Official Report: Tuesday 14 January 2025

Mr Speaker: The first item in the Order Paper is Members' statements. The usual rules apply.

Mr Delargy: I rise to note the work of Foyle Search and Rescue, a voluntary organisation in Derry. Many Members will be aware of the pivotal work that Foyle Search and Rescue does to assist people who are in distress and despair in Derry and neighbouring areas along the Foyle. Recently, Foyle Search and Rescue published its incident reports for 2024, noting that it provided support during 237 incidents. What is at the core of Foyle Search and Rescue's work is that those are not just statistics; they are lives. They represent people who have been saved and families who have been supported.

Unfortunately, Foyle Search and Rescue also has to support many families through bereavement and the loss of a loved one. In common with many families in Derry, my family is forever indebted to Foyle Search and Rescue after losing our amazing aunt Patricia. With those other families, we have stood, and will continue to stand, shoulder to shoulder with the courageous volunteers of Foyle Search and Rescue. Derry people are known for their generosity, passion and love for their community. I thank the volunteers of Foyle Search and Rescue for their tireless work for our city, community and families through the most difficult times.

Mr Brett: The Rathcoole multistorey flats have not just been a dominant feature of our local landscape for generations but have been home to generations of families who proudly call Rathcoole their home. For many years, the Northern Ireland Housing Executive has been on a crusade to demolish those homes and make the residents of Abbotscoole House homeless. Just last week, despite two residents' surveys being carried out by that body, with over 80% of residents rejecting the Housing Executive's proposals to demolish their homes, it submitted a business case to the Department for Communities seeking approval to demolish those vital local homes.

While the Housing Executive invests in tower blocks in other parts of North Belfast, it expects the community that I represent to accept second best. While local families are in housing crisis, the Housing Executive expects us to accept dereliction in Rathcoole.

Whilst it attempts to make an 87-year-old grandmother homeless in Rathcoole, it expects us to remain silent.

The Housing Executive will underestimate the community of Rathcoole at its peril. It is known for its community campaigning and for sticking together in the most difficult of times. Last week, when the Housing Executive informed us of its decision, we launched a community petition campaign to show the clear opposition to the proposals. In just five days, hundreds and hundreds of residents from across Rathcoole and North Belfast signed up to our campaign because they will no longer accept North Belfast's being seen as a place of dereliction. They will no longer accept local homes being demolished, and they will not accept proposals from the Housing Executive to replace family homes with dereliction and grass seeds.

My message to the Department for Communities is clear: there is a housing crisis not just in Rathcoole but across North Belfast, and any attempt to remove those vital family homes will be strongly resisted.

Miss McAllister: I welcome the announcement by the Justice Minister of the review of the case of Jonathan Creswell. I submitted a question for priority written answer to the Minister regarding Jonathan Creswell and the operation of public protection arrangements. I am glad to see two aspects under review: his case specifically and the wider issue of referrals into public protection arrangements.

As more continues to emerge about failings in relation to the death of Katie Simpson, I am glad that the Justice Minister is taking the matter seriously, and I welcome her commitment to shed light and identify learnings. I have been working on uncovering the failings surrounding Katie Simpson's death for a number of years — across the community in Armagh, in Tynan and in the Police Service, social services and many agencies in Northern Ireland. It is unfortunate that it has come to such circumstances in which we have seen the death of a woman in 2020 still being talked about in 2025 without justice having been done.

Long before the death of Katie Simpson, Jonathan Creswell was convicted of the gruesome assault of a partner. I commend Abigail Lyle for speaking publicly about the abuse and violence that she suffered at his hands. That conviction should have triggered public protection arrangements, but it did not. We will, hopefully, have learnings from the review, and we will see what we can change, not just for Katie but for all women across Northern Ireland. Tackling violence against women and girls is something that we will not speak in platitudes about but take action on. We will get to the root causes of the problem — the perpetrators — so that every woman in Northern Ireland is safe and never again is any woman failed as Katie was.

Mr O'Toole: The year 2024 was the first in which the globe recorded a temperature rise of 1·5°C above pre-industrial levels. That number is an important one, but not in a good way. A decade ago, at COP21 in Paris, the major participant nations in that conference agreed to limit global temperature rises to below 1·5°C. For decades, that has been deemed to be a critical threshold that the world cannot cross. Recording one year's rise on that scale does not completely breach the barrier, because the 1·5°C threshold has to be recorded as a median over a number of years, but it shows that climate breakdown is happening faster and more aggressively than people thought in 2015 and than we have been planning for. It is frightening. It is chilling — no pun intended.

We have seen the images from Los Angeles in recent days. This is January. Most of the wildfires that plague that part of the United States happen at the height of the summer, but, in January, those wildfires are raging. They have left dozens dead and destroyed thousands of homes and businesses in one of the wealthiest and most affluent parts of the planet.

Last year, across the world, including in Spain and Mexico, we saw extreme weather events. We will keep seeing extreme weather events as climate change and breakdown bites. It is happening. Climate change is not deniable any more, nor is it something that we can simply put a stop on. We can mitigate it with our policy response, but we can also continue to work to limit it by moving towards net zero.

Often, we in Northern Ireland have acted as though climate change is happening somewhere else and that we can continue living and acting as though it does not matter. Certainly, it took us a very long time in this place to adequately respond to climate change. I am pleased that we passed a Climate Change Act at the end of the previous mandate. We were the last jurisdiction in these islands to do so. We have been a laggard not just in dealing with climate but in environmental action and nature restoration more generally.

In this mandate, or in what is left of it, we need to see those targets and plans put into meaningful action. We need the Executive to agree a climate action plan urgently. I commend genuinely the Environment Minister for bringing such a plan to the Executive, but we now need to see practical action. It is not just going to affect us all; it will completely transform the way that we live over the century. Let us be serious about it and start to deal with it in this jurisdiction.

Ms Dolan: Last week, I was contacted by numerous Royal Mail staff members in Enniskillen who expressed deep concerns about a decision by their employer to cut overtime for its postal workers. That decision will have serious repercussions for my constituents across Fermanagh, particularly those who are in more rural communities. The cuts threaten the reliability of postal services, with delays already being felt by families, businesses and the most vulnerable. Many of my constituents depend on the timely delivery of essential items such as medical appointment letters and social welfare correspondence. For elderly residents and those who live in isolated areas, the post is often a critical lifeline.

I have written to Royal Mail to urge it to reconsider the decision, prioritise investment in rural services and engage with postal workers and the communities that they serve in order to find solutions. Unfortunately, that is not the first time that I have had to contact Royal Mail about delivery issues. In October last year, I had to contact it regarding complaints about the delayed delivery of post in Belleek and Kesh. As far back as December 2023, I raised with it the concerns of my constituents in Enniskillen. In my opinion, Royal Mail has been chipping away at the service.

Rural communities, such as those across Fermanagh, already face challenges due to their limited infrastructure and services. Cutting overtime for hard-working postal staff will only exacerbate those inequalities, potentially leaving my constituents at an unfair disadvantage compared with those in urban areas. It is not just an issue of efficiency; it is an issue of fairness. Royal Mail, which has a universal service obligation, must recognise that its duty extends to every citizen regardless of their location. For many here, it is not about luxury: it is about basic access and inclusion.

Mr K Buchanan: This coming weekend, we will remember those who were murdered at Teebane between Cookstown and Omagh. On 17 January 1992, eight Protestant workmen were murdered and another five were injured when an IRA roadside bomb blew up their minibus at Teebane crossroads. Apparently, the men were targeted because they carried out work for the security forces. They were returning from work at Lisanelly army barracks. They all worked for Karl Construction. Those men were simply tradesmen doing an honest day's work.

The bomb contained an estimated 600 lbs of home-made explosives in two plastic barrels, and later estimates reported that it was a 1,500 lb device. The Provisional IRA detonated the bomb from about 100 yds away using a command wire, and witnesses reported hearing automatic fire immediately prior to the explosion. The blast was heard at least 10 miles away. The Provisional IRA's Tyrone brigade claimed responsibility for the bombing shortly after, saying that the workers were killed because they were "collaborating" with "the forces of occupation".

To date, no one has been convicted in connection with the bomb attack. It is important not to have a hierarchy of victims, and no murder is any more deserving of investigation than another. We will continue to remember those who lost their life during the Troubles, and I again highlight the importance of bringing any knowledge and information about the activity of terrorists during the Troubles to the police. To those cowards who ran away that day — they did run away — if you are still on this earth, there will not be a day that you will not think about what you have done — not one day when you will not think about what you did. There will not be a night when your head touches the pillow that you do not think about what you did.

To those who think that there was no alternative, I say this: there was. Those who carried out that attack may have escaped justice in this world, but they will most certainly not escape it in the next.

The men who were killed that day were Gary Bleeks, Cecil Caldwell, Robert Dunseith, Oswald Gilchrist, David Harkness, Bobby Irons, Richard McConnell and Nigel McKee.

Ms Nicholl: The skills shortages that we face in Northern Ireland are one of the most significant blocks to our future economic growth. We have serious vacancy levels, and, according to the Audit Office, more than one in three of those vacancies is attributable to the skills gap. It estimates that that results in a loss of over £700 million gross value added every year. We cannot afford to ignore that substantial economic impact.

One UK Government initiative aimed at addressing those issues is the apprenticeship levy. However, that initiative does not work for us here. The levy requires many employers to contribute 0·5% of their payroll to apprenticeship funding. As stated by the Institute of Directors in 2023, Northern Ireland businesses contribute around £60 million as a result of that levy. Despite contributing, Northern Ireland does not directly receive funding from it.

This is a critical issue that needs to be addressed. We must be more creative and innovative in how we get the right skills into our economy to support further growth. Devolution of the apprenticeship levy would allow us to reinvest that funding much more directly into skills redevelopment, addressing those gaps in a way that could be adapted to our local needs and priorities. In particular, we could focus on the skills required to support and expand the green economy. There is no green growth without green skills, and the ability to adapt and tailor investment locally would allow us to develop the skills that we need in our economy and to contribute to our net zero obligation.

Growing our skills base has the potential not just to unlock job opportunities but to transform living standards, boost the economy and increase employment. The devolution of the apprenticeship levy could therefore be critical in helping us to deliver economic growth and support people into work. I will write to the Economy Minister and the UK Government on this issue in the coming days and will continue to work alongside my colleague Sorcha Eastwood MP in Westminster to deliver a fairer, more effective model to support skills development in Northern Ireland.

Mr McGuigan: I rise to voice my concerns about the introduction of the electronic travel authorisation (ETA), an unnecessary barrier to travel by visitors to this island that is being imposed upon us by the British Government. The ETA requirement will mean that all non-European travellers will have to apply and pay for a digital permission to visit here. The ETA comes with a processing delay of three working days after application that will, effectively, end spontaneous travel northwards.

Around 70% of tourists arrive in Ireland via Dublin, so there can be no doubt that the ETA will cause detriment and harm to the tourism and hospitality industry, tour operators, accommodation and transport providers and our many excellent restaurants, cafes, shops and bars, threatening the significant revenue that our local economy currently enjoys from those visitors. Recently, that value to our economy was estimated to be around £210 million over a 12-month period. The Economy Minister, Conor Murphy, has raised the issue directly with the British Home Office, urging it to listen to the concerns put forward by the sector here in the North and pointing out that this island of Ireland is marketed internationally as one entity and that tourism has been the success story of the peace process and should be protected. The ETA jeopardises years of progress, and we must continue to challenge it. To ensure that we can maximise our tourism potential and continue to grow our economy, it is vital that an exemption from the ETA requirements be agreed for tourists wishing to travel throughout the island of Ireland. There can be no further delays. Tourism and hospitality businesses need action now.

Mr T Buchanan: Last Thursday, 9 January 2025, marked the 35th anniversary of the cold, callous, premeditated, brutal murder of Olven Kilpatrick, a young businessman in Castlederg. Olven was a family man, a businessman and a part-time UDR soldier, and he was highly regarded and respected by all who knew him in his community.

Just before 5.30 that evening in 1990, when the shops were closing up for the day, Olven Kilpatrick was serving two ladies in his thriving business, a shoe shop, when two hooded and masked IRA men walked into the shop and shot him at close range. As he lay mortally wounded, the two bloodthirsty murderers, not content with the murderous act, planted a bomb in a shoebox, which exploded while police and army were securing the area, injuring two RUC officers and setting the shop alight, resulting in the Fire Brigade being unable to retrieve the body until the blaze was brought under control at 10.00 pm.

Within five minutes of that brutal act of premeditated murder, the IRA gangsters were in their safe haven across the border in the Irish Republic, while another family in Castlederg was left without a husband and father and the community of Castlederg was once again plunged into shock and mourning at the brutal and callous murder of an innocent businessman. That is what, the First Minister for all has said, there was no alternative to: a young wife, widowed; children growing up without a father figure in the home; and an elderly mother in mourning for her beloved son. How anyone can justify a statement of "no alternative" to such an atrocity is beyond comprehension and must be called out for what it is.

Olven Kilpatrick is only one of the 23 people who were murdered in Castlederg, and, today, not one person has been brought to justice for those murders. Today, I salute the memory of Olven Kilpatrick. I thank God that he was a man who had a personal faith in the Lord Jesus Christ — he is with him today — but we will never forget the men and women who were brutally murdered by the IRA and the price that their families had to pay.

Ms McLaughlin: Last month, I launched the online consultation for my private Member's Bill on regional economic balance. I am grateful to all those who have responded to date and to those who will do so during the period of consultation. It is a cause that is close to my heart, as many people will know, and, to me, the law is long overdue.

Recently, I looked back at the 2011-15 draft Programme for Government. It talks about:

and contains specific interventions for places in my council area such as Fort George and Ebrington, but words are cheap. It lacks any mention of transformational legislation. We know that regional inequalities are still a running sore, more than 10 years later; in fact, poverty indices show that the gaps are getting wider. For many, that sounds all too familiar. The places that the Bill intends to help deserve better than the same thing simply being done over and over again.

Everyone knows that I am never shy about standing up for my home city. It is our second city, and, in order for the whole of Northern Ireland to grow, it makes sense that we invest in a place with such huge potential. If we turn a blind eye to the wider north-west, the whole of Northern Ireland suffers, but the Bill is for every area of Northern Ireland that has been left behind. We are all too aware that it is simply a myth to say that everywhere east of the Bann prospers while everywhere west of the Bann suffers. Our economy is much more complex than that. Yes, our city — the second city — demands urgent intervention, but it is also important to say that there are areas of Belfast that face deeply rooted disadvantage. I am looking at my colleague across the Chamber from North Belfast. There are areas of Tyrone and Fermanagh that feel cut off from being able to get ahead, and there are areas of Newry, Mourne and Down where poverty is still too high. The Bill is for every area that is left behind so that our economy can work for everyone.

As the consultation progresses, we will publish our proposals on the specific case, as we see it, for legislation. I look forward to engaging with Members from across the House as we do so. We seek to build an economy that works for all of our constituents. I ask Members to have a look at the consultation and to, please, respond. The consultation closes on 16 February.

Mr Gaston: The vote on the protocol that was held in the Chamber just before Christmas was the most significant vote in Northern Ireland's history. Never before had the representatives of the people of the Province been asked to sign away their right to shape the laws to which they are subject. Yet, on that occasion alone, for the first time in 50 years, the vote was decided on a simple majoritarian basis.

Of course, even before the vote took place, everyone knew what the outcome would be, because of the nationalist and republican alliance in the House. Having trashed the principle of cross-community consent on a key issue, the EU was happy to leave the completion of the process to its lackeys in Stormont, who duly delivered for it.

Such an outcome was entirely predictable. However, before the restoration of devolution, the unionist people were told that they had nothing to worry about on that score, because, if there was not cross-community support for the protocol, that would trigger a review. That review was announced last week, and its terms of reference were published. Of course, some people were not interested in what the review was going to do and say. The Alliance Party, for example, put out a statement about what Lord Murphy should do two hours before the Northern Ireland Office (NIO) got round to sending a copy of the terms of reference to anyone, including the House of Commons Library. Regardless, I trust that some in the House will be interested in what the review says.

I draw Members' attention to paragraph 3.5:

While the protocol required a simple majority in the Chamber, the review, which has been triggered by the lack of cross-community support, requires cross-community support for any of its recommendations. There was no veto for unionists in December, but there is a veto for nationalists in January. Such double standards will serve only to underscore the feeling in my community that the process of which the Chamber and the Executive are a central plank is loaded against unionism at every turn.

Will anyone on the Benches to my right repeat the claims that that party used to justify its return to a terrorist-inclusive Executive? Once more, unionists have been treated as fools. Either the DUP was conned on the issue or, shamefully, it sought to con the unionist people. Members, either way, the result is shameful.

Mr Carroll: I am raising the issue of tenancy succession for Housing Executive tenants. In recent days, I have been contacted at my office by multiple West Belfast residents who are being evicted after suffering a family bereavement. That is completely unfair and counterproductive. The Housing Executive has been dragging its tenants through court to try to claw back homes under its succession policy.

It is important that social housing use is maintained and protected and that an avenue for people to have somewhere to live is kept open for all sorts of obvious reasons, not least because people are being ripped off by the cost of private rent in Belfast, which has reached over £1,000 per month. The Housing Executive should be preventing people from being made homeless rather than adding to homelessness figures by turfing people out of their homes. It defies belief that it should happen to anyone in any constituency, but someone in my constituency with a visual impairment is being evicted from a home that was adapted to suit her needs. Another person in the Beechmount/Clonard area is being kicked out of a Housing Executive home despite there being at least 200 empty homes in that area.

The current succession policy, introduced in 2022 by the then Communities Minister, Deirdre Hargey, does not work. It is unfair, and it disproportionately affects children, women, people with disabilities and those from a Catholic background. It causes havoc in communities and is tearing up the social fabric of communities and the connections that people have made over years and generations. This reasonable question could be asked: how many people are impacted by that policy? The Minister has told us that he does not have the figures. I seriously doubt that.

The Assembly declared a housing emergency a matter of months ago. This issue is part of the housing emergency. I support the call of the Community Action Tenants Union (CATU), Participation and the Practice of Rights (PPR), An Dream Dearg and many other organisations in calling for an end to evictions, an end to the eviction of Housing Executive tenants and a review of the current outdated policy. I will put that call directly to the Housing Executive in a matter of days.

Mr McCrossan: Over the Christmas period, our emergency departments featured strongly on the news daily. Each of us was inundated over the Christmas period by messages from worried constituents whose loved ones, perhaps vulnerable family members, were sitting in overcrowded emergency departments. Some people waited for prolonged periods on seats, often in pain and without getting the attention that they needed and deserved.

There is no dignity whatsoever in an emergency department. You are exposed entirely in your very vulnerable state while in a very stressful environment. A person who is unwell and sick goes there as a last resort. Believe me, it is becoming more and more of a last resort for people, because many often try to avoid our emergency departments. It really is getting worse. We talk about the state of the emergency departments every year, yet they seem to get worse. The situation seems to worsen, and our staff seem to be under even more strain and pressure. As a result, we will see a significant increase in sickness rates among staff and in people not taking up important posts in emergency departments, so the unfolding crisis will worsen.

The emergency department in Altnagelvin, in particular, can only be described as an absolute disgrace, to be honest. People are expected to go there and sit in an overcrowded and busy environment. They include those with mental issues; people who are intoxicated from drugs and alcohol; vulnerable elderly people, some of whom have no family members to support them, who are scared — that is the word that has been used to me — sitting there; and dementia patients, who have to sit in that environment without proper support. There is access to one toilet — one toilet — in the emergency department in Altnagelvin. That is an absolute shambles.

It is time that the Western Health and Social Care Trust, the Department of Health, the Minister and the Executive collectively got a handle on the situation, because, to be very blunt, it affects each and every one of our families. People do not go to an emergency department to sit there for no reason; they go there because they are seriously ill. Unfortunately, people are dying in emergency departments, because they are not being triaged, triaged appropriately or seen on time. They are being left on seats for hours.

Unfortunately, over the past few months, there has been a huge increase in the number complaints that I have been dealing with about how people have been treated in emergency departments. That is not down to the staff. The problem is that, for every problem, the solution from GPs, mental health services and everybody else is, "Go to the emergency department". It is an absolute shambles, and it is getting worse. We need to get a handle on it. It affects each and every one of us in the House, our family members, our grandparents, our parents and our children. It is time that we dealt with that very serious problem.

Mr Speaker: Thank you. That brings to a conclusion Members' statements. I ask Members to take their ease before we move to the next item of business.

Ms McLaughlin: I beg to move

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: The Business Committee has agreed to allow up to one hour for the debate. The proposer of the motion will have five minutes to propose and five minutes to make a winding-up speech. As an amendment has been selected and published on the Marshalled List, the Business Committee has agreed that eight minutes will be added to the total time for the debate. Before I invite Ms McLaughlin to open the debate, I wish to inform the Assembly that the Justice Minister is not able to be in the Chamber today and junior Minister Reilly will respond on behalf of the Executive. Sinéad, please open the debate on the motion.

Ms McLaughlin: Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.

I begin by putting on record my horror and deep concern over the epidemic of violence against women and girls that continues to plague Northern Ireland. It is a subject that we have discussed many times in the Chamber, and it continues to blight the lives of far too many women and girls in our communities.

In 2023, 33,000 domestic abuse incidents were reported to the police. That is 33,000 individuals who have gone through the most unimaginable horror and who will have to go through an incredibly difficult healing process. We all know, however, that that is only the tip of the iceberg. The wider consequences that many children and families have to endure as a result of the trauma of domestic abuse and violence are really affecting our society. No part of this island has been untouched by the epidemic of violence. We have seen an unprecedented amount of violence throughout our towns and city centres that has left women and girls fearing for their safety and unable to leave their home. That is unacceptable in a modern society.

The ending of violence against women and girls is not just a policy matter but a moral obligation for all Members. We must ensure that that violence is stamped out so that women and girls are no longer subjected to it. The recent publication of the ending violence against women and girls strategy represents a step in the right direction. The strategy focuses on important aspects of the issue, such as prevention, protection and justice. It will, however, ultimately fall short of generating the real change that we need to see if we do not address critical legislative gaps.

That is why the full implementation of the Gillen review must continue. As has been said many times before, that comprehensive piece of work offers us the potential to transform how the justice system responds to sexual and domestic violence. Although admirable progress has been made in some areas, some of his recommendations remain unfulfilled. Reform of the reasonable belief defence and pretrial jury education are absolutely needed.

The reasonable belief defence has allowed subjective excuses to shield offenders from facing the consequences of their actions. We saw that play out in the 2018 rugby rape trial, as the defendants, who were ultimately found not guilty, argued their innocence based on the presumed belief that the victim had consented. We must introduce a robust and objective standard that ensures that perpetrators cannot easily claim ignorance of whether consent was given. Not only would such reform better protect victims but it would help strengthen public confidence in the justice system.

Restoring public confidence and addressing societal issues and attitudes through a form of pretrial jury education is also an integral part of the Gillen review. Research has previously found that the conclusions of juries are sometimes determined, at least in part, by jurors' previously held beliefs instead of on evidence and actual deliberations. In trials, we must ensure that informed decision-making happens that is based on facts, not on stereotypes and myths. As with many things, education can be the greatest tool to deal with an issue, and that is why we are calling for pretrial jury education. The road to eradicating violence against women and girls is long, but it must be one that encompasses the whole of society through education and awareness campaigns that challenge deeply entrenched misogynistic attitudes.

The motion gives the Assembly the opportunity to dedicate its support to the countless women and girls who have suffered because of violence and systemic failures. Such support and reform cannot be achieved by the Department of Justice alone. Rather, it must be the responsibility of the Executive to deliver. It is time for us to come together to ensure that the motion translates into tangible progress, delivering justice and safety for women and girls right across Northern Ireland.

Ms Bunting: I beg to move the following amendment:

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Joanne. You have five minutes in which to propose the amendment and three minutes in which to make a winding-up speech. All other contributors will have three minutes.

Ms Bunting: Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. We agree with the thrust of the motion but have sought to add another layer to the process by inserting the need for consultation. The issues and rights are very sensitive, difficult and finely balanced, and it is imperative that everybody — complainants, victims, witnesses, defendants, families and society as a whole — can have confidence in the law, the justice system, due process and the right to a fair trial. Gillen came in post the rugby trial.

We are years further on, and there has been considerable learning since that was introduced. Society has moved on in some ways with regard to relationships and intimacy, so it would be helpful for the public to have their say.

From the outset, I wish to be clear that we in the DUP are committed to supporting measures that improve experiences of the criminal justice system for victims of violent and sexual crime throughout Northern Ireland. In particular, we want to raise confidence among women and girls who are victims of such abuse to pursue prosecutions, bring their perpetrators to justice and obtain the support that they need. Consultation, engagement and building a clear and informed evidence base for moving forward are necessary also to uphold the right to a fair trial for defendants in such cases. That said, our proposal for consultation should in no way be regarded as an attempt to delay or limit progress towards providing better support to victims of violence against women and girls.

