do that over the longer term. It is about making sure that children have the best start in life through education. It is about dealing with issues such as debt and ensuring that issues such as disability and addiction are given the proper support that they need, because those are all factors that lead to an increased risk of people falling into poverty.

The second thing that I want to do is make sure that we minimise the impact of poverty when people fall into it. That means ensuring that people have the resources that they need and that, again, they have access to education and the help and support that they need for their physical and mental health; that we address issues of place, crime and safety; and that, importantly, we deal with the issue of housing, including fuel poverty, which is a huge driver of poverty overall.

Thirdly, I want to make sure that we do everything that we can to support people to exit poverty. We need to make sure that people find themselves in the right economic and employment conditions. We need to support people getting back into work to gain employment and to have the further education opportunities and, importantly, the childcare that they need in order to work. Already, you can see that work being done in some of the job programmes that my Department is responsible for. Job Start was a fantastic programme. Just last week, I met a single mum who was on universal credit. She got work through the Job Start programme and is now in work in a situation that works for her and her family. That is why all these issues together are so important.

It is right that we look at this through a whole-system and all-government approach and that we do everything that we can to minimise the risk of falling into poverty, minimise the impact of poverty and also help people to exit poverty. Those will be the three pillars of the anti-poverty strategy. We have actions that we would like to see developed, and we are trying to make sure that we get buy-in from other Departments so that we can push along. I know how long people have waited for the strategy. As Carál Ní Chuilín pointed out, they have been waiting since the Northern Ireland Act was put in place. I am determined that we will deliver it, and I hope that Members will see that this is the way forward to tackle poverty overall. When thinking of child poverty, we cannot separate it from poverty in general. Poverty does not happen in isolation to children; it happens to families and to those in the wider community, so it is right that we take this approach. I will be happy to discuss the strategy further with Members as we make progress on it.

I will address some of the issues that were raised, although I hope that I have done so already. You will have seen my commitment to addressing the issue, but some issues came up time and time again. The first was that the strategy will require cross-departmental work. It is not solely the responsibility of any one Department, but there are a number of things that we need to do. I have heard different Members talk about the importance of education and the poverty of aspiration. I absolutely believe that education is the key to keeping people out of poverty. We need to make sure that education is a focus and a priority, and I intend to focus on childhood education and lifelong learning as part of the strategy. We also touched briefly on the issue of housing, which is fundamental. How can you get the good education that you need if you are in temporary accommodation and constantly moving around? How can you get a good job that will sustain you and your family if you do not have the necessary skills? It is exceptionally important that those issues are addressed, and, as Members can see, they all tie in with each other.

Those are the keys to tackling poverty, which is why I take exception to the comments from Robbie Butler and Sinéad McLaughlin. Poverty has not been left out of the Programme for Government. Now, of course, a consultation is going on, and the Member may respond to it and say that she wants it to be spelt out more clearly. However, let us look at some of the priorities in the Programme for Government: housing is a priority, which we have said is key to tackling poverty; healthcare is a priority, and we have said that it is key to tackling poverty; education is a priority, and it is key to tackling poverty; good jobs are a priority, and they are key to tackling poverty. All the things that we are trying to do will contribute to tackling the issue that has plagued so many areas across Northern Ireland, particularly North Belfast. It is wrong to say that tackling poverty is not in the Programme for Government, because it is, of course, one of our priorities.

My time is coming to an end, but I hope that, in the short time that I had, Members will have seen my commitment to dealing with the issue. We will put in place a strategy that will deal with the key stages, and I hope that we will end up with better outcomes for people right across Northern Ireland.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Thank you, Minister. I thank Miss McAllister for securing the Adjournment debate and bringing the subject to the Assembly.