A sexual attack or sexual abuse is, to my mind, one of the worst things that can happen to a person; it is life-changing. Likewise, to be wrongly accused is also devastating and life-changing. That is why any move that we make must ensure that the balance within a trial setting is right and that the pendulum does not swing in one direction or the other. The focus must be on due process in which everybody concerned, and everybody looking on, can have confidence. Therefore, with regard to the defence of reasonable belief, however we move, we need to be very clear about what exactly in law is a failure to ascertain consent. Also, rather than on a case-by-case basis, which can be a moveable feast, there should be a degree of certainty about what constitutes an offence and a breach of the law. There needs to be clarity about what are the reasonable steps to ascertain consent, and what constitutes a failure to take them — not just for jurors, the judiciary and lawyers but for society.

People navigating relationships in this difficult age need to be clear what the law is and what will be regarded as a crime. In some cases, it will be incredibly obvious. Unfortunately, those are not the cases that these recommendations seek to address. Moreover, in difficult cases, it is often likely that judgement on one or both sides will be impaired by drugs or alcohol. In those circumstances, it is going to very difficult for jurors to establish, one way or another, what the position is on consent, so there needs to be a discussion as to whether everything around this can be more straightforward and clearer. Additionally, consultation would prove valuable in that it should focus the public's mind on the issue of consent and allow for public discourse.

On rape myths education, a number of steps have already been taken by the Lady Chief Justice and the Courts and Tribunals Service to advance Gillen's recommendations for the trial education of jurors, particularly in respect of legal responsibilities in the use of social media. We welcome that, as will those who are affected by cases. The outstanding commitment to provide jurors with rape trial myth education materials engages sensitive issues. We agree that Northern Ireland should await the findings and insight from the pilot in England and allow those to inform us. We will need to be clear what rape myths are, and what exactly the jury is being educated in. Jury education is fundamental and has immense power to sway or determine the outcome of any case. Therefore, it must be done in such a way that it does not constitute putting a thumb on the scale either way. Again, consultation is helpful and allows the public to engage in the debate, keeping those issues to the fore.

Whilst the motion focuses on two discrete elements that impact on the handling of prosecutions relating to violence against women and girls, there is one further point that I wish to make. We must remember that this is a societal problem requiring a collaborative, whole-society approach. Also, it should not be the case that the Executive's strategic framework on ending violence against women and girls translates into lesser focus and a lack of urgency on the part of the police, the criminal justice system and society in tackling harm against male victims of this terrible abuse.

However we proceed, we must do so with due care and diligence. It is essential that we get this right. Sexual offence cases are complex to investigate and prosecute, and we must enable and encourage victims to seek justice, ensure that prosecutors have the opportunity and tools to bring forward these cases, and equip jurors and the judiciary with an informed and impartial understanding of the law in these areas. We must ensure that everyone with a stake in the criminal justice system is treated equitably and fairly. The recent, steady, long-term picture of sexual offence prosecutions —

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Time is up.

Ms Bunting: — must not be undermined by legislation that adds confusion or complexity. Ultimately, it is critical that the guilty are convicted but crucial that the innocent are acquitted.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Time is up.

Ms Bunting: I urge Members to support the amendment.

Ms Sheerin: I support the motion. The last time I spoke about the issue in the Chamber was on 21 October last year, at which time I lamented the fact that, in the previous eight years, 42 women had been murdered in the North. Even since then, another woman has been murdered here, and, at this time, I send my condolences to the family and friends of Karen Cummings. Just three days ago, we learned of the murder of another woman, Annie Heyneman, just across the border in County Cavan. Again, I send my thoughts and sympathies to all who have been affected by that. All of that is to say that we can barely get through an Assembly recess period without the murder of a woman or girl in this part of the world. These headlines have now become the norm here, but nothing about this is normal, and we need to reflect on that.

The North of Ireland is the most dangerous place in Europe to be a woman, and the most dangerous place to be a woman in the North of Ireland is in her own home. Most of these women are murdered within their own houses by people whom they know. Again, the statistics tell us that the most at-risk time for a woman in an abusive relationship is when she attempts to leave that relationship, yet still we hear: "Why was she with him? What did she stay for?" That is why she stayed. It does not begin with busted lips or black eyes or broken glasses. It does not begin with another of the headlines that are less and less shocking as they build up. It does not begin with a murder. We know that there is a pyramid of violence against women and girls. It begins in playgrounds. It begins in changing rooms. It begins within the confines of group chats, memes, innuendoes and remarks, and there is a running commentary that overtly sexualises women, dehumanises an entire section of our society and reduces an awful lot of women to the sum of their body parts — body parts that, ultimately, they do not own, because they end up another statistic.

At this point, I take the opportunity to send solidarity to our former colleague in the House, the Alliance MP, Sorcha Eastwood, for her incredibly brave statement the other day, which I am sure that many of you will have seen. It was so commendable for her to speak so openly about her experience, and I am sure that there is not a woman in the Building who will not have found herself relating to some of the words that Sorcha sadly expressed.

There is a duty on all of us to work together to end this phenomenon, and I am glad that the strategy is going to work.

Ms Egan: I stand today to make some of my first remarks in a debate in 2025. Despite it being the new year, we are unfortunately faced with the same problems. My colleagues and I are still filled with the same horror and concern at the epidemic of violence facing women and girls in Northern Ireland, which, in 2025, is still one of the most dangerous places to be a woman.

The Gillen review has made good progress over recent years despite the stop-start nature of our government, and I commend the work of Justice Minister, Naomi Long, in enabling her Department to deliver on that. I was pleased to learn recently in a Justice Committee meeting that 195 out of 253 recommendations from the Gillen review have been actioned or partially actioned, with plans to bring forward much of the remaining needed actions by the end of the mandate. The Gillen review action plan was published in 2020 and, since then, for two years of that time, the Assembly was down. It is welcome that we are making the progress that we need to make on the issue.

The motion deals substantively with two aspects of the Gillen review recommendations: pretrial jury education and the legal definition of "reasonable belief". I will respond to each of those separately in the limited time that I have.

It is imperative that we put in place a legal definition of "reasonable belief" to create an increasingly victim-centred definition of consent in the law. The Gillen review made a series of recommendations on how to improve the current definition of "reasonable belief" in the Sexual Offences (Northern Ireland) Order 2008. I welcome the fact that, although this matter is complex and needs to be sensitively considered, proposals are planned to be developed by the end of the mandate. A more informed definition of consent is key if we are to ensure that our legislation is inherently victim-centred and trauma-informed.

As the motion notes, the Gillen review also made recommendations on pretrial jury education. There is a lot of evidence to suggest that rape myths influence every stage of the criminal legislative process, and some individuals are likely to allow that to impact on their judgement while acting as jurors. Although it is crucial that there is some form of education, we must accept that a Minister cannot direct how the judiciary operates in the courtroom and that training for the judiciary is at the discretion of the Lady Chief Justice.

Mr Dickson: I thank the Member for giving way. Does she agree, given that she referred the fact that judicial training is the key element in all this, that our judges need to have a clear understanding of what is front of them and that the Lady Chief Justice has a clear responsibility to ensure that that training is rolled out to all our judges?

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

Ms Egan: Thank you. Yes, I absolutely agree and align myself with those comments.

Ultimately, we need a legal system that places victims at the centre. Hopefully, one thing that we can all agree on across the Chamber is that introducing pretrial education and reforming the definition of reasonable belief are steps that we can take to do so.

I have very little time, but I will touch on the wider issue of violence against women and girls. It is endemic in our society, and we need a whole-society approach to tackle it. It is an issue not just for the Department of Justice; the ending violence against women and girls strategy recognises that we need cross-departmental collaboration and initiatives across the Executive, local government and in our communities. Since 2020, 25 women have been murdered in Northern Ireland, and evidence shows that 98% of women have experienced at least one form of violence or abuse in their lifetime. That has to stop, and we all need to work together to end it.

Mr Beattie: Violence against women and girls and serious sexual offences in particular are an issue that we will have to face head-on. Lots of Members have mentioned the fact that it is a cross-departmental issue — it is not just for Justice but for Health, Education and the Executive Office. The framework for ending violence and abuse against women and girls is welcome. I added the word "abuse" because it is not just about violence; there is abuse as well. Violence starts with something else, and the word "abuse" needs to be added. However, in delivery, the Executive Office must be far more robust than what I am witnessing from it now. Throwing money to local councils to do something about ending violence against women and girls is, in principle, good practice. However, in reality, the councils are bidding for money without a joined-up plan on how best to use it. That makes it absolutely ineffectual, so we need to look at that.

The motion is absolutely welcome, and, of course, the Ulster Unionist Party will support it. It raises a couple of issues. For me, the first is education. Education is at the heart of how we deal with ending violence against women and girls. That education must be delivered at every level — in our schools, in our workplaces, to our public services and in various arms of government. Via education, it is important that young men — it is predominantly for young men but not confined to them — understand what sexual consent means. There can be no ambiguity and no blanket "reasonable belief" defence. There must be detail, guidance and legislation to assist our judiciary. Our judiciary needs compulsory continuous training if judges are to fully understand the issues faced by women and girls. Their language should reflect that understanding. We were all outraged by the judge who told a convicted sex offender to "find a wife" in his summing up. That was awful. There must be pretrial education for jurors on sexual offence trials or if there are any aspects of a trial that may include matters of a sexual nature. That pretrial training must be substantial and not a training package that says, "Watch a video". The judge must be curious about it.

The second issue is sentencing. We must use sentencing as a means of saying to people, "This is not acceptable". The processing time for sexual offences in Northern Ireland is approximately 675 days. Our criminal justice system is too slow and too weak, and we need to do something more. We need to stop talking about ending violence against women and girls —

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Your time is up.

Mr Beattie: — and start acting to stop violence against women and girls. Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Doug.

Ms Ennis: I thank the Members who tabled the motion for the opportunity to discuss this important topic. Violence against women and girls casts a long shadow over our society. It is a subject that we cannot afford to ignore, particularly here in the North where statistics are alarming and heartbreaking. As has been outlined, five more women and girls were murdered between October and December 2024. Violence against women is not just a private tragedy; it is a public crisis. Every act of abuse, whether it be physical, emotional or sexual, ripples through our families, our communities and our collective consciousness. In the North, police reports reveal the stark reality that incidents of domestic abuse are at a record level. That is not just a statistic; these are real lives: women waking up each day in fear; children growing up in households in which safety is a fragile dream; and communities struggling under the weight of silence and stigma. The impact is profound. Economically, the cost of gender-based violence drains resources from our health service, our justice system and our social care system; socially, it erodes trust and perpetuates inequality, reinforcing cycles of abuse that we are morally obliged to break; and emotionally, it leaves scars that linger for generations.

We must speak of hope, however, and we must give hope, because change is possible. Across the North, organisations, advocates and survivors are raising their voices to challenge outdated attitudes and demand better protections. We need to support them, not just with words but with actions. Like my colleague, I commend those who, inside and outside the Chamber, recently and previously, raised their voices and spoke about their experiences. I say to those who may not be able to speak about their experiences at this time that they will be believed and supported. That is why I am proud that Sinn Féin and the Executive have made ending violence against women and girls a priority. Michelle O'Neill recently outlined the Executive's delivery plan for that, which will be accompanied, in the first instance, by a £3 million fund for change.

Eradicating the scourge of violence against women and girls means having better education and robust legislation and ensuring that resources for prevention and support are prioritised. Above all, we need to confront the cultural underpinnings of such violence: the normalisation of misogyny, the silence that enables abuse and the lack of accountability for perpetrators. Let us never forget that every woman has the right to live free from fear. Every one of us has a role to play in making that a reality. Together, we can create a new society and a new Ireland in which violence against women is not just addressed but eradicated. I want my family, my sister, my friends, my colleagues and my daughters to live in a place where every woman feels valued, protected and empowered. I want that for myself as well. That is our right — it is the right of every woman — and we need to make sure that it is the reality for every woman.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Sinéad.

Mr Dunne: I welcome the opportunity to speak on this important issue. The statistics around violence against women and girls are truly shocking and totally unacceptable. The sad reality is that the figures may not even be an accurate or up-to-date reflection of where we are with this terrible issue. The figures may not demonstrate the true scale of the problem, as, tragically, many cases of domestic and sexual abuse go unreported due to fear and coercive control. As has been said, not even a home is always a safe place. This issue is a scourge that cannot and must not be ignored. Every life lost, every harrowing account of an incident and every family left devastated by such acts of violence call us to act decisively. I hope that the measures that are being discussed today can have a positive impact on female and male victims of gender-based violence as we seek to eradicate a scourge that affects every corner of Northern Ireland.

The Justice Minister must take clear, affirmative action to ensure that our laws and the justice system are robust enough to protect victims, deliver justice and send a clear message that that kind of violence has no place in our society. A key part of the process is supportive measures that increase confidence amongst women and girls who are victims of such abuse to pursue prosecutions and bring perpetrators to justice. I welcome the work that has been undertaken by the Justice Department and the Executive Office, including the recent investment through the local change fund, which was announced this month, in collaboration with councils. That is a positive step forward and something on which to build.

Unfortunately, evidence from the Commissioner Designate for Victims of Crime through the recent victims' survey suggests that confidence in our criminal justice system is currently lacking, with 50% of victims reported as being "dissatisfied" or "very dissatisfied" with how they were treated. Meanwhile, 77% of those who responded to the survey reported that they were not given enough support during their court experience. Those startling realities are a reminder of the need to do better. The lack of support and confidence in our system will only discourage victims from coming forward. There is certainly a clear body of work to be done to improve everyone's experience of our justice system.

Our amendment, which was ably proposed by my colleague from East Belfast Joanne Bunting, seeks to ensure that any changes in approach are firmly grounded in careful assessment and prior consultation. Doing so will ensure that protections are improved for victims while maintaining the important right to a fair trial.

I acknowledge the valuable work carried out daily to support women who have experienced violence. I have seen in my constituency how valuable the live-saving and life-changing work of organisations such as Women's Aid is. Legislation alone cannot —

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Time is up.

Mr Dunne: — address the epidemic. Education, prevention and support services must go hand in hand with urgent legal reform.

Mr Dickson: I thank the Opposition for bringing this important motion to the House today. We stand here confronted with a harsh truth: violence against women and girls in Northern Ireland is not just a problem; it is an epidemic. Statistics show that women in Northern Ireland will face at least one form of gender-based violence or abuse in their lifetime. More than two thirds will have at least one experience of unwanted sexual contact during higher education alone. That is a harrowing and shameful statistic. It represents a collective failure to educate perpetrators, protect survivors and deliver justice.

I send my best wishes to my party colleague the Justice Minister. As Members will know, she was struggling with a cold yesterday. She has shown remarkable leadership in this area. I thank her for the work that she has done. Her Department has overseen many critical reforms, particularly those from the Gillen review, which continues to address some of the failings of our justice system in handling serious sexual offences. The establishment of the sexual offences legal adviser has provided more than 2,000 adult survivors with vital access to legal advice and support. That will soon be extended to children, making sure that their voices are heard in the courtroom. The creation of remote evidence centres, which I visited during my tenure on the Justice Committee, has provided so many vulnerable witnesses, including children, with a safe and comfortable space in which to give their best evidence by video link. Those centres supported more than 300 people in 2024.

Those strides are in the right direction, but there is a long way to go. The Gillen review has laid bare the systemic issues and the changes that are needed to deliver justice and support for survivors, but some recommendations remain outstanding. Reforming the legal definition of "reasonable belief" in consent must be considered urgently. The current legislation fails to understand consent and leaves far too much room for ambiguity and dangerous assumptions. Likewise, we must do as much as we can to create a system that does not re-traumatise survivors or dismiss their experiences. The introduction of pretrial education is a vital step that must be prioritised. Myths and stereotypes continue to pervade public understanding and courtroom decisions. Educating jurors before they hear cases would be a simple but powerful step in ensuring that justice is based on facts rather than misconceptions.

The DUP amendment risks undermining the progress that has been made so far and further delaying the reforms that are so urgently needed. The Gillen review was built on extensive consultation with survivors, experts and stakeholders. Having more consultation at this stage would only further stall the urgent reforms that survivors deserve. Therefore —

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Time.

Mr Dickson: — the Alliance Party and I cannot support the amendment today.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Time is up.

Mr Dickson: Thank you very much, Principal Deputy Speaker.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Stewart. I appreciate that.

Ms D Armstrong: I welcome the motion that has been moved in the Chamber this morning. Many Members have articulated clearly the horrifying impact of violence against women and girls, but it is a societal issue that, even with the parameters of the Assembly, we cannot truly come to grips with.

Twenty-five women have been murdered in Northern Ireland since 2020. Worse than that, since 1996, 272 women in the Republic of Ireland have met a violent death, the most recent a woman in Ballyconnell. To her family I send my sincere sympathy. Those women are not just names; they were people with families, friends and lives to live that were brutally cut short. They must not be forgotten, and we must tackle the ever-rising rate of femicide. However, we cannot let emotions cloud our judgement. We must legislate carefully and ensure that what is done is practical and is not rushed and impotent.

The experience of female students at university here shows that 67% of that cohort have had at least one unwanted sexual experience. That is not to mention the many victims of spiking in clubs or bars or those who are catcalled and harassed in the street after dark. Those actions represent a vile and pervading misogynistic underbelly that is prevalent in society.

There has been a systematic failure to safeguard women and girls on such issues. Indeed, we have seen just recently how, in England, victims of grooming gangs have been failed by the refusal of the Labour Government to set up a public inquiry. It is imperative that we do not allow something as sick and gut-wrenching as organised grooming gangs to operate here. Those gangs and perpetrators of such heinous and depraved crimes must be apprehended and should face the full force of the law.

We desperately need transparency on what the Justice Ministry is doing to stop gender-based violence. That Ministry is the primary institution responsible for upholding justice and protecting citizens, so the answers must come from the Minister. Women and girls are terrified in their own homes and in their places of work and education. Those are places where women and girls should feel safe to flourish, but, instead, they must live in fear. In Northern Ireland, the PSNI receives a call related to domestic violence every 17 minutes. The onus of protecting women against violence and abuse has seemingly been left to women themselves. They police themselves on where they can and cannot go without someone knowing where they are or having someone go with them.

To address the amendment, there is a distinct need for consultation before implementation to ensure that pretrial jury education does not bias the jury. Moreover, consultation allows stakeholders and support groups to have input on important legislation, while providing educational content that is relevant and does not overwhelm jurors. There is a desperate need for consultation on the legal framework for reasonable belief in consent, as it can vary in interpretation, leading to inconsistencies in court rulings. Consultation helps to refine that definition —

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Time is up, Diana.

Ms D Armstrong: — to ensure that it is clear on consent.

Mr McNulty: I rise to speak on this important SDLP motion calling for immediate actions to put an end to the scourge of violence against women and girls, a scourge that is rampant in our society. The North of Ireland is one of the least safe places to be a woman in all of Europe. That is frightening and shameful, yet, unfortunately, it is not surprising. Violence is embedded in the very fabric of our society, and that has contributed to 25 women being tragically murdered here in the past four years, in most cases by someone known to them. Figures on domestic and sexual abuse paint a similarly disturbing picture, and the experience of victims and survivors pursuing justice through the justice system is shaped by more trauma.

Significant resources have been put into reviews and strategies, and we know what is needed to improve the system, so why is it not being done? Almost six years since the Gillen review was published, we still wait for many of the recommendations to be fully implemented. The pace of change has been far too slow, and people here are facing the consequences of that inaction. The Gillen review calls for the defining of what does and does not constitute consent. I urge the Minister of Justice to bring forward the recommended changes to the existing legal definition of consent to ensure that victims of sexual violence are taken seriously and given the opportunity to pursue justice, unhindered by loose definitions of consent predicated on misogynistic stereotypes.

Similarly, rape myths are all too prevalent across our society. Those stereotypes pervade each step of the justice system and process from the moment that someone decides to come forward to report a crime to the moment that the jury issues a verdict. That is a direct barrier to justice. I would like to know why the Minister has not implemented the numerous recommendations in the report in order to tackle rape myths across society and, in particular, in the justice system. The overarching theme of the review was cultural reform. We must challenge the violent, misogynistic stereotyping and victim-blaming attitudes that are present through all levels of society and have fostered an environment that allows murder, domestic abuse and sexual abuse to take place.

I pay tribute to my colleagues in Newry, Mourne and Down District Council, who brought forward a motion on tackling violence against women and girls. Consequently, the council is leading with 16 training days this year to tackle the issue.

Finally, I want to highlight my concern about the low levels of investment in the ending violence against women and girls strategic framework. Serious reform is required to tackle the issue, yet only £3 million has been allocated thus far. That is totally inadequate given the severity of the issue, and I urge the relevant Executive parties and Departments to make sure that the strategy is fully funded so that it can be effective.

I finish by returning to the 25 women who have been murdered here since 2020. Those 25 women were mothers, daughters, sisters, friends and so much more. My heartfelt sympathies go out to the families of each of those women.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Your time is up, Justin.

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

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: I appreciate that. Thank you very much.

Mr Gaston: I preface my remarks by saying that I listened with some disbelief this morning to the Member from Sinn Féin pontificate about violence against women and girls. There was no such concern shown by the republican movement, which decided that an innocent woman in my constituency, Yvonne Dunlop, should die. There was no pretrial education for the killers of mother of 10, Jean McConville.

Members, we all know the name George Floyd. This Building was lit up in solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement. We all know the name Stephen Lawrence. His family are to be commended for their fight for justice. How many in the Chamber know the names Lucy Lowe, Charlene Downes and Victoria Agoglia, who were all murdered by Pakistani rape gangs? When there was a chance to do something about that issue and call a public inquiry, what did the MPs from the parties represented in this House do? Sinn Féin, the SDLP, Alliance and three of the five DUP MPs were nowhere to be seen. The calls for a national inquiry into abuse by grooming gangs will, however, not go away, nor should they.

I have always been opposed to violence against women and girls. That is not something that the First Minister can bring herself to say. I tabled a question for written answer on 24 September 2024 asking the First Minister and deputy First Minister:

The reply came back two months later:

Members, I am still waiting for an update on a follow-up question, which asked them to provide an answer in the past tense.

That said, I want to explain why I will oppose the motion. My opposition relates to its call for the introduction of pretrial jury education. Jury independence is of paramount importance. Pretrial jury education smacks of trying to shape jury thinking, as per the educator. Importantly, juries in sex cases already get special direction. For example, a juror cannot infer anything from how the victim was dressed. In addition, those juries, like every jury, are directed on the law by the judge before they retire to consider their verdict.

Mr O'Toole: Will the Member give way?

Mr Gaston: Yes.

Mr O'Toole: Does the Member see the contradiction in what he has just said? He said that he does not believe in pretrial education, but he then said that judges direct juries in every criminal trial. Is it not the case that there is, by definition, instruction and education for jurors in every trial? Our motion calls for that to be enhanced, as does the Gillen review.

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

Mr Gaston: I thank the Member for his intervention. The difference is that it is up to the judge to direct within the legal setting rather than somebody who can put their own slant on it. It is carefully managed in the courtroom by the judge, which is not what the motion calls for. There is no stipulation or guidance on what pretrial education would look like. The Member fails to recognise that something being dressed up as education would be in danger of colouring the thinking of the jury, thereby diminishing the independence that comes from the life experience of its members. I want to see an end to violence against women and girls, but I am not in favour of meddling with our tried and tested jury system.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: The next speaker is Gerry Carroll. Gerry, I advise that you have two minutes.

Mr Carroll: Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.

I support the motion. As Members have said, we should be horrified and outraged that 42 women have been murdered in the North in the past eight years. It should be a source of shame for the Executive that no meaningful progress has been made on tackling gender-based violence, the epidemic of which is, unfortunately, getting worse. In 2023 alone, more than 33,000 domestic abuse incidents were recorded. Lip service from Executive parties will not cut it. Women deserve so much more than aspirational —.

Miss McAllister: Will the Member give way?

Mr Carroll: Yes, I will give way.

Miss McAllister: Will the Member recognise that legislation that was introduced in the previous mandate has brought about significant change as a result of the offences with which we can now charge perpetrators? Non-fatal strangulation is just one example. Although I recognise that he is passionate about the issue, as we all are, we must give credit where credit is due to members of the Executive. I am talking not just about the Minister of Justice —

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: OK. Interventions are meant to be brief.

Miss McAllister: — taking the issue seriously.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Excuse me. Interventions are meant to be brief. Unfortunately, Gerry, there is not enough time left in the debate to award you an extra minute.

Mr Carroll: Change has been slow. That is all that I will say, because I have limited time.

I send my solidarity to all women who have been impacted on by violence and threatening and abusive behaviour, including women in the Building who have spoken out in recent days such as the MP for Lagan Valley.

We need to be careful about focusing our language on racial minorities and on thoughts or perceptions that people from the Muslim or Asian communities are perhaps more predisposed to committing violence against women. That is nonsense. It is factually incorrect. It is dangerous language to use and a dangerous road to go down. Across these islands, perpetrators are more likely to be white and, as the Member opposite said, more likely to be a family member or known to the victim. People should therefore be careful about the language that they use in the debate.

Any serious plans to end violence against women and girls must be clearly targeted at the root of gender-based violence. Deep-rooted, institutional misogyny stems from old ideas about women and their bodies being the personal property of men. Those ideas, as outdated as they seem, are —

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Gerry.

Mr Carroll: — still being reinforced by the system today.

I have plenty more to say, but, unfortunately, time is against me.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Yes, unfortunately, it is. Apologies about that. The Business Committee agreed the time that is allowed for the debate.

Junior Minister Reilly, you have 10 minutes in which to respond to the debate.

Ms Reilly (Junior Minister, The Executive Office): Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

I am responding to the debate on behalf of the Minister of Justice, and I wish her well. I know that she will be back in the Chamber as soon as she can.

The Minister is grateful to the leader of the Opposition for tabling the important motion that is before the House. On the DUP amendment, I can confirm that it is the Minister's intention to consult on proposals to clarify the legal definition of what constitutes "reasonable belief in consent" before the end of the current mandate. On pretrial jury education, resources are already available to assist and educate jurors, including written guidance on their legal responsibilities, on contempt of court and on the laws around their use of social media. The judiciary also provides oral directions on social media use and on rape myths. The Minister will continue to keep under review whether further actions and/or resources could enhance jury education and will consult as appropriate.

The Minister wants to make it absolutely clear that all violence against women and girls is completely unacceptable, and she knows that all Members are deeply appalled by the increase in violence against women in recent months. There must be a collective effort from across society and across all Departments, not just Justice, to address the issues. That is why it is right that we in the Executive Office have lead responsibility for the delivery of the strategic framework for ending violence against women and girls.

The Department of Justice has an important contribution to make, however. It is making that contribution, particularly through its work to address domestic and sexual abuse and through its delivery of the Gillen review recommendations. The domestic and sexual abuse strategy, which was launched in September 2024, sets out a range of specific actions that are intended to create lasting change and, fundamentally, to keep those who are at risk from domestic and sexual abuse, including women and girls, safer. Clearly, there is interdependence between that work and the Executive Office's strategic framework for ending violence against women and girls. The Justice Minister will ensure that her Department continues to work in partnership with TEO and other Departments to deliver positive change.

For the First Minister, the deputy First Minister, junior Minister Cameron and me, ending violence against women and girls has been a day-1 priority. We are determined to work with our Executive colleagues and with the groups and organisations that already do sterling work on the ground to end the scourge of violence, harm and abuse that has an impact right across our society. The motion focuses particularly on the delivery of the Gillen review programme. That is a critical programme of change that will deliver vital measures for victims of serious sexual offences. We know that women and girls are affected disproportionately, but not exclusively, by such offences.

Of course, the vision set out in the Gillen review cannot be achieved solely by the Department of Justice. The review envisaged societal change that needs a collaborative, cross-Executive response, involving Education and Health and cutting across the Executive Office's responsibility to end violence against women and girls. That collective approach and collective responsibility underpin the Executive's work to build a changed society where women and girls feel safe and are safe everywhere. Collaboration is essential for us to start to build the transformative change that is needed to achieve that aim. The Justice Minister is fully committed to the implementation of the review, and good progress has been made in partnership with others. The focus has been on progressing the recommendations that have the most beneficial impact on victims. In spite of the challenges, DOJ has introduced many measures, services and reforms that deliver real and meaningful improvements for victims of sexual crime.

In practical terms, what is different now? The justice system can be disorientating and difficult to understand, so complainants in sexual offence cases are now able to access new supports, including a domestic and sexual abuse advocacy service and the sexual offences legal adviser (SOLA) scheme, that help to inform and empower complainants by providing a free legal service. The SOLA scheme has helped almost 2,000 complainants to date, and feedback has been overwhelmingly positive. The Justice Minister plans to build on that service by establishing equivalent support for child victims — that service should launch next month — and by legislating to clarify complainants' rights to pretrial third-party legal representation. That would allow SOLAs to represent them in the courtroom in order to object to the disclosure of their private material or the introduction of their previous sexual history.

Many victims say that the most stressful aspect of their criminal justice experience is standing up in a courtroom to give evidence. The Department of Justice has been working to reduce that trauma. New legislation is in place to protect victim anonymity and to exclude members of the public from the courtroom during serious sexual offence trials. In addition, remote evidence facilities have been established in Belfast and Craigavon to reduce trauma and provide a less intimidating, secure venue for giving evidence away from the courthouse. Promotion of the remote evidence centres has led to an increase of over 600% in bookings last year compared with 2023. While it is still early days, it is also noteworthy that, in the past calendar year to 1 November, the conviction rate for completed trials where the witness had opted to use one of the facilities was 92%. Almost half of those convictions were by guilty plea, without the need for the victim to give oral evidence at the trial. The use of the Belfast remote evidence centre for domestic abuse contests has proved equally successful, with, again, a conviction rate of over 90%.

Under the disclosure improvement plan, the PSNI and PPS have led work to improve the operation of the disclosure process, and that is making a significant difference. Training has been delivered to prosecutors and police officers, and new file standards have been agreed. As a result, the volume of prosecution files returned to the PSNI for failing requirements dropped from an average of almost 78% in 2020 to about 11% in 2024. Further measures are planned, and the Department of Justice is consulting on legislative proposals to regulate the disclosure process and enhance protections relating to the disclosure of private information in serious sexual offence cases.

Separate work through a judge-led under-13s protocol is reducing delay in cases that involve young children, which helps to reduce retraumatisation and to allow children to start their recovery journey sooner. Criminal justice organisations that are participating in the protocol have agreed to seek to expedite similar cases involving witnesses aged under 16 years across all court divisions. Wider work that is also improving the experience of child complainants includes dedicated child-friendly remote evidence centre facilities, the imminent launch of children's sexual offence legal advisers and work on improvement in achieving best evidence (ABE). ABE interview training has improved with input from registered intermediaries, child psychologists and members of the legal profession. Appropriate interview suites have also been refurbished, with children's toys or props available where required. An ABE cadre of police officers and social care staff was piloted and proved beneficial.

Other measures are designed to deliver a cultural and organisational change, again to benefit victims. They include the development and roll-out of a trauma-informed training framework to enhance the understanding, skills and sensitivity of those who work with victims of sexual crime in the criminal justice system. The Department of Justice has also worked with the PSNI and the Executive Office to develop a campaign to tackle the underpinning behaviours and attitudes that can fuel sexual offending and gender-based violence. The Minister of Justice anticipates that the campaign will launch later this month.

The motion specifically cites recommendations that relate to reforming the laws around the defence of reasonable belief and introducing pretrial jury education. The Minister of Justice supports the conclusion that legislative steps need to be taken to underpin the key principle of consent as defined in article 3 of the Sexual Offences (Northern Ireland) Order 2008, which states:

The review made a number of recommendations as to how that might be achieved. It remains the Minister's intention to develop relevant policy and legislative proposals before the end of the current mandate.

On pretrial jury education, the review specifically recommended that the judiciary should give clear directions to jurors about the use of social media during trials. While the judiciary is wholly independent, officials in the Department of Justice have engaged extensively with the Lady Chief Justice's office to work collectively on a number of the Gillen recommendations in that area. The Lady Chief Justice's office has advised that guidance on the matter is provided in the judicial bench book, which contains specimen directions for judges to give to the jury.

The Lady Chief Justice has statutory responsibility for the provision of training for the independent judiciary, and judges have received specific training on the matter. It is standard practice for judges to give clear and concise direction to jurors on their legislative obligations on the first day of the trial and as required at the conclusion of each day's hearing. As previously mentioned, the Lady Chief Justice has a statutory responsibility for judicial training and, in relation to raising a jury's awareness of rape myths, the Lady Chief Justice's office has advised that judicial training on such matters is regularly delivered and refreshed. The judiciary provides oral directions about rape myths at the start of sexual offence trials. Those instructions are straightforward and cover everything required. Judges will also intervene during a trial as appropriate.

Mar fhocal scoir, a Phríomh-Leas-Cheann Comhairle

, I reiterate my condemnation of all violence against women and girls. I reaffirm the Minister of Justice's commitment to working with Executive colleagues and other partners to end violence against women and girls and safeguard all those who are at risk from harm. Violence against women and girls is wrong and has no place in our society, and there is something that everyone can do to stop it. It can affect anyone in villages, towns and cities right across our society. My thoughts are with those who have lost their lives to this horrendous epidemic, but also with those who suffer from it every single day. We see you, we hear you, and we will work together to change our society for the better.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Go raibh maith agat as sin.

Thank you, junior Minister.

I call Maurice Bradley to make a winding-up speech on the amendment. I advise Maurice that he has three minutes.

Mr Bradley: Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I support the DUP amendment on the serious issue of violence against women and girls. I highlight the fact that it is a societal problem that must never be tolerated, and it is our collective responsibility to protect the victims.

Legal reforms must be carefully considered, evidence-based and balanced to ensure fairness for victims and the accused. Sexual crime cases often face low conviction rates and difficult legal processes, but progress is being made and there are increasing conviction rates. The focus should be on fair, transparent justice and not just statistics. Education is vital to challenge harmful rape myths, but interventions must be carefully calibrated to reflect juror attitudes. Delays in sexual offence cases cause further harm to the victims. The justice system must be reformed to address inefficiencies and reduce those delays. The laws around consent must be clear and fair for all parties and developed through consultation with victims, legal experts and the accused. Any legal changes, particularly to the reasonable belief defence, must consider the rights of defendants, ensuring a fair and balanced justice system.

Many Members have highlighted the disgust that abides in the Chamber around the issue of violence against women and girls. Sinéad McLaughlin called for greater education to ensure confidence in the justice system. Emma Sheerin made a passionate plea for the case that Northern Ireland is the most unsafe place in Europe and highlighted the fact that 25 women have lost their lives since 2020. Connie Egan said that problems still exist and that, while the Gillen review is welcome, it needs further implementation, and she called for more judicial training. Doug Beattie called for a cross-departmental approach to dealing with the problem, and said that he would add the word "abuse" to the heading "violence against women and girls". He talked about the importance of early education. Sinéad Ennis highlighted the unwelcome shadow of violence and domestic abuse and the effect that it has on children and families across Northern Ireland. She called for the safety of all women and girls throughout the province.

Stephen Dunne highlighted the number of incidents that go unreported because of fear. According to Stewart Dickson, violence against women and girls is an epidemic: I agree. He called for a collective effort to tackle the failure to firmly take on violence against women and girls. Diana Armstrong highlighted the failure to tackle violence against women and girls and the misogynistic mindset across Northern Ireland, where women live in fear in their own home, in workplaces and in society in general. Justin McNulty made another passionate plea and called for an immediate end to the scourge of violence against women and girls. He criticised the slowness in implementing the Gillen report. Timothy Gaston highlighted historical violence against women and girls and the lack of movement in recognising it.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Maurice, your time is up.

Mr Bradley: I apologise for Gerry, because he did not have much time either.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you. I call Matthew O'Toole to conclude and wind up the debate on the motion. Matthew, you have five minutes.

Mr O'Toole: I thank all those who participated in the first of today's Opposition day motions on violence against women and girls. It has been said repeatedly during the debate that we face a crisis in this society: that is true. I thank all those who participated in the debate and commend colleagues for the seriousness and depth with which the debate was conducted. I will not go through every point that was made, but I will tackle a few.

First, I want to reflect on the depth of the crisis that we face and what it means for our society, our people, ourselves and our families. A lot of the most impassioned people to speak on the subject are, necessarily, women. Female MLAs have spoken today with extraordinary intensity, as Sorcha Eastwood did in the House of Commons last week. My colleague Sinéad McLaughlin opened the debate. Emma Sheerin spoke with immense insight and passion, as she has done many times in the Chamber. Joanne Bunting, Connie Egan and Diana Armstrong gave passionate speeches. Diana spoke about the most recent victim of the horrendous epidemic of femicide on this island in Ballyconnell in County Cavan, which is near where she represents.

It is important that male politicians and men in general also speak about the subject, because, in many ways, men and male behaviour are at the root of many of the problems. It is important that we speak sincerely and honestly about the seriousness of the challenges and what we need to do to overcome them. Today's motions are about tackling the range of policy interventions that we can make, some of which are covered in the violence against women and girls strategy and others are not.

As a husband and father, I think that it is sometimes important to reflect on the matter at a personal level. I was having a conversation with my wife recently about something as mundane as going running and taking exercise. We live in south-east Belfast, quite close to Cregagh glen, which is just on the border of my constituency and that of Joanne Bunting. I was encouraging my wife, who is no shrinking violet, to go for a run or a walk in Cregagh glen. If you have not been to it, I can say that it is a lovely little glen just off the ring road. I sometimes go there for a run. It is a great place to clear your head at lunchtime. She said casually, "I wouldn't, because I would feel a bit exposed going there alone." That stopped me in my tracks. I thought, "Jeez, this is not something that I ever have to think about". In a couple of months' time, my wife will give birth, and we are going to have a baby daughter. It really makes you stop, pause and think, not just as a politician but as somebody who has a wife and will soon have a daughter, about the extent of the crisis of violence against women that we face.

Twenty-five people since 2020 have lost their life. They are not just statistics. They are Natalie McNally, an activist, an Armagh fan and a passionate, brilliant campaigner; in County Offaly, Ashling Murphy, a primary-school teacher; Annie Heyneman, who has just lost her life in County Cavan; and Karen Cummings, the nurse from Banbridge who lost her life. They are not statistics or dry abstract numbers; they are real people who had lives that were taken away from them cruelly.

Our motion today calls for the implementation of two specific parts of the Gillen review. One is on reform of the reasonable belief defence. I welcome the fact that the junior Minister has confirmed that the Justice Minister will consult on taking action on that. I acknowledge that the Justice Minister was suffering from a cold yesterday, so it is fair enough that she is not here today. I asked her a question late last year and have not received a response, but I am glad that we have some confirmation that we will see reform of that issue.

Mr Carroll: Will the Member give way?

Mr O'Toole: I do not think that I will get an extra minute, and I have a few things to get through.

I welcome that confirmation from the junior Minister.

A number of points were made about pretrial jury education. It is critical that, in our justice system, we retain free and fair trial processes and that the judiciary has discretion, but that happens already. It has to be said that a few particularly lurid comments were made about that, particularly by Mr Gaston. Judges give direction; jurors are given education. That was reflected on in the Gillen review. The justice system is the downstream part of the policy intervention in the crisis that we face, but there are real things that we can do. Our motion calls for specific, overdue action to implement them. Justice Gillen is not some left-wing, trendy academic; he is a former Appeal Court judge. They are serious, practical proposals. Let us get on with them.

This is the first of our motions today. I am a little concerned about the DUP amendment —

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Time is up, Matthew.

Mr O'Toole: — because we have had a lot of consultation in this area. We commend the motion, and I thank all of those who spoke today for the seriousness with which they approached the subject.

Ms Hunter: I beg to move

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Cara. The Business Committee has agreed to allow up to one hour for the debate. The proposer of the motion will have five minutes to propose and five minutes to make a winding-up speech. As an amendment has been selected and published on the Marshalled List, the Business Committee has agreed that eight minutes will be added to the total time for debate.

Before I invite you to open the debate, I inform the Assembly again that the Minister of Justice is not available to be in the Chamber today due to illness. Junior Minister Cameron will respond on behalf of the Executive. Cara, please open the debate on the motion.

Ms Hunter: Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I welcome the opportunity to address these critical and timely issues, which not only affect survivors and victims but act as a threat to our democracy. I rise to discuss the need to regulate deepfakes, a technology that has moved from the realm of novelty to become a tool for harm, exploitation and, of course, deception.

I welcome the fact that, in recent weeks, the British Government have moved by announcing plans to change the law to address the malicious use of the technology. While that is a step in the right direction, we cannot wait to have that law brought forward, nor can we afford to wait. We need action now, and we need to keep the pressure on to ensure that there is immediate implementation. The words from the mouth of the British Government are "when time allows", but that language will offer little comfort to victims and survivors and future victims of the malicious use of the technology.

Deepfakes are manipulated digital content that appears to be real. They are being used to humiliate, exploit and, of course, intimidate, targeting women in particular. They are so easily made — in mere seconds — through the click of a button on an app. A recent survey found that 96% of deepfake videos are non-consensual pornography. In the UK, a 2023 report stated that image-based abuse, particularly deepfake creation, is up 80% over the past three years. That rise really underscores the urgent need for our legal framework to catch up with technological advancements. Without adequate protections, victims are left vulnerable, while perpetrators will continue to act with impunity.

The harm caused by deepfakes goes far beyond individual cases. Deepfakes are a threat to the sanctity of our democracy. Doctored videos of politicians and other public figures spread misinformation, eroding trust in institutions and the people in those institutions and, of course, influencing elections. In a study by the UK's Centre for Data Ethics and Innovation (CDEI), 62% of people expressed concern that deepfakes could manipulate our political outcomes. Democracy relies on truth, and deepfakes distort truth. The longer we delay, the more vulnerable we become to that insidious threat.

I am mindful that aspects of the law to do with communication are reserved, but let me say what we can do. Although the Minister of Justice is not in the Chamber today, I really believe that, in our devolved institution, we can make the changes that can help support victims and push for action against perpetrators. I call on the Justice Minister in Northern Ireland to treat the issue with the urgency that it rightfully demands. First, we need to ensure that sentences for those who create and distribute harmful deepfakes are robust and can act as a firm deterrent. Victims deserve justice, and perpetrators must face real consequences for their horrific actions. Secondly, we ask the Justice Minister to commission a comprehensive review of existing criminal law on online violence against women and girls to ensure that all forms of abuse are adequately dealt with. The review must include investing in cybercrime technology and resources for the PSNI so that it has the capacity to tackle that growing issue effectively. Sadly, only 15% of UK police forces have dedicated cybercrime units. That shows the glaring gap in our ability to respond to the ever-growing technological threats.

We are really failing people, particularly women. They are really on their own with this one, and I feel strongly that that is just not good enough. We must recognise the need for investment in cybercrime units to ensure that law enforcement has the tools and the expertise to tackle the ongoing problem. The technology is advancing rapidly, so our capacity to combat it must advance just as quickly. That means that we need adequate training, resources and collaboration with tech experts to stay ahead of those who seek to use the technology maliciously. I am particularly concerned about how it can be used to harm children, so that is something important to include in today's debate. We need to step up, be firm and show perpetrators who maliciously use such tech that they will be dealt with. Sentencing here must be a strong deterrent.

Lastly, I urge the Minister of Justice to write to the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology and the Secretary of State for Justice demanding a clear timeline for the introduction of legislation to criminalise deepfake abuse adequately. It is not a problem that respects borders, so our response must be unified, swift and comprehensive. Across Europe, there are AI centres that provide support for victims of deepfakes. We must see those changes and supports, with ethics, in Northern Ireland in the Artificial Intelligence Collaboration Centre (AICC), which is currently being developed. AI has incredible potential. It can be used for good, but we must use our devolved powers to stamp out malicious use.

Today, every one of us is speaking up against online violence and harm against women and girls, so I urge every Member to support our motion.

Ms Egan: I beg to move the following amendment:

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you. You will have five minutes in which to propose the amendment and three minutes in which to make a winding-up speech. All other Members who are called to speak will have three minutes.

Ms Egan: Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I rise again to speak about the horrendous violence facing women in Northern Ireland, in the rest of the UK and much further afield. Online spaces, apps and social media have become part of our everyday life. We use them every day, whether for work or for connecting with friends and family. I know, however, that I am not the only person in the Chamber who has sincere and deeply felt concerns about how spaces on the internet are being used to torment, humiliate and cause harm to women and girls.

In 2021, research exposed that one in three women in the UK has experienced online abuse at some point in her life. That is only being compounded, and we need to act quickly. I sincerely thank the SDLP and Cara Hunter, in particular, for shining a light on this, particularly deepfake imagery. I commend her bravery for speaking on this topic. It is something that I know is deeply personal to her. I also thank Diane Forsythe, who shared her experience of being targeted with online abuse during the 2022 Assembly election. Both are horrendous experiences that should not have happened and that they should not have had to endure.

I stand here to present the amendment, not at all to dilute the contents of the motion but, instead, to try to strengthen its place within the Executive's ongoing work on the strategic framework to end violence against women and girls. Responsibility for tackling the online abuse of women and girls lies across the entirety of our Executive, and tackling this horrific misogyny is something that our Justice Minister has prioritised since taking office. We must work together on this cross-cutting issue, not just by creating robust legislation that criminalises such heinous acts but by taking a whole-society approach to change the growing culture of acceptance. We need to show leadership, embed prevention, deter those who create this imagery and protect victims.

Additionally, the amendment seeks to recognise that online communication is a reserved matter and that it should be placed with the First Minister and deputy First Minister, on behalf of the Executive, to liaise with the UK Government to ensure that changes are made as quickly as possible. I hope that Members across the Chamber will support the amendment.

The current legislative frameworks that deal with emerging forms of online abuse are clearly unfit for purpose and not victim-centred. We need coherent and unified legislation that is aimed at online activity. As the motion reflects, we welcome the recent commitments from the UK Government to introduce legislation on deepfake imagery, particularly deepfake pornography. Artificial intelligence has grown and learnt at an alarming pace, becoming more and more accessible to the everyday person each year. It has become extremely sophisticated, and, through that, it is hard to decipher what is real and what is not. The hyperrealistic falsification of images, video and audio poses a sincere threat to how we perceive and protect what is real. Between 2022 and 2023, the amount of deepfake pornography created increased by 464%. That quickening pace of development does not have adequate legislation to get ahead of it. The issue of deepfakes, as the motion correctly infers, is entirely gendered, with 96% of deepfakes online being non-consensual fake videos of women. It is one of the most recent ways to degrade, humiliate and harass women online.

We all have a role to ensure that legislation and its accompanying actions are victim-centred. Its being funnelled and coordinated through the ending violence against women and girls programme board will allow a coordinated approach that results in long-lasting culture change. Right now, instead, we see organisations in the community and voluntary sector, such as Women's Aid, Nexus and all those in our communities, bear the brunt and consequences and the impact that this has on victims. We need comprehensive legislation, and we need to work with the UK Government to get increased detail on the contents of their proposed law. Also, in light of our shortened mandate, working with the UK Government is the best and most effective way to create change. We need a consistent approach, because, all in all, this is about ending the exploitation and abuse of power to punish people, usually women and children, for merely daring to exist.

The solutions cannot be asking women to change their behaviour or just not engage online, as that makes us complicit in taking away the autonomy of those across our society. We need to permeate prevention across our culture, changing it to one that overwhelmingly finds this unacceptable.

Miss Hargey: These are important topics that we are discussing here in the Chamber today. Indeed, online abuse and the use of cyber-flashing, catfishing, targeted abuse and the emergence of the use of deepfake imagery is extremely concerning. We know that with the advancement of technology and, indeed, artificial intelligence, their use has become more widespread and often more sinister.

I have been raising the issue of fast-emerging technology at the Justice Committee and have been asking what the Department and the Minister are doing to respond to these advancements. The impacts are devastating to their victims and have profound consequences that can often be long-lasting. The use of deepfake imagery is an extremely deep form of abuse that violates the intended victim and survivor, often impacting on their safety and well-being. It is perpetrated without consent and often involves the sharing of sexually explicit images that have been altered. Often, the victims and survivors do not know the identity of the sender. The concerns around online abuse are amplified by the fact that it disproportionately targets women and young girls. That amplifies what we heard during the previous debate on the increase in violence against women and girls.

We live in a society where technology is an ever-increasing part of our lives and work. Many of us cannot do without our phones or our laptops. It is essential to understand that technology is now being used to further target people, with the aim of discrediting or undermining them or to perpetrate sinister and violent actions virtually. We know that it does not stop with the virtual world. The impacts reach beyond that to harassment and sometimes death. We saw that last year in the case of Alexander McCartney, who was behind one of the largest catfishing cases to date, which impacted on over 3,500 people throughout the world and involved the extreme sexual abuse of children and the manslaughter of a 12-year-old girl. That is how sinister and far-reaching the action can be.

We need to ensure that our laws are equipped to deal with such incidents and can respond to advances in the technology, whether they are reserved or devolved matters. It is also essential to have an ongoing review and to look at best practice. Alongside that, we need more robust adherence to guidelines by social media companies, and we need to ensure that there is robust enforcement if they fail in their duty to protect people. Wider strategies are important, including the ending violence against women and girls strategy, which is being led by TEO but is a wider Executive strategy for all Ministers and Departments. Indeed, all of us in the Chamber and in society have a duty to drive systemic change and promote grassroots support and education.

Ms Bunting: The internet is a great thing when it is used for good. However, it has also brought about and normalised some of the worst behaviours in human nature. The problem has worsened exponentially as technology has improved. That improvement, coupled with the advancement of AI, must be harnessed before things that are now out of control grow beyond any control.

The inception of social media brought about the horrific abuse of those who do not share the views of the ubiquitous trolls. Frequently, the aim is to intimidate, to embarrass and, ultimately, to silence. In the past few years, the situation has plumbed a whole new level of low. It is critical that there is action without delay before nothing meaningful can be done. For too long, the online world has been a deeply unpleasant place where people abuse others to the extreme, usually behind a cloak of anonymity. No one should be expected to accept that kind of disgusting abuse, particularly the vulgar abuse that is targeted at many females.

The DUP wants to see an improved response to the many forms of technology-facilitated abuse against women online. Far too many women and girls have experienced violence and harassment, including online, due to their sex. Indeed, shockingly, a 2023 study by Security Hero showed a 550% rise in deepfake pornographic videos since 2019, and evidence shows that these videos target women. Deepfake videos degrade, demean and deceive. During the most-recent Assembly election, some female candidates were subject to horrendously offensive deepfake content. In addition to the personal trauma that that will cause for our colleagues in elected politics and their families, it is concerning and sinister that such content may be used to attempt to influence the outcome of an election.

Technology to create explicit deepfakes without consent is readily available, with research showing that one in every three deepfake tools allows you to create deepfake pornography. That means that someone with access to the internet who has a clear photo of a person's face can make a deepfake video of them in less than 25 minutes. The pace of development with generative AI is concerning, and we must be in no doubt that the impact of its misuse could and likely will be far-reaching, including in cases of child sexual abuse, where the National Crime Agency (NCA) and the police cannot distinguish between an image of a real child and a generated image. Progress has been made on strengthening the police and legal response by including four new offences in the Justice (Sexual Offences and Trafficking Victims) Act (Northern Ireland) 2022. However, the pace at which technology advances is staggering, so we must ensure that the police have the means to tackle online abuse in all its forms and that our legislation keeps pace with technological progress in order to avoid loopholes. It will be important for there to be a comprehensive review of existing laws across Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK so that where there are gaps, what more could and should be done and what best practice is on and beyond our shores can be established.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Joanne, your time is up

Ms Bunting: Thank you.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you very much. Sorry about that.

Ms D Armstrong: I thank the Opposition for bringing the motion to the House. As others outlined, deepfake imagery is an image-based form of sexual abuse that has a horrific impact, as it is a deeply violating form of abuse that is predominantly targeted at women and girls. Cases of online violence and non-consensual deepfake imagery have escalated in an online environment where social media platforms' mechanisms to remove content offer limited redress to victims only after the harm has occurred. That results in profound mental and psychological distress for victims and impacts on their safety and well-being.

It is welcome that the British Government have responded to that form of abuse by indicating that, in addition to the Online Safety Act 2023, they will introduce the crime and policing Bill later this year, which will create a new offence of an individual taking intimate images without consent. Very often, victims have not consented to images and are not aware that they are being circulated. Threats to share the images with family and friends often lead to the further exploitation of victims and a sense of violation. The aim of the Bill will be to criminalise such behaviour so that the perpetrators can be caught and brought to justice. I support the call in the amendment to the motion for the First Minister and deputy First Minister to work with the UK Government, on behalf of the Executive, to ensure that the new legislation protects victims of online abuse through the inclusion of appropriate sentencing for perpetrators and that it ensures that there is zero tolerance of deepfake generation in all its forms. Intimate image abuse is a national emergency that causes significant and long-lasting harm to women and girls, who face a total loss of control of their digital footprint at the hands of online misogyny. Women should not have to accept sexual harassment and abuse as a normal part of their online life.

In tandem with the introduction of legislation, the misogynistic attitudes of young men and boys need to be addressed. Surveys show that there is a prevalence of traditionalist views among young males, predominantly among those who are in their 20s. Those views may be perpetuated due to peer pressure and environments in which they believe that it is manly to exercise power and control over others and that real men should not have to care about women's opinions or feelings. The influence of online pornography on young men and boys is also a determinant in the development of their attitudes towards women.

I support the motion. More work needs to be done to address young men's attitudes towards women.

Mr Bradley: I support the motion. Legislation to tackle platform promoters who provide a platform for such social abuses to be published and then shared needs to be addressed, because they are guilty. They are guilty because they have provided that platform. To use a platform, you must be a member of it; therefore, those people are responsible for their membership.

It is too easy to acquire a fake profile or account. The likes of Facebook, X, which was Twitter, Instagram and Meta need to do more to regulate their platforms, because they are making money out of them and profiting from the abuse of others. Not only are they not doing enough to regulate who becomes a member of those social media platforms but they are not doing enough to remove videos or offensive material once they have been identified. Legislation needs to be put in place to tackle that before it happens rather than after it has happened.

Owners must take responsibility for the content that is published on their platforms. That has not come across yet, and the Governments in Westminster and here need to take account of it. Those owners must be held responsible for any content that they publish, just as a newspaper is. Legislation has not kept apace with the expansion of the internet. It is too easy to make a false profile and to hack a social media account and cause offence not only with the material that is published but to the holder of the account that has been hacked.

When that happens, it creates offence right across the board. There is something badly wrong with the mindset of anybody who puts out a deepfake video. It could be a sickness, or it could be pure, deliberate vandalism that is trying to cause harm to an individual or organisation.

I support the motion. I hope that it passes and that something concrete comes out of what we decide to do here today.

Mr Dunne: I also welcome the opportunity to speak on what is a very important issue, as colleagues have said. The alarming rise in online violence against women and girls, particularly through the misuse of deepfake technology and social media, demands our urgent and decisive action. It is a rapidly evolving issue. AI is becoming an increasingly important part of all our daily lives. It is interesting that, just yesterday, the UK Government announced a major plan to enhance how it is used across our nation. Although it is vital that we grasp the opportunities that AI provides, we must be acutely aware of its potential dangers, particularly in the wrong hands. Unfortunately, deepfake technology has been weaponised to perpetrate the abuse and humiliation of, disproportionately, women and girls. Studies indicate that over 90% of non-consensual deepfake imagery involves female victims. Those manipulated images are not mere pranks or jokes; they are violations of dignity, breaches of privacy and sources of profound psychological and emotional distress and trauma. More robust and proportionate regulation of data and emerging technology is required in order to crack down on the abuse. As has been mentioned today, through the lens of anonymity, it is so easy to engage in harmful practices, such as deepfakes and efforts to undermine democracy through misinformation and disinformation. That is a fundamental issue.

For the women who are targeted, the consequences are devastating. Careers can be ruined, relationships can be strained, lives can be disrupted, and, tragically, in some cases, even ended, as we have seen across the world. The abuse has knock-on effects on children, family members and loved ones. Deepfake imagery is becoming more prevalent, with Ofcom recently revealing that 43% of people aged 16 and above say that they have seen at least one deepfake image online within the past six months. For too long, we have seen dither and delay in addressing those issues, while individuals have continued to suffer and actors have continued to escape punishment for their vile abuse. They are leaving a trail of destruction right across our country and beyond. We must address the loopholes that allow perpetrators to exploit technological gaps in order to harm others.

Any review must not only focus on criminalisation but consider prevention and education and the provision of support for victims. Education campaigns will be crucial in that regard. There is also a role for our education sector to look at the issue, given the rise in the use of that technology by people of all ages. Legislation alone cannot solve the issue. We must confront the underlying cultural attitudes that enable and normalise online violence against women and girls.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: I call junior Minister Cameron, who is responding on behalf of the Justice Minister. Minister Cameron, I advise that you have 10 minutes.

Mrs Cameron (Junior Minister, The Executive Office): Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. First, I apologise on behalf of the Minister of Justice for her not being available today. I offer my best wishes to her and hope that she makes a speedy return. I hope that we are not replacing one cough with another; I will try to keep my coughing to a minimum.

On behalf of the Minister of Justice, I am grateful to the Opposition for bringing this really important motion before the House today. It is an issue that has impacted on many thousands of women and girls, including Members of the House, as we have heard. The level of abuse and violence against women and girls, whether online or otherwise, is completely unacceptable. Members know that we remain committed to strengthening the law where possible to try to stop that blight on our society.

In the previous Assembly mandate, the Minister of Justice brought forward legislation that strengthened existing law and introduced new offences of stalking, upskirting, downblousing and cyber-flashing and four new offences designed to tackle the particular behaviour of an adult pretending to be a child, which is mainly perpetrated online, and making communication with a child under 16 with a view to sexual grooming. Those offences have added tangible and valuable protections against online and offline abuse.

As junior Minister Reilly said in response to the previous motion, the Department continues to work collaboratively to help to eradicate such abuse. That includes work with the Department of Health on the domestic and sexual abuse strategy and with the Executive Office, where online abuse and violence against women and girls is an area of focus identified through the development of its ending violence against women and girls strategic framework for 2024-2031. The framework will enable collaborative working across Departments and wider society to address online abuse. Identified areas of abuse include cyberstalking, cyber-flashing, sexual harassment, grooming for exploitation or abuse and image-based sexual abuse. Unfortunately, the fast pace of advances in technology means that the prevalence of online abuse is increasing. Our challenge lies in the influence of the online world on our community, particularly on our young people, in shaping attitudes and the capacity to establish safe and healthy relationships.

As the motion makes particular reference to the making of sexually explicit deepfake images, I will address that issue first. Those images, where people's faces, usually those of women and girls, are placed on pornographic images without consent, cause immense harm and distress. They can destroy the lives of victims, who report feeling embarrassed, violated and unsafe, and there are far too many victims. On a recent 'Woman's Hour' feature on Radio 4, it was stated that, in 2023, more deepfake videos were viewed than in all the preceding years put together. On top of deepfake sites, videos have been viewed more than 4·2 billion times.

The psychological impact of knowing that those images are out there must be severe, and wondering who has seen them must play on victims' minds constantly. Such images also harm society. They are a tangible form of misogyny and the over-sexualisation of women and girls. What impact are those images having on those who watch them? I believe that those images desensitise people, mainly men, to the harm that they cause and deprive women and girls of the right to autonomy, dignity and privacy. The creation of deepfake images should not be tolerated, and, as I said, I am determined, where I can, to send the message to perpetrators that sexual offending against women and girls, whether online or offline, will not be tolerated.

Last week, the UK Government announced that they plan to bring forward, in a crime and policing Bill, proposals to make it an offence to create sexually explicit deepfake images. The Justice Minister has already been approached by the Minister responsible, the Minister of State for Policing, Fire and Crime Prevention, on a possible extension of the offence to Northern Ireland. Subject to the agreement of the Executive, the Justice Committee and Members, the Minister intends to take the opportunity to ensure that there is similar provision here by extending the offence to Northern Ireland. DOJ officials are liaising with UK Government officials on the detail of the legislative proposals.

The Department constantly keeps the legislative framework governing online and offline offending against women and girls under review, as evidenced —.

Mr O'Toole: Will the Minister give way?

Mrs Cameron: If you do not mind, I cannot. I have a lot to get through, but I am sure that the Minister will be watching and will read Hansard and will be able to answer questions that are forthcoming from the debate.

The Department constantly keeps the legislative framework governing online and offline offending against women and girls under review, as evidenced by the offences that I have already referenced and which were introduced in the previous mandate. The Minister continues to look for opportunities where she can to strengthen the law further and to enhance protection from that type of abhorrent behaviour. That is why the Department of Justice is seeking to take the opportunity to provide for a deepfake offence in Northern Ireland.

Turning to wider issues of online communications and harms, Members will be aware that telecommunications legislation is a reserved matter. However, we have sought always to take a proactive approach towards supporting online safety. While the policy and legislation is developed and led by the UK Government, the Minister remains fully committed to playing her part in addressing the issue where she can. Online abuse and harassment is completely unacceptable. Everyone should be able to enjoy the positive benefits of online engagement without being subject to vile, abusive and harmful content.

A number of recent high-profile cases have shown the devastating impact of online abuse and the potential for it to lead to further harm. During the passage of what is now the Online Safety Act 2023, the Department of Justice sought to influence its content, urging that more be done to address the lack of accountability of anonymous account holders, which is a key issue when seeking to prevent and detect online harms and offences.

The Minister met representatives of Ofcom, which is now the regulator for online safety under the 2023 Act, to discuss implementation of the Act and plans to put it into practice. Ofcom was a key co-design partner in the development of the Executive's ending violence against women and girls strategic framework. The framework will be agile in its delivery to ensure that it can respond to evolving and changing cultures and practices, such as expanding forms of online harm and technological abuse, including sexually explicit deepfake imagery.

Ofcom is developing draft guidance for protecting women and girls online, which is a requirement of the 2023 Act. The draft guidance, which is due to launch for consultation in February, will focus on the content and activity covered by the Act that disproportionately affects women and girls, such as online harassment, online misogyny and intimate image abuse. Executive Office and DOJ officials have been liaising with Ofcom, through the two UK-wide workshops, as it develops the guidance for consultation.

Members will be aware that round-table forums were held to take views on tackling online abuse and intimidation, particularly in light of incidents during the most-recent Assembly elections. Alarming and distressing experiences of online abuse were shared, and the Minister subsequently wrote to the Home Secretary to express her concerns. Those who seek to harass, bully, intimidate or otherwise cause harm should be aware that such activity, whether perpetrated directly or online, may constitute a criminal offence. I strongly encourage victims of such abuse to report all those incidents to the police. However, as we have heard today, a criminal justice response alone cannot improve online safety. We must take a holistic approach that is focused on prevention and education, as set out in the cross-cutting Executive online safety strategy, which has been put in place to assist children and young people to participate in the online world in a positive, safe and responsible way.

The online safety strategy, which is coordinated by the Department of Health and involves a number of other Departments, aims to educate, support and involve a wide range of key stakeholders, including parents, carers and the wider family; schools, colleges and youth organisations; and practitioners who work with children and young people. The launch of the dedicated online safety hub in April 2024 is also a welcome development to help parents, carers and young people to be more safe and secure online.

I am sure that Members will support me in calling out the perpetrators of this despicable behaviour — behaviour that, unfortunately, is increasing in prevalence in our society. We must do all that we can, collectively, to protect our community from the harm that it causes and to seek to address the wider issue of misogyny and violence against women and girls, which is all too prevalent in Northern Ireland.

I am sure that Department of Justice officials will review Members' comments and pick up on any specific issues that I have not been able to respond to.

I commend the motion and the amendment to the House.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: 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 after Question Time, when Sian Mulholland will be called first to wind on the amendment.

Mr Lyons (The Minister for Communities): Casement Park is the third and final project of the regional stadia programme, and funding was agreed by the Executive 14 years ago. I met Jarlath Burns, president of the GAA, alongside senior representatives from Ulster GAA, including Brian McAvoy, its director and CEO, on 31 October 2024 to discuss how the redevelopment of Casement Park could be taken forward. However, the Executive commitment from 2011 remains.

Mr Honeyford: That meeting happened in October. Has the Minister met the UK Government since then to discuss the funding that Treasury might make available? If that meeting has happened, will he give us an update on it?

Mr Lyons: I have not met the UK Government, but I have written to the Secretary of State to ask for an update on the Government's view of the project.

Mr McHugh: Last year was a very busy one for the teams involved in the Casement Park project. Minister, have you any meetings with Ulster GAA and other key partners scheduled in the diary for 2025 as part of your Department's duty to support the Casement Park redevelopment?

Mr Lyons: Let me make it clear that, when it comes to Casement Park, I have fulfilled my requirements. I have certainly met the groups that are involved in the project. The pledge that the Executive made in 2011 remains.

It is worth remembering that it has been a long process. Some in the Chamber have tried repeatedly to lay the blame for the lack of progress at the feet of unionist Ministers. I remind the House once more that I was not the one who took a judicial review in order to get the planning permission quashed. My actions were not the ones that resulted in a Committee inquiry into safety certificates for Casement Park, and my actions were not the ones that led to a 2015 Cabinet Office report that revealed the chaos behind the stadium project. That report said that problems had been exacerbated by the fact that relationships between key stakeholders were broken. It was not me who said:

I understand the frustrations that many people feel about the project. However, the fact remains that there is a funding gap between what is on the table and the money that has been pledged. Our commitment from 2011 remains. I remain willing and open to meet and work with those who want to see the project progressed.

Mr Brooks: Sports clubs in my constituency are looking forward to potentially having their grounds redeveloped and improved. Will the Minister give an update on the Northern Ireland Football Fund (NIFF)?

Mr Lyons: Yes. The Northern Ireland Football Fund was another key element of that Executive agreement. I am pleased to tell the House that we will open applications to that very soon. That will be a key milestone in that programme. I want to see that happen, and I believe that we will be able to open applications by the end of the month. I hope that that sends a message to all clubs that we recognise the need that exists and that the fund is just the beginning.

Mr McNulty: On Casement Park, the Minister will know that the period between now and the end of March is critical for that iconic bellwether project. Yesterday, it was four months since the HM Treasury announcement. The Minister met uachtarán Chumann Lúthchleas Gael

, Jarlath Burns, and Ulster GAA in October, and it appears that we are no further forward. As Casement Park is a priority for his Department and a flagship project for the Executive, will the Minister list the organisations and people that he has met or corresponded with regarding the funding of our new world-class stadium in the heart of west Belfast? When will the project move forward?

Mr Lyons: I have already outlined whom I have met, the meeting that took place in October and the correspondence that I have had with the Secretary of State. We need some realism here: the issue is the funding gap. That is the problem. Either an additional contribution of funds or a more modest proposal is needed, or else we need to look at both options. I am happy to have those discussions, but, as I have said repeatedly, the commitment that was made in 2011 stands.

Mr Crawford: How much has been spent to date on the redevelopment of Casement Park and on the Northern Ireland Football Fund?

Mr Lyons: I do not have the exact figures for Casement Park, but I am happy to provide the Member with that information. Very little has been spent on the football fund, although we have been able to give some financial support to clubs that are developing business cases. I have no issue with giving the Member that information, but I do not have it in front of me.

Mr Gaston: Minister, will you give a clear commitment that the GAA will not receive more than its fair share of funding compared with the money already awarded to football and rugby?

Mr Lyons: I have said on a number of occasions that an agreement was made in 2011.That agreement was made on the basis of fairness and of all the sports that had identified their needs getting a share of the money. Windsor Park has received the money that it was promised, as has Ravenhill. I look forward to distributing the money from the football fund, and, as I have said, the commitment for Casement Park remains. When we allocate resources, it is important that we do so fairly and equitably. That is what I will do during my time in office.

Mr Lyons: My officials are continuing their work on the development of the Executive's anti-poverty strategy, which will aim to minimise the risks and impact of poverty, including child poverty. My Department is engaging with officials from all Departments to discuss the development of the strategy, and I am encouraged by the reports of progress to date. Discussions have focused on the delivery of a range of key actions that will help mitigate impacts, reduce the risk of falling into poverty and support all those impacted, including children and their families, to exit poverty.

I will bring a draft strategy to the Executive in early 2025 for their consideration. Following Executive agreement of the paper, the strategy will be subject to public consultation prior to its final publication.

Of course, in addition, my Department plays a vital and ongoing role in providing social security and housing support as well as supporting people through our work with the voluntary, community, culture, heritage, language, arts and sports sectors.

Mr Allen: I thank the Minister for his answer. No doubt he will recall the recent Public Accounts Committee report, which highlighted stark failings in the child poverty strategy. What steps is he taking to ensure that the same failings, such as its not being fully costed or sufficiently targeted and not properly working with all stakeholders, are not repeated?

Mr Lyons: My officials and I have been working with other Departments in the past months to make sure that we do not fall into that situation again. That is why we have taken our time to make sure that we get the strategy right, that we have deliverable actions and, most important, that those actions make a real difference to the lives of all the people whom we represent. I am pleased that I have gone further than any past Minister in progressing an anti-poverty strategy. The promise was made in 1998, and it is one that I look forward to delivering on and bringing through the Executive so that we can make a difference.

Mr Gildernew: Minister, almost one in four children live in poverty, and many families continue to struggle to afford basic essentials. You referred to early 2025: will you give us the latest date by which the Executive will have an anti-poverty strategy to consider?

Mr Lyons: It is my hope to get the strategy out as soon as possible, and that is what I am trying to do. For me, however, the most important thing is that we can get buy-in and that we have all Departments signed up to it, with actions that we can progress. I want to have it passed by the Executive and out for consultation by the end of the financial year: the sooner, the better, certainly.

Mr Buckley: Every form of poverty is a stain on any nation. Does the Minister agree that a Labour Government whose policies have made pensioners poor, made farmers poor and made businesses poor and have killed growth in the UK economy in the meantime will do absolutely nothing to create the sustainable, healthy economy that we need in order to tackle the major issues that face our society?

Mr Lyons: Absolutely. I agree, and you have only to look at the policies of the Labour Government to realise that they will do nothing to help with poverty. We have policies that damage growth, and that means less money for public services. We have policies that are driving up inflation and costs, which will make it more likely that people fall into poverty, and we are damaging business. It is through business that we have job creation, and that will be so important and so central to the anti-poverty strategy because the ability to get into work is the greatest tool that we have to combat poverty in Northern Ireland. Unfortunately, the actions of the Government have meant that it is more difficult to create jobs and wealth. It is not only that: the policies are also targeting the voluntary and community sector, the organisations that do so much to stop people falling into poverty by giving them the skills and abilities that they need to get out of poverty.

I will do what I can to make sure that we have growth and prosperity in Northern Ireland, but the Government should seriously rethink the policies that they are putting in place, which are so damaging to the economy and therefore to people not just in Northern Ireland but across the United Kingdom.

Mr Speaker: I call Paula Bradshaw.

Ms Bradshaw: Thank you. I was not sure that I was going to get in.

I would be grateful if the Minister could confirm whether the anti-poverty co-design group has been involved up to this point? What role do you see it playing over the next few months?

Mr Lyons: The co-design group had a very important role to play as the strategy was developed and, certainly, before I came into office. I look forward to consulting it throughout the process. However, for me, what is important is making sure that we finalise the draft strategy, get it to the Executive, get it out for consultation to ensure that people can have their say, and then, importantly, implement it, get on with it and deliver for people in Northern Ireland.

Mr O'Toole: Minister, you want to get on with it, and I encourage you to get on with it. We have been back for nearly a year. We have not seen the anti-poverty strategy yet, but I am encouraged that you have said that it will be published before the end of the financial year. If it is so important, why was it not mentioned in the Programme for Government? Will it be included in the final Programme for Government?

Mr Lyons: I do not agree with the Member that the issue of poverty is not found in the draft Programme for Government. You need only look at a number of the actions that the Executive have put forward, which will have a real and meaningful impact on tackling poverty, whether that is creating more jobs, improving our education system or improving access to healthcare, which is a huge drag on people getting into work and thereby combating poverty. However, we have listened to what people have said. I understand the need that many have expressed to have the strategy in lights and up front in the Programme for Government. We look forward to finalising the Programme for Government to show the Executive's commitment to tackling such issues.

Mr Lyons: Universal credit (UC) can support claimants in self-employment when that is their best route to financial independence. The minimum income floor is broadly a notional amount of earned income that is used to calculate a person’s UC award. It applies to those in gainful self-employment whose business has been running for more than 12 months. It does not apply in all cases; for example, it does not apply to claimants who are in the 12-month start-up period, to those who are not gainfully self-employed or during the first 12 months of moving to UC from legacy benefits.

Universal credit work coaches and case managers provide support to those who are self-employed to make and maintain their claims. The support provided includes information on work allowances, taper rate, the childcare element and my Department’s adviser discretion fund (ADF), which provides a non-repayable grant of up to £1,500 to help unemployed and self-employed people overcome the financial barriers to starting or returning to work.

Ms D Armstrong: Thank you for your response. Minister, do you accept that some individuals and farmers rely solely on seasonal work for their income and, as a result, earn less than the minimum income floor? What can the Minister do in such cases to support individuals whose income may fluctuate over a period of time?

Mr Lyons: I am aware of the issue because I have had correspondence from the Member, and from Mrs Erskine as well. I assume that there are many people in Fermanagh and South Tyrone who have been affected. The Member will be aware that this is a result of policy change in the Department for Work and Pensions. In many ways, our hands are tied. I will continue to express concern about this to the Department for Work and Pensions and stand ready to help in whatever way I can. However, we need to recognise that these rules apply across the United Kingdom.

Mrs Erskine: Like the Minister, I know the value of farmers in our rural communities and throughout Northern Ireland. The policies that the Labour Government have put in place are really driving farmers into poverty. It is very simple: no farmers, no food. I would like to know what practical support will come from the Minister's Department and what he can advise farmers to do in relation to the breadline that they are facing.

Mr Lyons: I thank the Member for raising that issue with me as well. She will be aware of the cross-nation approach that is taken with regard to benefits and welfare. However, I want to make sure that we are as helpful as possible, and senior officials have met representatives from the Ulster Farmers' Union and Rural Support to offer them any additional help or support that they can. They certainly remain willing to engage and meet again, if that would be helpful. I am more than happy to link my officials up with the Member and her constituents in any way that might be beneficial as well. I am also happy to work with the Member so that we can increase awareness of the support that is available to claimants.

Mr McGlone: Minister, in the instance of people who are self-employed, such as those in the farming community, the gap of five weeks, which is how long it can take until eligibility is established for universal credit, can be financially very painful. Can you advise of the elements of welfare support that are available in those instances to help people to bridge that five-week gap?

Mr Lyons: Help is available from my Department. I have already raised the issue of the adviser discretion fund and the money that is available there to help those who are unemployed or self-employed. I am happy to share the details directly with the Member. Again, we are largely constrained by the rules that have been set down and put in place by DWP, but where we can give additional support, assistance, guidance and, sometimes, just advice, we will of course do that.

Mr McMurray: Has the Minister considered targeted exemptions or adjustments to the referenced minimum income floor for the self-employed, rural farmers and seasonal workers?

Mr Lyons: It is certainly something that we are happy to raise directly with the Department for Work and Pensions. The Member will be aware that any way in which we deviate from the rules that currently exist comes with administrative and other costs for the Department that can be very hard for us to bear. Certainly, we will continue to raise the issue with DWP and see what additional support it may be able to provide or what adjustments it can make to help in those situations. When it comes to such a large and complicated welfare and benefits system, we should always do what we can to try to make the process as simple and straightforward as possible for people. I am happy to work with the Member on that.

Mr Lyons: The musical instruments programme is a capital investment programme delivered by the Arts Council on behalf of my Department. It is designed to increase the quality of music making in Northern Ireland by helping musicians to replace older, worn-out instruments and purchase new and additional ones. The programme has three strands for individuals, bands, and professional and non-professional performing groups.

In December, I was pleased to be able to allocate an additional £323,000 to support the programme. With that additional investment, all eligible applicants were able to be supported. That was 119 grants to 75 bands, 13 professional and non-professional performing groups and 31 professional musicians. That involves over 4,500 people in total. The range of recipients this year, from marching bands and school groups to traditional musicians and musical societies, is impressive, and I hope that the grants will support and inspire the next generation of musical talent across the genres.

Mr K Buchanan: I thank the Minister for his answers so far and for his efforts in supporting the bands and individuals. That support is greatly needed. Will the Minister ensure that that support for the marching bands and individuals will continue into the years ahead? Will he provide a more accurate update on the impact that the programme has had on marching bands and individuals?

Mr Lyons: I am grateful to the Member for his comments. I want to make sure that we can continue with the funding of the programme for the simple reason that I want to ensure that more people in Northern Ireland get involved and stay involved in the arts and benefit from them. That is because the arts can provide a huge benefit for our people, especially the younger people. I also want to make sure that we get arts funding across Northern Ireland and do not limit it to the places that regularly get it. To that end, I am pleased to tell the Member that, in Mid Ulster, 13 bands and two professional and non-professional performing groups received funding. That was over £100,000 of funding for the Member's constituency.

Ms K Armstrong: No one can deny that the musical instruments for bands programme has been very successful. Will the Minister confirm whether there is the potential to allow charities, such as Beyond Skin, that work with groups of musicians and make musical instruments available to people such as the Afghan women's solidarity group — a group of women who escaped the Taliban, which barred them from engaging with music — to apply?

Mr Lyons: I want to make sure that as many people as possible are involved and take part in the arts and have the financial support to do so. I think that groups such as the one that the Member mentioned will have been eligible under the professional or non-professional group element. If that is not the case, I will certainly confirm that with her. I am more than happy to work alongside the Arts Council to make sure that we are getting more funding into those sorts of programmes, which make a difference and, importantly, allow more people to take part. That is what we should all want to see.

Mr Lyons: As the principal funding and development body for the arts in Northern Ireland, the Arts Council is tasked with distributing funding on behalf of my Department. It is also a distributing body for National Lottery moneys. It is my assessment that, despite the constrained position in the current financial year, the Arts Council continues to make a positive difference across a range of areas such as social inclusion, health, education, regeneration, justice, place-shaping and tourism. I am also going to continue to make the case to Executive colleagues that they should recognise the benefits that the arts provide to them in delivering on their responsibilities. It is my assessment, however, that government cannot wholly support the arts sector by itself and that a range of funding sources are needed to complement government funding. We are also exploring options for private and philanthropic investment opportunities.

In short, I do not believe that the arts get the level of funding that they deserve or require, but I am working on that to increase the level of funding, because I know the impact that the arts have right across Northern Ireland and how they help other Departments in how they deliver public services. Funding the arts is an investment in people and our services across Northern Ireland.

Ms Nicholl: I thank the Minister for his answer. I wholeheartedly agree that our arts are underfunded. There is widespread recognition of that. The Department for the Economy has added funds through the in-year monitoring rounds to the year-end totals of arm's-length bodies. Is the Minister agreeable to looking at that and putting in place a similar agreement for the Arts Council so that it can adequately plan and budget for programming for the year ahead?

Mr Lyons: I have used the monitoring process over my time in office to make sure that additional funding is made available to the Arts Council. I did that for resource and capital this year, and we can see the results of that. I am always keen to ask for more in the monitoring rounds and to make sure that we have the resources that we need. However, we need more in the arts than just that funding. We also need a clear policy framework. That is what I am bringing forward under the new arts policy.

I have protected the budget allocation that we had last year. We are in an environment in which I have had to find savings of £119 million, but the Arts Council budget was maintained. Compared with other regions, that is still a small amount. That is why I have been able to bid for and receive money in monitoring rounds where I have allocated additional capital funding as well. I have also been exploring philanthropic avenues for investment. My recent visit to the US opened a few doors there, which I look forward to exploring. I was pleased to attend the arts round-table event, where we were able to set out some of the issues and the challenges in how we approach those. Certainly, I am committed to continuing to fund the arts and to highlighting to Executive colleagues the benefits of doing so properly.

Ms Ferguson: Minister, last November, like you, I was among those who attended a meeting with representatives from Equity and heard from its members about the huge challenges, particularly in the north-west. We heard from local artists in Derry about how it is now really difficult to be able to remain in the field and to be an artist while living at home. We are exporting our local talent. I welcome the fact that you mentioned that you are working on and exploring a range of options to increase the funding. In that process, how will the Department seek to ensure regional balance in funding opportunities for Derry and across the north-west?

Mr Lyons: Regional balance is very important when it comes to the arts. That is why I have been so keen on the musical instruments for bands scheme: that funding has gone to communities across Northern Ireland; it has not been limited to particular geographical areas. I look forward to working with the Arts Council to ensure that the funding gets to where it is needed and where it will make the most difference.

Ms Forsythe: There has been a feeling for a long time that the arts have been very Belfast-centric. My question builds on your previous answer. Does the Minister agree that regional balance across Northern Ireland is important in the arts sector, especially in rural areas of the country such as my constituency of South Down?

Mr Lyons: Yes, that is absolutely the case. Again, I am happy to tell the Member that part of the extra allocation that we made through the musical instruments for bands scheme went to her constituency. In the Newry, Mourne and Down District Council area, we were able to allocate over £110,000 of funding to bands, professional and non-professional groups and individuals. I often feel that rural areas have missed out on arts funding in the past. It is a key priority for me, given that I come from a rural area. I have asked officials to begin work to identify programmes and activities that can ensure that we support rural areas such as South Down.

Mr McGrath: Further to that answer to my constituency colleague's question, if there is money for instruments in South Down, maybe I will take up the guitar or something, and is the Minister aware of the percentage of Arts Council funding that goes to the Belfast City Council area compared with other areas?

Mr Lyons: I saw those figures recently. I do not have them with me but I can certainly provide them to the Member. I have to say that it is a significant amount. Do not get me wrong: I am a fan of Belfast, but I want to see other areas getting money as well. That is why I am looking for additional resource in that area. I am happy to provide that information to the Member. Hopefully, he will be glad of the extra investment that I made in the South Down area. On his comment about taking up the guitar, if the comments that were made by Members who are sitting behind me are anything to go by, I do not think that he would have universal support in the House for that. Certainly, though, if he would like to make an application to the Arts Council, that process is open to him as well.

Mr Lyons: Plans to change the universal credit contingency fund name are being taken forward by officials in my Department.

Mr McCrossan: Thank you, Minister. Do you agree with the Cliff Edge Coalition and me that the fact that the spend has increased from £1·4 million in 2020-21 to £3·4 million in 2023-24 shows a significant increase in the amount of need? What is your Department doing to tackle that issue and ensure that those needs are met?

Mr Lyons: The figures that the Member has given are stark. We are keeping an eye on the matter.

The managed migration of claimants to universal credit through Move to UC has, as expected, led to an increase in claims. However, from what we see so far, that has increased in line with forecast demand.

Mr Speaker: We now move to topical questions.

Mr Lyons: The Member will be aware that I published the housing supply strategy. Part of that will deal with the issue of empty homes. I raised the issue very early on in my tenure in this place. We obviously need to build new homes, but there are other homes out there that are not being used. We will explore all options to see how we can bring those back into use. It is not just current homes but other buildings that could potentially be transformed into housing.

Mr McCrossan: I thank the Minister. Earlier, he referenced music. He is good at blowing his own trumpet, but we do not quite agree with the tune.

Minister, the problem has worsened on your watch. You gave a commitment to the House in May that you would tackle it, yet it has worsened. More and more people are struggling, and more homes are empty. What are you doing to deliver a measurable plan on which we can hold you to account in order to see a change in the crisis?

Mr Lyons: We have one. It is called the housing supply strategy. We have a very clear plan, and we can see already the difference that is being made. I look forward to sharing with the Member some of the latest statistics on housing in Northern Ireland. He will see how we, in my Department, have been able to deliver not just on this issue but on a number of issues. The measures that we have put in place for housing are significant. They include intermediate rent; loans to acquire move-on accommodation; the housing supply strategy, which gets all the Departments to work together; greater use of financial transactions capital (FTC); and movement on the revitalisation of the housing supply strategy. Those are all measures that I have taken; they were not implemented by other Ministers in the past. They are the moves that I am making to improve access to housing and housing supply in Northern Ireland.

I am pleased that it is not just housing that I have been able to deliver on. The Member's leader in this place said that we have had only warm words, waffle and lack of delivery from the Executive. I am more than happy to point once more to the achievements of my Department. The Defective Premises Act (Northern Ireland) 2024 was passed. The social capital loan scheme was introduced. The voluntary and community sector budget was increased. Protection for private tenancies was implemented. The £100 emergency fuel payment was secured. One thousand jobs delivering services for DWP were created. The housing selection scheme points review was delivered. The housing supply strategy was published. Our Olympic and Paralympic heroes were celebrated. Debt advice funding was increased. Intermediate rent was launched. The anti-poverty strategy is being progressed. A sign language Bill will soon be introduced. We have established the US/NI cultural working group. Charity regulation is being made easier. We have more money for the arts, homeless prevention, Supporting People and the Job Start scheme. That is real and tangible delivery for people right across Northern Ireland.

Some Members: Hear, hear.

Mr Lyons: I point to Your School Your Club, on which I have worked closely with Paul Givan in the Department of Education to improve access to facilities. You can look at the Northern Ireland Football Fund and how that is being progressed and at the work that we are doing through Sport NI to help with the provision of facilities. There is collaboration with councils and other public-sector agencies to improve access to facilities. Good work has begun, but I am aware that there is much more to do. I look forward to delivering on that issue as well.

Mr Crawford: Thank you, Minister. How do you gather input or feedback from young people when you are planning those services?

Mr Lyons: The Member will be aware of the consultation processes that are in place. I agree with him that hearing and involving the voices of young people is very important. I look forward to doing just that next week with the youth participation group.

Mr Lyons: The working group continues to develop a programme, working with US partners, to promote events in Northern Ireland and North America leading up to the 250th anniversary commemorations. My officials recently met Library of Congress staff to discuss practical ways to cooperate on links between people, places and collections as part of the America 250 commemorations. I look forward to making a number of announcements around that important work with the US in the coming weeks and months.

Mr T Buchanan: Thank you, Minister. Do you agree that the 250th anniversary of the United States is an excellent opportunity for Northern Ireland to showcase our rich historical links? Being parochial, I am thinking of the Ulster American Folk Park in my constituency, which you visited last year. The centenary of the Ferguson system master patent, which revolutionised the world's agriculture sector, will be marked on 12 February. Has any consideration been given to commemorating that historic event and to the possibility of having a Harry Ferguson museum, given that the Ferguson Belfast black prototype tractor, which was built in 1933, is now back in Belfast?

Mr Lyons: Yes, of course. I saw that recently at the Ulster Transport Museum, and I encourage others to do the same. I always look forward to seeing how we can promote events and anniversaries, such as the one that the Member mentioned. He rightly highlights West Tyrone and people from there. He may well be aware of John Dunlap, who printed the first copies of the Declaration of Independence and was from Strabane. He may be the most famous person to come from Strabane other than Mr McCrossan. [Laughter.]

There was also the Mellon family from Omagh, on whose land the UIster American Folk Park is built. Thomas Mellon, whose son became United States Secretary to the Treasury and United States ambassador to the UK, was born in Omagh. There are many local connections that we seek to promote. Hopefully, that will increase the number of visits to and tourism and interest in West Tyrone and Northern Ireland as a whole.

Mr Lyons: The Member will be aware that the Department for Communities previously had responsibility for the Homes for Ukraine refugee resettlement scheme. That included funding for a community and voluntary sector consortium that provided support to people who arrived under the Homes for Ukraine scheme. From 1 April 2024, management of the scheme, along with the Afghan and Syrian schemes, has been undertaken by TEO in order to consolidate the work on asylum seekers and refugees. The Executive Office is the strategic lead for refugee resettlement and asylum seekers in Northern Ireland. The transfer of the work to a single Department was undertaken to facilitate a more cohesive approach to the vital work of resettling and integrating refugees into Northern Ireland society. I do not have any evidence to indicate the impact of the removal of the £350 payment that the Member asked about.

Mr McMurray: Thank you to the Minister. Does the Housing Executive expect, or is it preparing for, any increase in demand as a consequence of the removal of that payment?

Mr Lyons: To the best of my memory, that is not been brought to my attention. I am aware that the UK Government's policy on the processing of asylum seekers has moved a considerable number of people who were under the care and responsibility of Mears and the Home Office to being the responsibility of the Northern Ireland Housing Executive. I will be happy to furnish the Member with those figures.

Mr Lyons: The Member is absolutely right to raise that issue. It has been a source of frustration to me, as a representative in her constituency, for many years, so I am happy to tell her that changes to the housing selection scheme are under way, including an exploration of options for the future of intimidation points. The award of intimidation points is subject to very specific criteria. Under the current scheme, someone who leaves their home as a result of domestic abuse can be allocated points for homelessness and primary social need points for violence or the threat of violence. However, they are not eligible for intimidation points.

I am keen to ensure recognition within the selection scheme for all victims of violence and those who are at risk or under threat of violence, including victims of domestic abuse. The Housing Executive and my officials have brought forward recommendations from independent research for my consideration. I am giving the matter consideration as a matter of urgency because the intimidation points scheme needs review and reform. I am determined to reform it.

Ms Brownlee: Hear, hear. We have been waiting for that for quite some time, so it is certainly welcome news. You will know that in our constituency of East Antrim, the Cithrah Foundation provides fantastic support for women who are fleeing domestic abuse but we have no safe spaces for males who are fleeing domestic abuse. What has your Department done, or what can it do, to meet that need?

Mr Lyons: I thank the Member for raising that issue as well. It is absolutely right that we have support for all those who find themselves in need regardless of their gender. That is something that I will, obviously, continue to work on and raise with officials. If there are particular issues or geographical areas that the Member wishes to bring to my attention, I am more than happy to make sure that they are explored.

Mr Lyons: I will have to come back to the Member on that. I have had much correspondence with the Department of Finance on many areas related to housing, but I do not have the details of when or how often I raised that with the Minister of Finance.

Mr McReynolds: I thank the Minister for his response and for saying that he will come back to me on that. What action is he taking to ensure that the 100,000 homes outlined in the housing supply strategy include a planning requirement for them to be connected to town and city centres by public transport, which will reduce reliance on private vehicles?

Mr Lyons: Obviously, we want to make sure that we are building homes where they are needed. We also need to make sure that we are building homes that are accessible, and it is, obviously, a benefit to be accessible by public transport. I would be reluctant to put additional conditions on where houses can be built. We want to increase housing supply, but there are a number of limitations in place, for example around water capacity. I would not want us not to build homes simply because they may not be connected to public transport routes. I sense that Mrs Erskine, who is behind me, is in favour of what I am saying because the Member's suggestion would rule out the building of houses altogether in many areas in her constituency. We have to be cognisant of the differences between urban constituencies, such as the one that the Member represents, and the rural constituencies that myself and Mrs Erskine represent.

I want to make it as simple, easy and straightforward as possible to build homes. Yes, absolutely, they should be accessible via public transport as much as possible, but I would not want to create a drag on building homes because, unfortunately, there are already far too many drags on the building of homes. We need to make it as easy, simple and straightforward as possible to build homes.

Mr Lyons: I am more than happy to explore that and see what is possible within the boundaries that are set by the Department for Work and Pensions.

Ms Mulholland: Thank you very much, Minister. Are there are any other recommendations of the independent welfare review that you are considering for the upcoming Budget?

Mr Lyons: I do not think there will be anything that we will be able to include in the upcoming Budget. There are significant proposals in there that come at significant cost.

I look forward to sharing the information with Executive colleagues and, hopefully, Committee members shortly, but we need to be aware of the significant costs that some of the proposals would entail. If we look towards how we combat poverty across Northern Ireland, all of that should be taken into consideration. We should look at it in the round when the time comes.

Mr Speaker: That brings to a conclusion questions to the Minister for Communities. Members, take your ease while we change the top Table.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: I call Sian Mulholland to make a winding-up speech on the amendment. Sian, you have three minutes.

Ms Mulholland: Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I will try to speak fast. I wish that I had more time.

I echo my colleague Connie's personal thanks to Cara Hunter. We know only too well the abuse that comes when a woman speaks out about her personal experience, as my colleague Sorcha Eastwood is unfortunately experiencing this week and has probably experienced every week since she became an elected representative.

We know that artificial intelligence holds great promise. When it is abused, however, it can cause such immense harm. The rise of AI-driven deepfake technology is such a rapidly evolving and metastasising problem. It is spreading across platforms and creating really serious societal challenges. It is not just a technological issue but is deeply tied, as others have said, to the broader issues of misogyny, harassment and, ultimately, control.

In looking at AI, deepfake imagery is particularly alarming. They are such hyperrealistic images that women are left completely vulnerable, simply for existing online. The issue is not just hypothetical. It is not just pie in the sky. It is happening now and on a massive scale. Look at the case of Taylor Swift, bigger than us, whose AI-generated pornographic images went viral and garnered millions of views before they were deleted 17 hours later. There was also an AI-generated image that falsely showed her endorsing Donald Trump, which completely distorted that public discourse. Those examples illustrate how deepfake technology can destroy reputations, manipulate public conversations and inflict serious emotional and psychological damage. There are also sinister viral acts happening virtually, about which Deirdre Hargey talked.

I welcome the UK Government's announcement of a new criminal offence of creating sexually explicit deepfake images with penalties of up to two years in prison. I welcome the call to liaise with the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology. Legislation must do so much more than keep pace with technology; it has to get ahead of it, which is why we tabled our amendment urging the Executive Office to engage with that Secretary of State. The First Minister, the deputy First Minister and all Ministers should engage to ensure that the changes are implemented quickly and effectively in Northern Ireland, as Connie Egan outlined and Diana Armstrong mentioned. The fastest way in which we can get there is by working with Westminster. While we would love to see further legislation here, we will not get there in this mandate.

It is not solely a Department of Justice issue. It is cross-cutting and involves the Department of Education, which deals with young people; the Department of Health, which deals with online victims who require robust mental health interventions; and the Department for the Economy, which looks at cyber skills. The regulator, Ofcom, has to hold the platforms accountable, as Maurice Bradley referenced. Telecommunications legislation is reserved by the UK Government, but we need legislation in order to move forward. Deepfake imagery is —

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Time is up, Sian.

Ms Mulholland: — not just online violence: it is violence full stop.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: I call Mark Durkan to conclude and wind up the debate on the motion. I advise you, Mark, that you have five minutes.

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

A world in which anyone can impersonate you, steal your image or have you do and say outrageous things would have seemed closer to some sort of sci-fi horror film than to reality just a few years ago. When combined with entrenched misogyny, that technology becomes a recipe for the worst types of abuse and amplifies harm. The use of deepfake imagery disproportionately targets women — over 90% is a staggering statistic — often using their image to create exploitative content. The abuse not only invades privacy but leaves lasting emotional scars. Social media remains a Wild West where harm goes far beyond deepfakes. The anonymity that it provides to some makes it an inherently dangerous arena to be utilised by perpetrators of abuse, whether through the spouting of racist, sectarian or misogynistic rhetoric.

That digital harm ultimately stems from the toxicity and violence that is embedded in our society. Social media exposes abuse to a global audience, providing perpetrators with the means to tighten their grip on victims and creating a sense that nowhere and no one is truly safe. All too often, bystanders watch as lives are torn apart online, fuelling harmful behaviours, addictions and the real-time unravelling of human beings. In some cases, there is a deliberate and orchestrated effort to silence and suppress the truth. We have seen that happen repeatedly to victims of abuse who have bravely taken the decision to share their story. Máiría Cahill's case is one that comes to mind. Pile-ons from Twitter trolls who thrive on spreading misinformation and use online platforms as yet another avenue for intimidation have become par for the course. Social media is not just the playground of bullies from the far right. While it is encouraging that some prosecutions have been made against those who issue threats and misinformation on social media, legislation has clearly failed to keep pace with a rapidly evolving medium.

We need to tackle all forms of online violence — yes, violence against women and girls but also violence against children, society's most vulnerable, who remain inadequately protected within current frameworks. What a person does and says online remains for ever. It can have profound and lasting consequences. I think of the tragic case of Jo Cox MP, which reminds us all of the real-world impact of online hate and urges us to consider the weight of our online behaviour. Eight years on from her murder, little has been learned. Social media giants have not done enough to protect people, and legislation continues to fall short.

I stand in solidarity with women across the North, across the world, in the Chamber and across the political spectrum, including, of course, my party colleagues, who have been the targets of horrific online abuse. I commend Cara, the proposer of the motion, who has spoken out so bravely about it. The courage that it takes to step into the world of politics, especially in today's climate, must not be underestimated. If we are to foster a safe, more inclusive space for all, we first need to be mindful that words are combustible. What is said on the Floor or shared online has the power to ignite. Sadly, it is a power more often used and seen for bad than for good.

I regret that we will oppose the Alliance Party's amendment. We recognise, as the motion does, that this is a reserved matter, but that is not to absolve the Executive of their responsibility or the Justice Minister of hers. We have heard from Alliance today that the Minister has shown great leadership on the issues. I do not dispute for a second that she has, but you cannot take responsibility for all progress that has been made and, at the same time, seek to be absolved of responsibility for any further progress that is required.

We welcome the strategy to tackle violence against women and girls, but it is null and void without the necessary funding to support it. The Executive need to put their money where their mouth is. Existing criminal law must be reviewed here and in Westminster in order to offer proper protection to victims of online abuse, and we will —.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Go raibh maith agat as sin.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Members, take your ease.

Ms Hunter: I beg to move

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): The Business Committee has agreed to allow up to one hour for the debate. The proposer of the motion will have five minutes in which to propose and five minutes in which to make a winding-up speech. As two amendments have been selected and are published on the Marshalled List, the Business Committee has agreed that 16 minutes will be added to the total time for the debate. Please open the debate on the motion.

Ms Hunter: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I thank the Members from across the House who have given us their attention and enthusiasm throughout the previous debates. I thank them for being here and contributing.

I rise to address a critical issue, which is how we educate our young people on establishing and maintaining healthy relationships. Relationships and sexuality education, which is also known as "RSE", should equip our young people with the knowledge and skills to foster healthy relationships, understand boundaries and recognise harmful behaviours. However, for some, including me, RSE in Northern Ireland has, historically, definitely not been fit for purpose. It is really important that it encompasses things such as consent.

The findings of Ulster University's healthy young adult relationships project are stark. They reveal significant gaps in how we teach our young people about coercive control, consent and the dynamics of power and abuse in relationships. Those gaps are not just academically recognised; they have real-world consequences, some of which were highlighted in our previous debates. Across the House, we know the statistics: one in three women worldwide will experience either physical or sexual violence in their lifetime, most often, sadly, at the hands of their partner. In Northern Ireland, domestic abuse crimes reached a record high last year, with over 35,000 incidents reported. Every one of us hears about and sees such things happening all the time in our constituencies. It is absolutely devastating for the victims. A 2021 study found that 71% of our young people across these islands have experienced or witnessed coercive control in their relationships.

For years, our curriculum here has been woefully outdated. The Education (Curriculum Minimum Content) Order 2007, which sets out what should be included and discussed in RSE, does not mention the word "consent" even once: that is crazy. Consent exists in all aspects of our lives. How can we expect young people to navigate the complexities of modern relationships when we fail to teach them about that fundamental concept? I feel strongly about that.

The Education Committee is working through RSE developments and coming to agreement. Thankfully, we agree on more than we disagree on, so I think that there is a wide acknowledgement of the need to educate our young people. We have been listening to young people as well, and I thank the team at the Secondary Students' Union (SSUNI), particularly a young lady named Lauren, who has put together a document called 'Let Us Learn', which explores issues such as the importance of consent, understanding what coercive control looks like and, most important, educating our young people who are experiencing abuse in relationships so that they have the words to describe it, to understand what it looks like and to know whom to go to and to speak to if they are experiencing harm, intimidation or threat. I also spoke with young ladies at Thornhill College in Derry, and they had talked through the importance of including things such as the dangers of spiking in our RSE curriculum. They said that they do not feel ready for the world, and they think that RSE can be one answer in preparing them for real-life situations and preparing them to go out into the world and feeling most confident when establishing and maintaining relationships.

Consent is not just a box to tick; it is the cornerstone of healthy relationships. Without a clear understanding of consent, young people are left vulnerable to coercion, abuse and harm. That is particularly urgent when we consider the rise of online abuse, image-based sexual violence and the normalisation of harmful gender stereotypes in digital spaces. It is also really important that we talk about things such as rape myths in RSE and ensure that they are part of the conversation.

This is about not just education but prevention, and comprehensive RSE has been shown to reduce rates of sexual violence, improve relationship satisfaction and empower young people to make informed choices. It is about giving them the tools to recognise abuse and arming them with the confidence to know where to go to seek help and to speak up. That is why, today, I call on the Minister of Education to work with the Minister of Justice to establish a task force dedicated to enhancing RSE. The task force must address the gaps identified in the healthy young adult relationships project and implement its recommendations by December 2025. The reason why that is so important is that it is a tangible target and has a timeline. It is very topical, and we have been doing extensive research at Committee level. I really think that establishing a task force will bring a lot of justice to the topic.

Why now? We cannot afford to wait. I firmly believe that, every day that we delay, we fail another generation of young people. We fail to equip them with the knowledge to build respectful relationships, and we fail to protect them from harm. I urge every Member across the House to vote for our motion.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Thank you. I call David Brooks to move amendment No 1.

Mr Brooks: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. With the shortened speaking times —.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Please move the amendment.

Mr Brooks: I beg to move amendment No 1:

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Thank you. You have five minutes to propose and three minutes to wind. Please open the debate on amendment No 1.

Mr Brooks: Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker, for the second time. With constrained speaking times today, the Chair of the Education Committee and other colleagues from the Committee may wonder whether I will get past the preamble in the debate.

In the context of the debate, although the term "RSE" often invokes passionate and diametrically opposed positions and, as we may see, differences even in how we should approach such education, it is important that we outline that on which there is agreement. I do not think that there is any Member of the Assembly who would not argue that we have work to do in addressing the trend in violence towards women and girls in our society. We will all have been part of debates in the Chamber, often following another horrific attack or murder. Many will have had to engage with the families or individuals affected and speak to police or press about incidents in our constituencies.

Many aspects of concern have been brought to the Education Committee during our mini RSE inquiry, an inquiry that, in general terms, has probably taken disproportionate priority and, perhaps, more time than many of us would have liked. Nevertheless, it has produced some useful sessions and information. Many sessions have found broad agreement on issues around violence against women and girls, online harms and ensuring that young people have age-appropriate tools to enable them to understand when someone has been inappropriate with them and how to report that. It is important to recognise that, on an issue that is often defined by polarising points or finer nuances on which we will continue to disagree, we often share similar concerns around the issues at the heart of the discussion.

The curtailed time that I have does not allow for an in-depth discussion of the Ulster University report, but, in general, I feel that much work in that area is worth considering. However, at some point, we need to step beyond theorising and focus on forward movement and action. I also express some concern about the weight given to reports — it applies not only to this report — that seem to be based on a relatively small and potentially quite unrepresentative sample. In any case, the Executive have now agreed an overarching strategy that outlines their range of commitments to addressing violence against women and girls and to promoting healthy relationships, with collaboration by Departments across the Executive. The report, in some instances, will share synergy on some issues with which, as has been said, sadly, we are all increasingly familiar.

The Executive's strategy is to be actioned through a delivery plan, which is to say that the Ministers already have a blueprint for action. I know that the Education Minister is committed to playing his part. That blueprint, rather than regularly published academic or interest group papers, should now provide a plan for action and progress that should be the focus for Executive Ministers. I am not arguing that this and other reports and submissions should not be duly considered, but it is one of a range of contributions on the issue, many of which will have helped to shape and inform the thinking of Members and Ministers and should be considered in that manner rather than being adopted as an alternative action plan to the Executive's plan.

Again, I will address the changes that we have proposed to the motion. Personally, I am not convinced of the ask for a joint departmental task force to be assembled. It feels like a proposal that will simply take up more time. There is already a commitment to the cross-departmental action plan. Departments and, I am sure, Ministers are more than aware and informed of the issues at hand and are more than capable of collaborating and considering the necessary steps that they can collaborate on. They are best placed to put forward any further proposals or structures required, and I am sure that the Minister will touch on that.

I have listened and will listen to the Opposition's arguments today, but my initial thinking is that such a proposal, in the context of the motion and the existing work that Departments have committed to, seems arbitrary. I am not convinced that it would necessarily lead to expedited or additional meaningful action in the area.

Our amendment also commits to parental consent. I have expressed before that I do not believe that there would be many cases in which parents would wish to have a child excluded from such teaching. Even representatives from groups that may normally be stereotyped as being resistant to elements of RSE have expressed their lack of an issue with many elements discussed during the RSE mini inquiry. It was noted that rates of potential parental opt-out have been exceptionally low, even among people of faith. That said, the right to exercise parental rights should remain. This party continues to support the right of parents to parent their children; they should have primacy and the right to raise their children in accordance with their own beliefs and principles within the law. To be fair, the importance of parental —.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Time is up.

Mr Brooks: Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Thank you, Mr Brooks.

I call Kate Nicholl to move amendment No 2.

Ms Nicholl: I beg to move amendment No 2:

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): The Assembly should note that the amendments are mutually exclusive. If amendment No 1 is made, the Question will not be put on amendment No 2. The Member has five minutes to propose the amendment and three minutes to make a winding-up speech. All other Members who are called to speak will have three minutes.

Ms Nicholl: I thank the proposer of the motion. I think that we all welcome any opportunity to talk about tackling violence against women and girls, and RSE is such an important part of that.

I start by paying tribute to my colleague Sorcha Eastwood MP, who made such a personal and moving speech in the House of Commons earlier this week about her experience of domestic abuse. It takes so much bravery to talk about those experiences, and what she has faced since, on social media in particular, has been vile.

I have moved from the Education Committee to the Economy Committee, but I have always been really passionate about RSE. I have spoken in the House about how educating our young people is safeguarding and will play such an important role in changing the toxic attitudes that make Northern Ireland the most dangerous place in Europe to be a woman. The sentiment of the motion is good, and we welcome it, but the Alliance amendment is concerned more with the how.

We were surprised to see an RSE motion in the Order Paper in light of the fact that the Education Committee is just weeks away from wrapping up the inquiry on this very topic. The inquiry has heard from a wide range of experts — I have been watching — including the excellent healthy young adult relationships project, which is referenced in the motion, and has received a huge number of reports and submissions.

My party's amendment challenges what additional benefit would be yielded by requesting yet another task force when we have the Gillen review, the Committee's ongoing work, the ETI report on preventative curriculum and the Executive's strategy and action plan on ending violence against women and girls. Whilst we agree that we cannot afford to wait, we are concerned that another task force would risk disrupting and possibly delaying actions that should be well under way.

Ultimately, policy around RSE reform is a matter for the Education Minister. The inquiry has heard from a diverse range of stakeholders who agree on the pivotal role that RSE plays in challenging dangerous mindsets and also in safeguarding, as I mentioned, so that our young people are able to recognise the signs of abuse. It is that latter point, in particular, that galvanises support from organisations such as the NSPCC, the Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People and the Children's Law Centre, to name a few, that a standardised and mandatory RSE curriculum is necessary to protect our children and young people from harm. Acknowledging the specific duties of the Education Minister on RSE is not to abdicate the Justice Minister from any role in that space when talking about violence against women and girls. On the contrary, the Justice Minister has been extremely proactive in that regard. For example, she brought forward the first stand-alone domestic abuse legislation in Northern Ireland, which included criminalising coercive control.

Of course, it is vital to prevent behaviours that result in convictions. I remember that, in 2021, in recognition of that fact, Minister Long met the then Education Minister, Peter Weir, to understand how the RSE minimum content order could better support work to prevent offending and tackle the toxic ideas that some people have around sexual relationships and that can be promoted online. Minister Weir agreed that the Department of Education would take the lead on the subgroup of the Gillen education and awareness group to look at the provision of RSE in schools, including a review of the minimum content order. Unfortunately, neither Minister Weir nor his successor took that forward. That was partly due to the collapse of these institutions, which, inevitably, set back vital work across a range of priorities.

That having been said, I am encouraged by the current Minister's responses to questions for written answer. He has said that his Department is considering how the curriculum and specifically RSE can support the ending violence against women and girls strategy. Therefore, my party's amendment requests an update from the Education Minister on completed and planned actions on the Gillen review, as well as responsibilities under the strategic framework to end violence against women and girls. I hope that Members will endorse our amendment, which welcomes the spirit of the motion and its original intention, but seeks to ensure that the motion's focus on RSE is directed appropriately.

The time for task forces and reports has passed. Our focus must now be on delivery of a fit-for-purpose RSE regime. That includes necessary support and training for teachers and schools. Ultimately, that is how we will deliver societal change. That is what is needed to grapple with the issue, which is not only ruining the lives of many young women and girls but is, ultimately, costing lives. My party hopes that you will support our amendment. We support the motion's intention.

Mr Sheehan: Sinn Féin fully supports the need for a relationships and sexuality education curriculum that is age-appropriate, fact-based and delivered consistently across all schools. If we are serious about issues such as child safeguarding, supporting young people to have happy and healthy relationships, consent and tacking violence against women and girls, giving children access to proper RSE in schools is vital. I have sat on the Education Committee for a number of years. One thing that has come up time and time again is the inconsistency of provision and, often, lack of provision of RSE in schools. Young people themselves have told us that. Many tell us that they go through their entire educational journey without receiving education on that topic.

While it is important to commend schools that deliver high-quality RSE to their pupils, the issue here is consistency — or, in this case, lack of consistency. Many schools are not grasping that it is an issue. Some are being led by external influences. That does not serve the needs of children and young people. Teachers need to be empowered, and they need the proper training and resources to teach RSE effectively. New legislation is welcome, but will it deliver what is required? I am not sure that it will.

The topic needs to be underpinned by fact when it is taught to young people and to be delivered in a consistent manner across schools. There can be no equivocation in that. The need for proper RSE as part of the curriculum is clear. It is a child protection issue, and, according to the NSPCC:

Such organisations are the experts, and they should be listened to.

I have been clear in previous debates on education that the child should be central in policy development.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Time is up.

Mr Sheehan: I have also said countless times that we need to be led by the evidence.

Mr Crawford: Our children and young people are growing up in an increasingly complex digital world where they need to know how to stay safe and be healthy. Like other Members, I want to make sure that young people understand what healthy relationships look like and how they can navigate their personal lives in a positive, safe and healthy way to embrace the challenges of creating a happy and successful adult life. RSE can support children and young people to develop healthy relationships and to keep themselves and others safe, both online and offline. Whilst we know that many schools already teach those topics, very well in some cases, it is important that we ensure universal coverage and improve quality for all pupils.

The focus of RSE in primary school should be on building healthy relationships, including friendships and family relationships, and on dealing with strangers, with the ultimate goal of staying safe. As children move to secondary school, they should start to develop their understanding of healthy adult relationships in more depth. That should include different types of relationships. Young people should be taught how to recognise, understand and build healthy relationships, including through teaching on self-respect and respect for others, tolerance, boundaries and on how to recognise unhealthy relationships, including coercive control.

It is evident that wider concerns about the safety and well-being of women and girls relate to the types of topic that the subject can cover, such as online abuse, sexting, sexual harassment, stalking and ways of preventing violence against women and girls. The healthy young adult relationships project report, which was written by researchers at Ulster University, makes evidence-based recommendations on the teaching of age-appropriate knowledge and information to build healthy and safe relationships.

RSE is a multidisciplinary subject, and any improved working relationships involving the Department of Education and the Department of Justice should be welcomed in enhancing RSE as a method of tackling violence against women and girls.

Mr Gaston: I will be brief. I want to address how violence against girls is dealt with within relationships and sexuality education. Given the history of the issue in Northern Ireland and the position of parties on the matter, it will come as a surprise to some that the House has had to wait until my contribution to hear anyone highlight the world's biggest killer when it comes to girls: abortion. It is estimated that, in 2024, some 14 million children were issued out into eternity before they could even be born. In many countries, abortion means that girls are vastly more likely to perish than boys. It is shameful that there is not more openness on the issue. In October last year, I asked the Health Minister to detail the number of abortions that have been carried out since the change in legislation and for the figure to be broken down by health and social care trust. He still has not answered. Tellingly, no other MLA has asked that question. The last MLA to get a reply was Jim Allister, who was told in May 2024 that the figure stood at 8,490. If Members are concerned about violence against girls and want to address it in a motion about RSE, the motion should attack the fact that RSE must, by law, teach pupils how to access services that result in the end of life.

Mr Carroll: If we want to end gender-based violence for good, we need to prevent it from happening in the first place and from the earliest possible stages. We need to change the cultural attitudes that allow gender-based violence to spread across society as well as in the home, and the best way in which to teach that is in the classroom.

Standardised and inclusive RSE should be taught in every single school across the board to help fight harmful stereotypes about gender and to promote relationships based on respect, equality and consent. High-quality RSE can stamp out sexism, misogyny, victim blaming and rape culture. The DUP amendment, if made, will effectively allow pupils to skip, as the Member for South Belfast indicated, essential, life-saving education and learning of life skills. Instead, the reality is that young people are in a postcode lottery when it comes to RSE, which varies widely in quality, quantity and content, if it happens at all.

We need to fight back against racist, far-right myths about the role of so-called grooming gangs in child sexual exploitation. Those myths are being peddled by some in the House. The perpetrators of abuse and violence against women are usually males who are white. Child sexual exploitation and violence against women is, in the vast majority of cases, perpetrated by people who are known to the victim and their family. We cannot allow people's justified outrage at violence and child exploitation to be weaponised by far-right agitators, who are out only to make political gain.

We also need to examine critically the role of Churches and religious bodies in RSE. Churches should not have a veto over what is taught in schools or in education settings, especially when it comes to teaching young people about consent and healthy relationships. Organisations that have anti-trans and anti-LGBT agendas should not dictate school policy on what is taught either. The DUP talks about the importance of parental choice in education, especially for RSE, but, in practice, its actions show a shocking lack of respect for parental choice when it comes to school integration. The DUP cannot have it both ways.

We are also missing an important opportunity by not having a school-wide roll-out of the NSPCC Talk PANTS programme. It is an age-appropriate programme to make young people aware of what abuse can look like in order to protect and safeguard them in cases in which they could be at risk of abuse. Disappointingly, the Department does not have the figures for the number of schools that have availed themselves of that possibly life-saving resource. I urge the Minister to get the data, get the research and ensure that the programme is rolled out in schools right across the North.

Ms Sugden: I recall a meeting that I had as Minister of Justice a number of years ago. It was with a group of young people probably aged between 14 and 16. The conversations that we had about what was felt to be appropriate or, indeed, inappropriate stayed with me. It is shocking to know and understand what young people are thinking and are saying to one another. Eight years later, young people are still telling me troubling stories about life online, and we heard about the WhatsApp group in the previous debate, where hundreds of boys and young men say the most inappropriate things. There are figures on the influence of harmful figures on social media and on the deep hurt and fear that young women and girls are feeling.

The world that our children are navigating today is very different from the world in which we all grew up. As a parent, I recognise my limitations. I do not fully understand the challenges that children and young people are experiencing today. I suggest that most of us in the Chamber do not understand those challenges.

I am self-aware enough to know that, 10 years from now, when my child becomes that age, I will know much less. I want my daughter and all young people, including boys and young men, to be equipped with the knowledge and skills to navigate, regrettably, one of the most dangerous regions in Europe for young girls and women. That is why RSE matters.

I appreciate that parents worry that RSE will overstep into their role. However, RSE is carefully designed to be age appropriate, and I fully expect that our current Minister of Education will ensure that. RSE for younger children is about kindness and boundaries, and for older children, it is about consent, respect and recognising abuse. It is not a displacement of parental or family rights; rather, it complements what we teach at home, providing young people with the tools that they need to thrive in relationships and society.

It is important to note that babies do not come with a manual and perfect parents are not born the day their children are. Why do we assume that all parents do not need help in this area? Why do we assume that parents do not need to be guided in how to become parents? We do not do well, in Northern Ireland, in supporting our parents. We teach women how to give birth; I do not think we teach men or dads anything. I suggest that RSE is a way of complementing our parenting skills, not a way of interfering in them.

Of course, we must deliver it well, which is why we propose a task force to ensure that teachers are trained. The Minister knows that teachers, parents and young people are asking for that. This is not about preventing harm but creating a culture of respect where consent is understood, harmful norms are challenged and everyone can thrive in a healthy relationship.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): That concludes our list of Members who wish to speak. I call on the Minister of Education to respond. Minister, you have up to 10 minutes.

Mr Givan (The Minister of Education): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I am grateful for the opportunity to respond to the motion and the amendment.

I begin by placing on record that relationships and sexuality education is an important part of the curriculum, particularly in developing our young people both as well-rounded individuals and contributors to society. Effective RSE encourages children and young people to value themselves and make responsible and well-informed decisions about their lives. Education about healthy relationships can help to address very serious societal issues, such as violence against women and girls, understanding and respecting consent, dealing with misogyny and coercive control. Violence against women and girls — indeed, violence in all forms — is a systemic and deep-rooted problem in our society. Addressing it is a key priority for our Executive. Schools are well placed to help shape the behaviours and attitudes of our young people and to support future generations to develop healthy, respectful relationships. That is done through RSE but also more widely across the curriculum and in schools' culture, policies and practice.

A recent report by the National Youth Agency stressed that young people need more than just RSE in the classroom to develop healthy relationships. It emphasised the vital contribution that role models play throughout the different aspects of young people's lives, including parents, grandparents and youth and community workers. Young people need long-term, trusting relationships with adults to whom they can talk about the challenges and issues that they experience.

I note that the healthy young adults relationships project report from Ulster University was referenced in the motion, and it is an important contribution to understanding the issues surrounding coercive control and its impact on young people. I pay particular tribute to the young people from the Lagmore Youth Project who played a key role, working with the research team, in developing the report. We need to listen to the views of those young people, and our young people and their families, and be informed by them.

I emphasise that learning about healthy relationships is currently an important part of the school curriculum. Children and young people begin to learn about the importance of relationships as soon as they start school. From Foundation Stage, pupils should be enabled to explore themselves, their personal attributes and their own and others' feelings and emotions. Some of the issues to be explored as children progress through school include: initiating, developing and sustaining mutually satisfying relationships; human rights; and social responsibility. In post-primary school, young people are also given opportunities to explore the qualities of a loving, respectful relationship, developing coping strategies to deal with challenging relationship scenarios and strategies to avoid and resolve conflict.

To support schools in the effective delivery of the RSE curriculum, CCEA has developed its RSE progression framework to provide a sequenced pathway in priority areas of RSE from Foundation Stage through to post-16. That includes the important area of domestic and sexual violence and abuse.

It is also my priority to learn from, and disseminate examples of, excellent practice that we already see in our schools. Some of those were highlighted by the Education and Training Inspectorate in its 2022 survey on the preventative curriculum. For example, one post-primary school identified a group of year 10 girls who required a time-bound programme on healthy relationships in response to a recent incident. The impact of the intervention resulted in a greater understanding of respect, positive decision-making and a decrease in behavioural incidents. Fifteen teachers also volunteered to mentor year 10 girls to support their emotional well-being, and training was provided in trauma-informed practice.

Teachers know best how to teach, how to convey knowledge effectively and how to unlock understanding. In order to bring the curriculum to life, teachers need the space to create lessons that engage their pupils, and children need the time to develop their thinking and to retain and apply knowledge. I would be wrong, therefore, not to note my concern about the growing tendency, not just in Northern Ireland but globally, to place unrealistic expectations on schools to solve every issue that faces society. Our rapidly changing world places new demands on society, especially the education sector, on issues from tackling poverty to addressing family breakdown to the challenges of the digital age to violence against women and girls. There is an increasing, pervasive belief that schools alone can, and should, provide the solutions. Interest groups, politicians and Governments put increasing pressure on the school curriculum to change in response to these multiple issues and competing demands. At the same time, the school curriculum lacks the space to easily add new content without causing overcrowding. While schools have a role to play — an important role — we must be careful not to burden them with being the sole agents of change. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development has raised particular concerns in that regard. An overloaded curriculum can put pressure on teachers to teach an excess of material, potentially risking superficial content coverage. Students may also feel stress and pressure due to a lack of time to consider issues thoroughly. That, in turn, can undermine their ability to engage in deeper learning. Curriculum overload can be a stressor to students and teachers —

Mr Carroll: Will the Minister give way?

Mr Givan: — and even serve as an impediment to learning.

I am not going to give way to the Member. Thank goodness that he does not have responsibility for RSE in our schools. Never would I want my children to be subject to the kind of approach that he would take to RSE. I will not give way to that Member.

The OECD is also very clear about two issues: students need to learn deeper, not more; and subjects should not simply be independent blocks, but rather interdependent pieces of puzzle to create a coherent whole with opportunities for cross-curricular learning on key concepts. That is why I am keen not to isolate RSE from the reality of the wider school curriculum by establishing a separate one-issue task force. Rather, I wish to consider it coherently as an integral part of my wider review of the curriculum.

Members will know that I have engaged Lucy Crehan to carry out a focused review of the design and delivery of the Northern Ireland curriculum. Our current skills-based curriculum was introduced in 2007. Areas of the current curriculum lack clarity on the core knowledge and skills to be developed. Critically, in every area of learning, pupils' experiences of the curriculum may, therefore, vary significantly from school to school, depending on the leadership approach to curriculum development. I want to ensure that every child is taught a broad, ambitious and knowledge-rich curriculum that develops their learning in a well-sequenced and explicit manner. Such an approach will also support our teachers with high-quality resources. We need a new approach to the curriculum in Northern Ireland that continues to limit unnecessary prescription but specifies the key knowledge and accompanying skills that every child should expect to master in core subjects at every Key Stage. That revised approach is vital for RSE, as well as all other areas of the curriculum. Focus, rigour and coherence are key curriculum design principles in all top-performing nations, with crucial topics being identified and ordered in a logical way to create well-structured progression for educational experts, not long lists of contemporary issues that politicians and interest lobbies identify.

That brings me neatly to one of the amendments. I note the Committee's inquiry, which will, no doubt, gather important evidence from stakeholders. However, I am concerned that the best approaches to curriculum and pedagogy should come not from politicians but from educationalists, who are well informed about the development of a well-sequenced, communicative and thoughtful learning experience. I also highlight the fact that my officials have been part of the Gillen review implementation group since 2020. Three out of the four actions that were assigned to my Department have been completed. Work on addressing what are commonly referred to as "rape myths" will be taken forward under the leadership of the Department of Justice, with input from CCEA as needed. I am also fully committed to supporting the delivery of the strategic framework to end violence against women and girls. That will be reflected in the plans and actions that my Department will take forward.

Relationships and sexuality education is a crucial part of promoting healthy relationships. I am committed to ensuring that we have a fit-for-purpose curriculum for RSE and, indeed, every subject area that carefully builds on and sequences children's key knowledge and understanding of those important issues as they progress through their education.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Thank you, Minister, for that response. I call Nick Mathison to make a winding-up speech on amendment No 2. Nick, you have up to three minutes.

Mr Mathison: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I am very conscious that my time is short, so I will keep my remarks as brief as possible. I probably will not have the opportunity to refer to individual Members' points.

I will refer to the Minister's points briefly before I go any further. I welcome the Minister's confirmation that he considers RSE to be a crucial part of the curriculum in Northern Ireland. That is certainly a very different tone from the previous time that we debated RSE, when, I think, he referred to sex education as "the Alliance Party's pet project". It is good to see that the Minister has moved on from that, and the debate in the Chamber has reflected that RSE is certainly much more than that.

I will emphasise a couple of things. First, while the motion is welcome, its timing is odd. The Education Committee is very close to concluding its inquiry. Some Members have suggested that the inquiry has run for longer than they would like, but we have heard evidence from those who are involved in the healthy young adult relationships project and from a whole range of expert witnesses. While many of the recommendations in the report that was referenced are very welcome, it would be good to deal with the issue in the round and bring some recommendations to the Assembly and to the Minister that take into account all the evidence that was heard by the Committee.

I also want to make it very clear, as my colleague Kate Nicholl did, that the Justice Minister is very keen to work with all Departments in the space of promoting healthy relationships and tackling violence against women and girls. The motion's stated purpose, however, was about enhancing RSE, and it is very clear that the responsibility for that lies with the Education Minister. We definitely do not need another task force to do that; we simply need an Education Minister who will listen to young people and ensure that we have an RSE curriculum that is fit for purpose and meets the needs of young people rather than the inconsistent and patchy provision that we see across Northern Ireland. It is very clear from the Minister's contribution that dealing with violence against women and girls is a whole-Executive challenge. It is a whole-society challenge. I do not argue with that at all, but RSE is critical to that, and it lies with his Department. It is important that that is not pushed aside by saying, "Well, look, it is for everybody". Delivering the right curriculum is for the Minister.

On that basis, I hope that our amendment receives support. It lets the Committee process run its course and deliver a full suite of recommendations on RSE in due course. It further asks that the Minister sets out updates on his work on the Gillen review and the strategic framework. We have heard a little bit today about that, but I would have liked to hear a bit more detail on it.

I will turn very briefly to the DUP amendment. Regrettably, it fails to acknowledge something really crucial, which is the fact that RSE is failing our young people. That amendment does not acknowledge that RSE is not fit for purpose, so, in light of that starting point, we cannot support it. We need to see change in that space.

We do not need to focus our energy on a new task force. We need to sort out the reform of the curriculum and the RSE delivery that we all know are so desperately needed.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): I call Diane Dodds to make a winding-up speech on amendment No 1. Diane, you have up to three minutes.

Mrs Dodds: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. If we look at the positives from the debate, we could say that the Chamber is committed to a society where violence against women and girls is a thing of the past.

There is an understanding and a broad consensus on the need to help young people to understand what loving, healthy, respectful relationships are and how they can be part of one.

To the proposer of the motion, it is important to say that we need to help young people and, indeed, adults. The Health Committee spent some time talking about older adults and the issues of consent and coercive control.

Ms Hunter: Will the Member give way?

Mrs Dodds: No, I am sorry. I do not have any time.

All those things are hugely important. However, when we, as a body of politicians, are here deciding on a motion and even on legislation, the evidence that we use should be wide-ranging and broadly based. I thank the young people who are referred to in the text for their contributions. It is massively important to hear from young people, but we also need to hear the outcomes of, for example, the RSE inquiry that the Education Committee is taking forward and from many other groups. I think that there is consensus among some in the Chamber on that.

It is really important to talk to young people; I have said and emphasised that. That is massive. It is also important to talk about and acknowledge the role of parents, teachers and governors in developing the RSE curriculum. Over 13,000 people responded to a recent consultation exercise that the Department of Education conducted on the teaching around abortion in the RSE curriculum. That is one of the largest consultation responses that, I am sure, you will get anywhere. It confirmed the need for the RSE curriculum to be developed and consulted on in a local setting and in partnership with parents, teachers and school governors. That is also important.

Mr Carroll talked about the DUP. In the consultation responses, there were parents who also argued for the right to opt out if they wanted to do so. It is important that we acknowledge parental choice on the issue.

We have talked a lot about the issues of consent and how we deal with them. We should all be encouraged that, in the wider review of the curriculum, the Minister has confirmed that those issues can be integrated —

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

Mrs Dodds: — across the curriculum. That is the type of exciting innovation that we need for the future.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): I call Colin McGrath to conclude and wind up the debate on the motion. The Member has up to five minutes.

Mr McGrath: Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker.

In every society and in every age, there is an injustice on which everybody feels that they must come together to overcome in order for us to have a peaceful and civil society. In the last number of years, the issue of violence against women and girls has really come to the fore and needs to be addressed by us. It was in that spirit that the Opposition tabled a suite of motions that we can debate and discuss in this place today. It gives us an opportunity to test where there is consensus and agreement in order to see how we can progress and move matters forward.

The debate has been positive. I sense that, in the Chamber, there is more that we agree than we disagree on. Importantly, that sends a message to people that we are trying to work together to achieve a programme that will work in our schools and help our young people.

There are undeniable facts. We have one of the highest rates for murders of women. As a society, we should not just sit back and acknowledge that; we must do something about it. In order to do something about it, we must recognise — there is a fair recognition of this — that there is, among some, a value base or an approach that is inconsistent with the peaceful society that we want to see.

The best way to support young people is, first and foremost, within the family, and then we get the opportunity to reinforce that in the education system by educating young people. That also allows us to address the imbalances, if there are any, where families are not teaching the correct values for society. We get that opportunity to do what we can to address the imbalances.

Mr Carroll: I thank the Member for giving way. The Minister has no longer any excuses for not introducing standardised RSE across the board. Teachers are under pressure — all education workers are — so does the Member agree that it would be worth looking at the amount of time that teachers spend on examinations and homework, which put a lot of pressure on them and on young people? That could be a way to look at the issue of RSE.

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

Mr McGrath: I am in the job of trying to get votes, so I will not say that there should be more homework. That is something that should be addressed.

In this context, however, we should prioritise the type of education that we want to give our young people that shapes them best for the future. In the context of what we are discussing today, there is an opportunity to have an approach in RSE in our schools that helps to shape our young people to be the best citizens for the future and would be a good help to them.

Very briefly, I say that I am enjoying the fact that more and more Members are saying that the debates are too short and they are not getting the opportunity to participate. That is good. Turning up to these debates is good. When we first had a round of Opposition days, the Chamber was empty, and we had all the debates done in about two hours instead of four hours. Suddenly, now that we have condensed it, everybody is jumping up and down saying that they do not have enough time. That is good and positive, and that is what the Opposition brings to the Chamber. It gives us an opportunity to examine issues as important as RSE and the other motions that have been presented today. I like the fact that people feel that they under a little bit of pressure for the time to do that.

We have two amendments before us. I struggle a little with the DUP amendment: not with its overall context but because it does not acknowledge that what we have at the moment is not fit for purpose. It removes the references to the academic research, which comes from the experts and not the politicians. One or two people have said that it is not for politicians to set the agenda, but this is about the experts in academia. They came up with the report. We do not think that removing the references to that is a good thing. The amendment also replaces the sense of implementing recommendations with reviewing them, which takes our foot off the pedal a bit.

We are happy to support the Alliance amendment, although we believe that all Ministers should be involved. Justice has a really important part to play, and we would love to see the Justice Minister doing more.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Before I put the Question on amendment No 1, I remind Members that the amendments are mutually exclusive. If amendment No 1 is made, I will not put the Question on amendment No 2.

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

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Members, please take your ease before we move to the next item.

Mr O'Toole: I beg to move

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): The Business Committee has agreed to allow up to one hour for the debate. The proposer of the motion will have five minutes to propose and five 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 eight minutes will be added to the total time for the debate. Matthew, please open the debate.

Mr O'Toole: Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. This is the final debate in a series of debates on Opposition day on motions that have focused on violence against women and girls and the broader urgent crisis that we face in this society around tackling violence against and abuse of women. Our motions are constructive, the debates have been rigorous and constructive, and I think that we have made progress. There has been significant consensus but also a thorough exchange of views. I hope that progress arises out of today's Opposition day.

The final motion is about gender-responsive budgeting. The motions today have been a mix: we have dealt with the downstream consequences of misogyny, tolerance of hateful attitudes towards women and tolerance of misogyny and awful behaviour, particularly among men; but we have also dealt with and discussed upstream policy interventions to stop those outcomes. The final motion is about one particular form of upstream policy intervention, which is gender-responsive budgeting. What does gender-responsive budgeting mean? In simple terms, it is making sure that all budgetary, financial and significant expenditure decisions are made, or at least analysed, through the lens of their impact on gender equality.

It is important to say, first of all, that this measure is not some abstruse, left-wing preoccupation. Actually, it is normal practice. The majority of OECD countries now practise some form of gender-responsive budgeting. It is also important to say that gender-responsive budgeting can feel a little bit like a relatively abstruse, slightly academic framework that interests people who pay attention to and look closely at the detail of public expenditure or those of us who serve on the Finance Committee and take a close interest in these things. Actually, it is about the delivery of the most urgent policy priorities that our society faces, that Stormont confronts and that our people want delivery on. Childcare, the health service, economic inactivity and crime all have vastly differential gender impacts that, bluntly, the women of Northern Ireland deal with every day. They deal with the differential consequences of policy priorities and policy delivery that have not properly prioritised them and their needs. We know, for example, that, disproportionately and historically, the burden of caring responsibilities, whether for children, elderly parents or disabled family members, has fallen and still falls on women. We know that the consequences of caring for career prospects, financial position and, indeed, mental health, also fall disproportionately on women.

When we talk about childcare, we are talking about a gender-based issue. When looking at how we finance childcare, we are talking about an issue that should be looked at through the lens of gender-responsive budgeting. It is, however, also true to say that, in a number of specific areas, analysing policy outcomes through a gender lens will also require us to look at specific differential impacts on, for example, Protestant working-class boys. When it comes to the differential in their educational outcomes, gender-responsive budgeting would be able to uncover, analyse and unpack that. This is a hugely important development in rigorous and impactful policy development in most developed countries.

I will not go through all the details, but a whole range of toolkits and frameworks has been produced by organisations such as the OECD to advise countries that wish to pursue gender-responsive budgeting. It is also true that the UK, of which we are a devolved part, is an outlier, in that it has not pursued it. Gender-responsive budgeting is pursued in Scotland in a devolved context. We think that this is a hugely important way in which we can improve how we address the gender inequality in our public policy outcomes. We also think, as our motion says, that the Executive should introduce this promptly. It may not be possible to do it for the 2025-26 financial year, but we hope to hear from the Finance Minister about how she wants to make progress.

We have many concerns, to be honest, about the amendment. Although I understand some of what the amendment seeks to do, it also seems to seek to negate the motion entirely.

Gender-responsive budgeting presents a hugely important opportunity for us —

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Can the Member draw his remarks to a close, please?

Mr O'Toole: — to address significant gender inequality across a whole range of policy outcomes. We commend the motion to the House and look forward to a constructive debate.

Ms Forsythe: I beg to move the following amendment:

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Diane, you will have five minutes to propose the amendment and three minutes to make a winding-up speech. All other Members who are called to speak will have three minutes.

Ms Forsythe: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I welcome the opportunity to recognise the importance of addressing systemic inequalities in our society, including in respect of gender. I thank the Opposition for tabling the motion. DUP Ministers have recognised those inequalities and taken actions to date. The Communities Minister, Gordon Lyons, has paved the way for gender pay reporting to be operationalised as part of the employment Bill that is coming from the Department for the Economy. In Education, Paul Givan's childcare subsidy scheme is benefiting many female parents who would otherwise struggle to return to or stay in the labour market, which was mentioned by the leader of the Opposition.

Our Budget process is one way in which we can enable better-informed decision-making with respect to the impact of policy and spending on gender inequalities in the workplace, at home or in society more generally. My party does not see a need for there to be separate budgets for men and women in order to make that happen. However, there is clear merit in seeking to improve the evidence base that is available to Ministers and the Executive as a whole when agreeing allocations. That can, of course, extend to examining whether previous decisions have had positive or negative gender impacts. Our amendment seeks to introduce that improvement.

As a member of the Finance Committee, I know, as do many others in the Chamber, that the Northern Ireland Budget process has much room for improvement, with inconsistencies in reporting and the lack of completion of key procedural documents from Departments. My party is concerned about the motion's introduction of further procedural requirements to the 2025-26 process at this time. Departments should be encouraged to bring forward information that examines the gender impact of their budget proposals to support fairer, better-informed and more impactful budget decisions. That must not, however, be to the detriment of existing equality assessment and screening that is carried out in the context of the section 75 processes. Ultimately, if the Executive are to go down the route of gender budgeting pilots or practice, that will require a joined-up approach from senior civil servants with policy and finance responsibilities.

We need to look at others and learn from their experiences. Worryingly, in 2021, the gender equality strategy expert advisory panel that was commissioned by the Department for Communities indicated that the Civil Service locally lacked the competence and capacity to deliver on the aims through the existing section 75 process. That illustrates the challenges ahead. It would be wrong, therefore, to rush or set artificial deadlines for scoping that out. The Scottish gender budgeting pilot was evaluated by the OECD, which reported formally in July 2024. It underlined a range of challenges to implementing gender budgeting that are relevant to the situation here in Northern Ireland, not least the need for significant investment, upskilling, additional staff headcount, potentially, and tensions between some Departments in the way in which they tackle cross-cutting gender goals. Therefore, it is important that Northern Ireland takes stock of experiences elsewhere in order to ensure that any changes that are brought forward provide tangible improvements in promoting gender equality in our society.

The proposer mentioned the OECD. In 2023, it reported that 32% of countries that currently operate gender budgeting rarely use the evidence that is collected in policy and decision-making. We should not seek to replicate that precedent. Therefore, while my party understands the motion's sentiment, it is crucial that any reforms are evidence-based and command widespread support from politicians, Ministers and civil servants. A whole-of-government approach is essential. The co-design and co-development of a gender equality strategy for the Executive will be the best vehicle to take forward those proposals. DUP Ministers are committed to continuing that work in this mandate. Our amendment seeks to secure support across the Executive to bring that forward. I commend the amendment to the House.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Thank you very much, indeed.

Ms Sheerin: I support the motion and commend those who brought it to the House. In welcoming the motion, I must mention the work that my party's Minister Caoimhe Archibald has already done on the issue. We know that it is vital that policies have regard to the entire population. Our society across the North is not a homogenous group, and creating policy by reference to only one group ultimately means that people will be excluded. On the contrary, when you consider the specific needs of different demographics in society, you will ultimately have a more inclusive society with more access to public services and a Budget that works better for people. Dr Archibald has reflected that in her work on this thus far.

We know that gender-responsive budgeting — taking account of the specific challenges that women face, such as unpaid care and the health issues that they have to deal with — allows for a more productive workforce and more efficiencies in our public services. It is better all round. I commend the motion to the House and urge Members to support it, and I thank the Minister for her work on this.

Ms D Armstrong: I thank the Opposition for tabling the motion. Recognition of gender-responsive budgeting is a vital tool in addressing systemic gender inequalities. Gender-responsive budgeting, as explained by the UK Women's Budget Group, is a way of analysing the Budget for its effects on gender equality. It aims to increase focus on assessing the impacts of spending and revenue-raising decisions on gender equality and adopt practices that can bring about equality between men and women. The approach raises awareness of the different impacts that publicly funded policies and programmes have on women and men at all levels of government. That strategy assesses the impact of government budgets and policies while striving to achieve social and economic gender equality. At its core, gender budgeting leverages fiscal policy and administrative procedures to address gender inequalities and promote the social and economic development of women.

In Northern Ireland, the statistics are stark. The Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency found that 67·9% of women are in part-time employment and that about 31% of working-age women are economically inactive, often due to caring or family commitments. In contrast, the main reason why men are economically inactive is sickness. Northern Ireland has the highest rate of economic inactivity among women in the UK, yet we lack a comprehensive childcare strategy to support women returning to work. The Good Friday Agreement committed to improving women's public life and promoting equality of opportunity between men and women. However, section 75, which is open to interpretation by the Executive and each Department, does not guarantee equality in social and economic development.

Despite being one of nine grounds considered in a Budget, gender equality remains elusive, and deeply embedded inequalities persist. To move towards gender budgeting, our Departments must collect gender-disaggregated data to develop evidence-based policies. Stormont has the institutional and legal architecture to implement that, yet none of the Departments practises gender budgeting freely and willingly.

Ms K Armstrong: I thank the Member for giving way. I appreciate that the Member was not here in the previous mandate — I absolutely agree with what she is saying — but, as part of International Women's Day on 8 March 2021, the Assembly, endorsing a motion from the Women's Caucus, identified that we need to have a gender-sensitive Parliament. Part of that would be the budgeting process. I absolutely concur with her. We have already decided that: all parties agreed to it.

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

Ms D Armstrong: I thank the Member for the intervention.

Gender-responsive budgeting requires collective engagement and consultation. By introducing comprehensive gender-responsive budgeting measures for the 2025-26 Budget, including thorough gender-impact assessments, proactive resource allocation and transparent monitoring and evaluation mechanisms, we can make significant strides towards gender equality. I will support the amendment to the motion.

Ms Bradshaw: I also support the motion. I do not wish to use the brief time that I have to speak about points that have already been made, but there are, broadly, three points on why gender-responsive budgeting is helpful and how it would fit into wider equality work.

First, despite significant strides in some cases, there are identifiable areas where we, in Northern Ireland, are further from gender equality than neighbouring jurisdictions. The most obvious of those, which we, of course, hope to tackle effectively as a priority in the Programme for Government and in the Executive Office, is that the scale of violence against women and girls here is considerably worse than in comparable places. Another is the lower rate of participation in the workforce among females, particularly at and after middle age, where there is a marked discrepancy between Northern Ireland and neighbouring jurisdictions. There are, of course, other areas.

Secondly, tied to that, there is the absence of a single equality Act in Northern Ireland. That, of course, brings us to the work of the Committee for the Executive Office, which is coming to the end of its inquiry into gaps in equality legislation. There seems to be no doubt that one area of investigation should be into whether equality impact assessments should include gender-responsive budgeting and, potentially, gender equality action plans. It would also be necessary to improve our data gathering to ensure that such assessments can be carried out effectively and with purpose.

Thirdly, there is a question about how we ensure that equality and fairness are embedded in policy in the first place. That is not just about equality in a rebalancing sense. Some of you will be aware of the Swedish example that is cited in the work of Caroline Criado Perez, where it was found that policies and practices that were put in place by committees that were dominated by men had led to snow clearing taking place on roads that were used predominantly by men, often ring roads and roads that led to factories and offices. However, roads that were more commonly used by women, notably roads to schools and care centres, were not prioritised. Footpaths and cycle paths were cleared last. That led to a scenario in which 69% of those injured in winter pedestrian accidents on Swedish roads were women because of the roads that they commonly used. Bear in mind that the roads to the locations that women were likely to want to access were not prioritised for snow clearance and the fact that they were less likely to have access to a car in the first place. Once the authorities switched that around, clearing footpaths and cycle paths first and leaving the ring roads to a later stage of the process, overall casualties in wintertime fell by half and the gender imbalance amongst victims disappeared. In other words, we should not just look at the dry bureaucratic process: it is about how we develop and implement policy from the outset and the practical outcomes of that policy.

Mr Frew: It is very clear that part of our role is to create a balance and end the inequalities that lie within our societies. It is incumbent on every one of us to work to that end and achieve something in our time here, no matter how short that might be for some. It is very important that there are Ministers who take that on board, individually and collectively, as an Executive, but so should the Assembly.

In my time here, since 2010, there have been opportunities, through the legislative process, to make changes, and there have been times when changes have been made, sometimes dragging a Department to a place. Examples of that include the laws on upskirting and downblousing; the child aggravator clause in the domestic violence legislation, which the Department did not want to touch; the stalking laws that I pushed so hard for; and, of course, the child protection disclosure scheme that I got included in one of the Justice Acts a long time ago. That seems like an age ago. There are opportunities for us to make a difference in this place, and each MLA should value their place in the Assembly because they, individually, can make a change. Do not leave it to the Executive or individual Ministers: MLAs can make changes.

Ms K Armstrong: Will the Member give way?

Mr Frew: Yes.

Ms K Armstrong: I agree with the Member. That is why the proposal in the motion is key. We can talk about change all the time, but we need to take action and not just consider doing so. For instance, if we make the change on gender-responsive budgeting, it will apply to everyone.

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

Mr Frew: At risk of there being consensus, I agree totally with the Member. It is easy to rhyme off phrases like "gender-responsive budgeting" — does it not sound so great? — but why are we not doing it already? We have something in this place that is unique, namely section 75. Surely, gender-responsive budgeting is covered in that, so why is it not being done in practice? That is the question, and it is a valid one. If we had a Budget that was aligned to a Programme for Government that had gender-responsive budgeting as one of its key objectives, the Budget would fund the Programme for Government and we would get outcomes.

It is OK to speak in fluffy terms, but what about outcomes? This place does not look at outcomes nearly enough, so it is about time that it did. That is why I am glad that the Minister for Communities is looking at a gender equality strategy. There will be opportunities in this term. Let us see all MLAs table amendments to the employment rights Bill to help create equalities.

One of the biggest pieces of work that we have done since we returned is on the childcare strategy. I am glad to say that that strategy comes from my party. It enables women to go back to work and afford childcare. It is one of the greatest examples in this term of something that will lead to equalities.

I applaud Ministers for their endeavours and hope that the Assembly will be able to make real changes and a real difference in the term ahead.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): I call the Minister of Finance, who has up to 10 minutes.

Dr Archibald (The Minister of Finance): Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

I welcome the opportunity to speak about this important area.

As others have said, there is significant merit to be gained from implementing a Budget through a specific gender lens. I, too, fully recognise the potential for gender-based budgeting. It is an area that I am keen to see further advanced. Gender budgeting has the potential to ensure equal access to public services, opportunities and resources. It can be a tool that enables us to analyse and address the impact of public spending and income-generation policies on genders, identifying gaps and disparities and making adjustments to address the issues.

When women and marginalised groups have access to resources, the workforce becomes more inclusive and more productive. It leverages the untapped potential of women and ensures their active participation in the economy. It also improves policy effectiveness. By integrating a gender perspective into them, policies are better tailored to serve all segments of the population. That ensures targeted interventions in critical sectors such as maternal health, childcare and gender-based violence prevention.

Gender-sensitive policies lead to more inclusive and sustainable outcomes. Gender budgeting also creates a more equitable society by enabling public services such as education and healthcare to become more accessible and inclusive. Gender-responsive programmes target issues such as income inequality and lack of access to opportunities for women and disadvantaged groups. Empowering women economically helps lift families and communities out of poverty, contributing to reducing the overall gender pay gap and employment disparities.

We currently implement Budget policy through the lens of equality by looking at impacts on all section 75 categories. The gender impacts of Budget proposals are therefore captured as part of the equality impact screening and assessments that Departments complete as part of the Budget process.

Ms K Armstrong: Will the Minister give way?

Dr Archibald: Yes. Go ahead.

Ms K Armstrong: Apologies, Minister. I know that you are in full flow, but this is something that, as a former member of the Women's Caucus steering group, I think is important.

Section 75 outlines equality, but equity is the key. One of the things that gender budgeting can bring about, as you said, is equity. It can ensure that investment is made in places where people most vulnerable and need most help. When they are produced under the Equality Act, should those responsible for section 75 reports also be asked to confirm where that equity has been brought in?

Dr Archibald: I thank the Member for her point. I do not disagree with her. There is the potential for us to build on section 75 as it exists. As I will outline later, that is particularly the case for gender-based budgeting, which I have focused on since I came into office. I fully recognise the potential for gender-based budgeting, and I am keen to see more done in that area, given that it can contribute to better Budget outcomes for everyone, not just women. That is part of my aim for an improved Budget process in the future and will be part of the ongoing work on the Executive's Budget sustainability plan.

I met the NI Women's Budget Group and experts from Ulster University in May 2024 to discuss gender budgeting. My officials have continued to engage with Ulster University, most recently attending a training event for all public spending group staff in my Department. I recently agreed and published a Budget improvement plan road map. That road map includes gender budgeting as a key action, confirming my commitment to consideration of the matter for future Budget processes. I remain committed to advancing financial sustainability and, as I have just indicated, exploring gender budgeting.

Those initiatives are not just about managing our finances better; they are about building a more just and equitable society. The work that my officials are doing is crucial to the well-being and prosperity of our citizens. Equality, gender budgeting and financial sustainability are not just technical processes; they are about shaping the kind of society that we want to live in and ensuring that our financial policies reflect our values of fairness, equality and responsibility. That cannot be done quickly if we want to do it correctly. There are barriers that we face, some of which have been referred to. They include systems, metrics and practical and cultural barriers. Our current budgeting system is not set up to record budgetary data in a way that identifies gender outcomes or costs. I am hopeful that, through engagement with experts in the area, we will be able to put in place the necessary systems and processes.

There is also the matter of data collection. One of the key issues identified by the team from Ulster University is the lack of available metrics to appropriately assess the impact of policies on gender. It is imperative that we consider how best to collect the relevant data. We also need to understand how gender budgeting operates in practice by seeking pilot programmes that will help to identify the issues and benefits related to gender budgeting, and, perhaps most crucially, we need to grasp the nettle and address any scepticism about gender budgeting, fostering a gender-budgeting culture within and outside government that is driven by Ministers right through organisations.

It is my ambition that we will address those issues and, along with my Executive colleagues, consider how to put in place the building blocks for gender-based budgeting in future Budget processes. However, it is my view that we do not have to wait for that. There may be specific areas in which individual Ministers may wish to implement gender-based budgeting sooner — potentially even in 2025-26. The development of the Executive's social inclusion strategies, including the gender equality strategy, will be crucial in enhancing our gender considerations in Budgets and will help drive the long-term benefits of equal participation of women in all aspects of society.

Gender budgeting is not merely a financial exercise but can be a powerful tool for social transformation. By prioritising equality in the allocation of resources, it has the potential to strengthen economies, enhance policy impact and promote social justice. That is why I am committed to exploring gender budgeting as part of future Budget processes and bringing the matter to the Executive for consideration.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): I call Phillip Brett to make a winding-up speech on the amendment. Phillip, you have three minutes.

Mr Brett: I thank the leader of the Opposition for tabling the motion. To quote his words, I will, hopefully, offer "constructive opposition" to his Opposition day debate.

I think that the entire House is united in wanting to end gender inequalities. I look at my constituency of North Belfast. Why is it that a woman born in the New Lodge, Rathcoole or Tiger's Bay has a life expectancy of eight years less than that of her counterpart who lives somewhere on the Antrim Road? Why is it that a young boy born in those communities is less likely to achieve any success at GCSE level and is condemned to a vicious circle of repeating those examinations? It is something that the House is united on.

The motion is clear. It calls on the Minister of Finance to bring forward:

Does anyone in the House seriously believe that the Minister of Finance will do that? There has been no commitment to do that in the remarks that have been made by the Minister or Members from her party. It is a disservice to simply sit here, vote through the motion and pat ourselves on the back and say, "Job well done. We agreed a non-binding motion on something on which the Minister made it clear that she has given no commitment". We have proposed an amendment because agreeing a motion that tries to get the Minister to do something that, her party has made clear, she is not going to do does the House a disservice.

The leader of the Opposition, who proposed the motion, is the Chair of the Finance Committee. I have no doubt that he will hold the Minister's feet to the fire, because, today, her party will vote for a motion that it will wilfully ignore. I will leave that in the hands of the leader of the Opposition and Chair of the Finance Committee. However, Members, when we vote on the motion and pat ourselves on the back for passing a great motion —.

Mr O'Toole: I thank the Member for giving way. He shares my frustration with this place voting through motions that are not acted on. I certainly intend to hold the Minister to account for the delivery of gender-responsive budgeting. She has indicated her broad support for it. The Member can take my assurance that we will hold the Finance Minister and the rest of the Executive accountable for it through our role as Opposition and my role as Chair of the Finance Committee, of which he is also a member.

Mr Brett: I welcome that commitment. I will do so too. We will, obviously, vote for our amendment, but let the record show clearly that the Minister and her party are making commitments that they will bring forward:

That Budget is currently out for consultation. I will leave it to Members to judge whether the Minister of Finance will deliver on what she is about to vote through.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): I call on Sinéad McLaughlin to finish the debate. Sinéad, you have up to five minutes.

Ms McLaughlin: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I thank all those who contributed to the debate. The contributions have clearly illustrated that gender-responsive budgeting has a long way to go.

In the Good Friday Agreement, a commitment was made to the full and equal participation of women in public life. More than a quarter of a century later, we cannot credibly say that that has been achieved in our society. Women still face systemic barriers to fulfilling their potential not just in public life but in our workplaces, in our communities and across all sections of society.

Government policy has not recognised the impact of failing to put gender-responsive budgeting at the heart of government. Being gender-blind in budgeting has led to the gender pay gap; more women and children moving into poverty in Northern Ireland; the lack of an anti-poverty strategy; the fact that one third of women here are economically inactive; poor women's health outcomes; the lack of a healthcare strategy for women; the fact that women undertake 60% of unpaid caring responsibilities; the lack of a coherent and responsive childcare strategy; an epidemic of violence against women and girls; and high levels of maternal mental health problems. That list is not exhaustive, and none of the above happened by accident. It all happened by design through the failure to recognise the gender policy gaps and the lack of urgency to prioritise gender policy, including responsive budgeting and investment. All those challenges are surmountable, but reversing those inequalities will take deliberate design and a focused effort from the Executive.

Gender-responsive budgeting has taken root in over 80 countries, and almost half of OECD countries are planning or actively considering gender-budgeting tools. Those countries recognise that budgets are never neutral and that the way that we allocate our resources has vastly different outcomes for men and women. Research by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust identified that the architecture to provide for gender-responsive budgeting may exist but pointed to the lack of a:

The researchers recommended:

Of course, we know that no such commitment was included. Today's motion is an opportunity for the Minister of Finance to commit to putting that right. I welcome the Minister's positive remarks and her commitment to that process.

In the debate, Members referred to equality impact assessments and the new gender equality strategy, but we know from the Communities Minister that the timings of that strategy's development are still vague and undetermined.

We also know that section 75 exercises are simply insufficient. Unfortunately, they too often represent a tick-box exercise and happen too late in the decision-making process.

Let us be clear: none of the above is a gender-responsive approach to budgeting, and to think that are of them is is to not understand the concept. Gender budgeting starts from the very start of the design of policies, initiatives and plans. The DUP amendment is not acceptable, as it waters down our motion and confuses the policy intent.

We also need the architecture to be fit for purpose — that point was well made by Diana Armstrong and Paula Bradshaw — because we need the right data. As chair of the all-party group on UNSCR 1325, women, peace and security, I have been told time and time again that the right data does not exist. On that note, I commend Alex Brennan from the Northern Ireland Women's Budget Group for her work, engagement and clarity in shining a light on gender budgeting.

In conclusion, gender-responsive budgeting can address inequalities, improve effectiveness and enhance public scrutiny. Gender budgeting should have started here a long time ago, and the failure to introduce it earlier is a significant missed opportunity. I accept that it will be challenging to put that right in the 2025-26 Budget. However, introducing it and starting a gender-responsive approach to next year's Budget can only be a useful tool in improving equity and efficiency. It can also be a powerful signal of intent from this place that we take gender equality seriously. It is time to put our money where our mouth is.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for the debate.

Mr Brett: On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. Public trust in these institutions is something that all Members should strive to achieve. The Clerk of the Assembly has just provided all Members with a 40-page report on the employment practices of Sinn Féin and Mr Michael McMonagle. The report concludes that Mr McMonagle was employed for up to 80 hours per week at public cost, in clear breach of Assembly rules. Have you, Mr Deputy Speaker, been informed whether that report will come before the Assembly so that Members can have their say and ensure that public trust, truth and transparency are at the heart of the Assembly?

Some Members: Hear, hear.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Thank you for that point of order, Mr Brett. I will relay it to the Speaker, and we will take notice of that, as we do.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): In conjunction with the Business Committee, the Speaker has given leave to Paula Bradshaw to raise the matter of integrated education provision in South Belfast. Paula, you will have up to 15 minutes. Over to you.

Ms Bradshaw: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I will not need anywhere near that, but I appreciate Members taking the time to join me in the Chamber this evening to debate the topic. I want to focus specifically on the issues facing integrated education provision in South Belfast. I do not believe that, during this debate, we need to rehearse what recently happened with the schools in North Down. MLAs can return to that at another time.

It is important to emphasise that successive surveys reinforce that integrated education provision is inadequate in Northern Ireland and specifically in South Belfast. To be clear, no one in my party is talking about enforcing integrated education. Many parents choose state or maintained schools for very good reasons. Indeed, I was among them in sending my children to Belfast Royal Academy, for example. What we are talking about, however, is parental choice. When it comes to parental choice, the availability of integrated education provision in South Belfast falls short.

For example, Lagan College, which is admittedly based just over the constituency boundary in Strangford, has a huge intake from South Belfast and, every year, has nearly double the applications for admissions than it has places to fill. That has been the case for many years, yet progress on securing a site for the proposed 600-pupil, mid Down integrated post-primary school is still to be publicly announced. We need to see a firm commitment from the Minister that he will proceed at pace when that site is found.

Back in 2019, the Community Conversation report, which was produced by the Integrated Education Fund and Ulster University and focused on the Castlereagh and Carryduff areas, stated:

Six years on, I note that the last update on that from the Minister was in September 2024 to my party colleague Nick Mathison, in which he stated:

I hope that the Education Minister can provide us with an update on that today and indicate whether, given the ongoing growth of the population in that area of South Belfast and the fact that 250 pupils will be joining from Blackwater Integrated College, he believes that a 600-place school will be big enough to meet current and future demand.

Moving to primary-school provision, I should note that pressure for primary-school places has been eased to a small degree through the triumph last year of the conversion of Cairnshill Primary School to integrated status. The principal and the school community worked so hard to achieve that for the parents who voted for the conversion in such high numbers.

Not to underestimate those efforts, I highlight the challenges that the principal and the school community at Forge Integrated Primary School have faced and continue to face in making their move from the current site on Carolan Road, which is adjacent to Wellington College. As a side note, I mention the proximity of the two schools because I am sure that Wellington College would, no doubt, be able to expand with minimal disruption onto the Forge Integrated Primary School site, if and when it becomes available, thereby addressing some of its own challenges with the huge demand on its confined site.

Turning back to Forge Integrated Primary School, in 2016, it was announced that the school would take forward plans to relocate to the former Knockbreda High School site along the Knock dual carriageway. Since that time, the principal has tried to keep the project moving forward at pace, despite facing many challenges along the way, not least the COVID pandemic. The two most enduring issues are the significant delay in getting planning permission, which is moving into its fifth year, and the challenge of ensuring that all aspects are ready for the development so that, when the opportunity for funding arises, everything is in place. It should be noted that it is envisaged that the new build will include an autism support centre for Key Stage 1 pupils and a general learning support centre for those at Key Stage 2. No one in the Chamber will fail to appreciate how much demand there is for those new learning units in South Belfast.

Minister, I appreciate your coming to the Chamber. I would like to know what support you can and will provide to Forge Integrated Primary School to progress its proposals. I hope that you can help it to address long-standing queries with DFI Roads and help the scheme to progress at the pace that it deserves after eight years.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): All other Members who are called to speak will have up to seven minutes.

Miss Hargey: I thank Paula for securing this important debate and for discussing the issue in South Belfast. It is clear that forward planning to meet school pressures, especially for nursery and primary places, is essential. We recognise that challenge in an area such as South Belfast. Our schools do an excellent job despite the pressures and challenges that they face.

We know that all schools should be open, inclusive and safe environments in which all our children can learn, develop and enhance their outcomes, no matter their religion, social class, gender, ethnicity or sexual orientation. Sinn Féin worked with other parties in the Assembly on, and supported the introduction of, the Integrated Education Act in the previous mandate. The Good Friday Agreement places a duty on the Department of Education to "encourage and facilitate" integrated education, That has been enhanced to include a duty to:

Sinn Féin is a champion of integrated education, but, when we look at the issue, we often find that the main focus here is on religion and religious integration, be that through the media, debates, campaigns or, indeed, endorsements.

I understand the need to look at integration in the context of the history and legacy of the conflict and to look at the divisions that resulted from it. Those divisions had an impact on our communities and our people, resulting in children being taught in different schools on the basis of their religion.

If we are looking to have true integration and better outcomes for our children and young people, which is what we really want, we need to acknowledge that it is on the basis of social class that people are consistently failed and segregated. Indeed, all the education outcomes show that those who come from a certain social class are impacted on more than those from other social classes. That is demonstrated in an area such as South Belfast, which is stratified on the basis of social class. Integrated education has to be a key component of the types of schools, the type of society and the types of outcomes that we want for all our children: all of them, not just some.

That has been reflected in wider debates in the Chamber that have looked at division resulting from conflict. It is easy to look at issues where there are hardened interfaces, but it is often about invisible barriers related to social class, which depend on where a person lives. We hear about those barriers when pressures are debated in the Chamber, whether they are pressures in our justice system, our healthcare system or our education system. Segregation by social class is factored into all those areas of work and impacts on citizens from lower social classes or working-class backgrounds. If we are serious about integrated education providing better outcomes, we need to look at that. There is no doubt that the biggest division in our education system and in outcomes from it is along the lines of social class.

I want to work with other parties to advance integrated education, as we did in the previous mandate. I want to see more support for it. We have excellent integrated schools in South Belfast. When one meets their boards of governors and their young people, as many of us South Belfast MLAs did last year when we got together in some of the primary-school settings, one sees the drive of teachers, boards of governors, parents and, importantly, children. We want to enhance integrated education, but, in doing so, we need to make sure that it is integration in its truest form, which should include children from working-class backgrounds.

I am happy that the topic has been brought to the House for debate, and I look forward to hearing what the Minister says. His contribution will hopefully expand on the subject of integration to look at social class, at working-class communities and at children. I hope that we can continue to work together to deliver better education outcomes for all our children and young people.

Mr O'Toole: I am pleased that Paula Bradshaw secured the Adjournment debate and hope that we hear from the Minister about what he is doing to support integrated education in South Belfast. Like Paula, I am not going to use the debate as an opportunity to relitigate some of what we robustly debated yesterday and in the days before that. I am sure that we will have the opportunity to do so again in the days and weeks ahead.

I declare an interest as a parent of a child who attends an integrated primary school in South Belfast. Indeed, it is one of the primary schools that a Member mentioned in an earlier contribution: Forge Integrated Primary School. There is a specific issue at that school, to which I hope that the Minister will be able to speak. Unfortunately, I may not be able to be present for the Minister's remarks, because I have a pressing engagement elsewhere that involves said pupil of that primary school.

The school had been expecting funding under the Fresh Start Agreement. Again, I will not relitigate this — it is an Adjournment debate, and things are a little less heated at this time of day — but, for one reason or another, it no longer has that Fresh Start funding. We have discussed the matter in the Chamber before. The school has been placed on the list of schools to receive future capital funding, but it has no certainty over when the money to build a new school will be received. It was expecting new money. Indeed, it has been told for a decade to expect it.

As Paula Bradshaw said, the school also faces an outstanding challenge to secure a site. It has an agreement to move to the old Knockbreda High School site on the A55 dual carriageway, but there are outstanding issues with traffic management and, frankly, with DFI getting on with doing what it needs to do. There is an obvious solution, which should happen sooner rather than later, because that school community has been waiting for nearly a decade for the matter to be progressed. That is one issue.

More generally, integrated education provision is a hopeful and positive story in South Belfast. I am in a relatively unique position in this place: I was away for 20 years from this island and the North before coming back. While I was away, I was one of those people who bloviated and had lots of opinions about Northern Ireland and what was wrong with it. One of the things that people often talk about is our education system and the fact that kids are educated separately. There is context for that, and there are reasons and complications. However, as I said when we passed what became the Integrated Education Act, it is not normal that our education system is segregated as it is. It just is not normal. I will never be coaxed into saying that it is normal for our kids to be educated separately, as they are. Deirdre Hargey is right: there is a huge challenge around social class that I will go on to talk about. Those things intersect, which is really critical. However, we cannot kid ourselves about the role that a fundamentally segregated education system has in reinforcing the sense of abnormality between broad communal identities in Northern Ireland. It just does.

Mr Buckley: I thank the Member for giving way. Perhaps he could provide a bit more clarity. By "segregation", does he mean different sectors? As was noted in the debate yesterday — it is appropriate that we put it on record again today — so many of our schools from those different sectors have naturally integrated. In fact, as was pointed out by the Minister yesterday, they have integrated in more elaborate ways than some schools in the integrated sector.

Mr O'Toole: I am really glad that I gave way, because the Member is right. These debates get into the mud so quickly, and we end up looking as though we are virtue-signalling, or we offend people, or we talk around the issues. Holy Rosary Primary School is an amazing maintained primary school near me with lots of kids on free school meals and lots of kids from ethnic minority backgrounds for whom English is not their first language. It would be ridiculous if I were to say that that Catholic maintained primary somehow needs to feel guilty about the fact that it is not formally integrated. Rosetta Primary School is an amazing controlled primary that has a huge number of kids on free school meals. Talking about the aspiration to have a less divided education system should in no way be read as criticism of those schools, and, frankly, things become a bit sterile when we get into that territory. However, I think that you can acknowledge that brilliant Catholic maintained, controlled, integrated and Irish-medium schools exist while also saying, "It's not a good thing that so many of our kids are educated separately and come to think of one another as different". I am afraid that that is a reality. It is a reality that crystallises when you leave this place and you realise how, bluntly, abnormal it is. That is just a simple truth.

South Belfast has amazing schools in all sectors, but there is huge demand and growing support for integrated education. Cairnshill Primary School began the transformation process last year. Harding Memorial Integrated Primary School also underwent that transformation process. Those are all good things. There is a particular pressure when it comes to post-primary schools. As has been said, Lagan College is an amazing school; it is the exemplar in many ways, because it was set up 40-odd years ago. I think that our former colleague Clare Bailey attended Lagan in the first intake. However, Lagan is oversubscribed; there are just not enough post-primary places. There are, of course, other amazing schools in other sectors in that part of the city, but many parents want to choose an integrated option at post-primary. At the minute, Lagan is the only option in the south-east of the city. Malone Integrated College is a great school in the south-west of the city. A significant amount of its intake will be from west Belfast. Those are two great schools at either end of the constituency, but, as was said by Paula Bradshaw, in the Carryduff/Castlereagh area, there is definitely capacity for an additional school. Hopefully, mid Down integrated college will relieve some of that pressure, but we need clarity about when that school will be built and completed.

There is a huge positive level of support for integrated education in South Belfast. We are proud in South Belfast of our diversity in terms of the traditional identities in the North but also of newcomer communities, whom we welcome, celebrate and integrate. Deirdre Hargey was right to say that we sometimes slightly miss a trick when we talk about how our education system is divided along two fundamental axes. One is along traditional communal identities, which is in no way to diminish or criticise the amazing schools that we have in the controlled and maintained sectors. However, the system is too divided: too many kids are educated separately in that context. It is also too divided by class. We fail working-class kids at a heroic level in this society. Every serious educationalist who has looked at it has recognised that the kind of selection that we do at 11 simply fails working-class kids. I slightly got dragged off into that debate, but it is a critical one.

There has been huge progress on integrated education in South Belfast. We would like to see more, so it would be helpful to hear more from the Minister about what is happening at Forge — I have declared my interest — and at mid Down, which will be critical to taking some of the post-primary pressure off Lagan.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Thank you, Matthew. You had an extra minute, but I did not know when to say it as we went through.

Ms Nicholl: I thank my constituency colleague Paula Bradshaw for securing today's Adjournment debate. It is really good to have the Minister here. Thank you.

South Belfast is one of the most diverse constituencies in Northern Ireland, and it is an honour to represent that community. In South Belfast, we know that our diversity is our strength, and that is why we have always had such a special and close connection with the integrated education movement. As colleagues have outlined, we have so many wonderful integrated schools, including Cairnshill Integrated Primary School, which recently underwent the transformation process, and Forge Integrated Primary School, which was founded in 1985. Lagan College, the first integrated school, is technically not in South Belfast, but we like to claim it as our own, and many families and children from South Belfast are part of that school community. We have brilliant primary schools, including Harding Memorial and Cranmore, and we also like to claim Lough View as ours. We have Malone Integrated College at post-primary. It is important to recognise other schools that are not in the constituency but will be with the boundary changes, including Millennium Integrated Primary School and others further afield.

You can recognise the excellent work that is being done by schools across the board and still have policy aspirations. In Alliance, we have always believed that children should be educated through a single integrated education system that delivers equality of opportunity so that every child can develop their unique ability, personality and potential. We have always championed integrated education as a core part of our party DNA and as part of that pathway towards creating a more united community. You can talk about integration and diversity within schools, but what is different about integrated schools is the ethos that is at the core of it, and that is something that we really want to champion. There is no doubt that the integrated —.

Mr Brooks: Will the Member give way?

Ms Nicholl: Yes, go ahead.

Mr Brooks: It is a genuine question, and it probably comes out of some of the discussions that have been taking place this week. It is something that I have not grasped yet. What exactly is it about the ethos of integrated schools that is explicitly different from our other schools? Often, when you ask the question, you genuinely hear the talk about tolerance, encouraging understanding and respect for the other. That is something that, I feel, I got in my school and that other schools do. It is not just about saying that there are wonderful schools in every sector, because I think that we all think that, in the same way as I believe that there are wonderful integrated schools. That is something that the integrated sector has to grapple with in defining itself. It is not about a certain number of people from the traditional Protestant and Catholic —.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): David, it is an intervention, not a speech. If you wish to be added to the speaking list, we will have no difficulty whatever.

Mr Brooks: No, I am OK. Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Kate, you have an extra minute.

Ms Nicholl: I understand what you say. I am trying to think of the best way to answer it. I would love for you to come with me to Lagan some time and meet some of the pupils. They will talk to you about how everything is intentional. The integration ethos is through everything. I really love how — I think that it was in the last local government election — every party had a candidate running who had gone to Lagan. It is not homogenous. People are proud and confident in their identities, and having difference is not a conflict. They are just so at ease with difference there.

Yes, we want to create a more tolerant, inclusive society, but, when you speak to children who have been to integrated schools, you see that they champion integrated education better than I ever could. I did not. I went to Methody, which was a very mixed school, and I was very privileged to do so and had lots of great opportunities. I had never even heard of Gaelic football until I met my husband. There are so many things that are part of our society that you are just not exposed to. We are in a divided society, but, in integrated schools, integration is so intentional. That really is the difference.

So much progress has been made in the landscape. There has been a huge surge in the number of schools seeking to transform, which is wonderful, with a number of successful parental ballots. It is no secret that we were disappointed by the recent decisions, but the rise of 8% in pupils in Northern Ireland attending an integrated school in Northern Ireland is positive. Twenty-six years on from the Good Friday Agreement, is that progress as fast as we want it to be? I do not think so.

In the previous mandate, my colleague Kellie Armstrong brought forward the Integrated Education Bill, which is now an Act. That was welcome and a lot of it was really positive, but demand and support consistently outstrip supply. We need to do more. I would like to hear more from the Minister about how he is taking forward certain sections of the Integrated Education Act. Section 5 places a duty on the Department with regard to:

What is happening with that in South Belfast? How is the Minister aiming to identify and assess demand in South Belfast when polling consistently shows that a majority of parents are in favour of integrated education? What mechanism is being taken forward to assess the demand? I also want to ask the Minister when he intends to publish the next report on integrated education, which is required by section 10 of the Act. Those are not just things that would be nice; they are in the Act, and we would like to know the answers. Constituents in South Belfast have a real interest in the issue, and, as constituency MLAs, we have been getting so many emails about what is happening.

Future development has been mentioned, but the community-led campaign for the development of mid Down integrated college — I am out of breath. I am 30 weeks pregnant, and I cannot breathe [Laughter.]

I will try to slow down. The community-led campaign for the development of mid-Down integrated college has been really inspiring, and I have met the people who are driving it. It will be an invaluable resource in helping to meet the growing demand for integrated education in South Belfast and beyond. It is only through developing a school of that size and scale that we will even come close to meeting the demands for integrated education from parents in South Belfast. Any information or reassurance that we can get about that and, as mentioned, the speeding up of the development at Forge Integrated Primary School would be really welcome.

We are really proud of our education provision in South Belfast, but we know that parents would like to see more provision of integrated education. We will continue to champion it.

Mr Crawford: Members, I think that we all agree that children deserve a fair chance to go to school and to learn and develop the skills that they need in order to thrive into adult life. It is a priority that all children and young people in Northern Ireland are educated together. The journey towards understanding and shared purpose begins within the walls of the school classroom. I pay tribute to all the schools in South Belfast that provide an inclusive approach where all the children and young people in their care are valued and accepted on a daily basis. I also thank the Member for securing the Adjournment debate.

As a party, we support the education of our children and young people together in inclusive and diverse schools. We believe that that can be done best through a single education system that fosters an environment where children of different backgrounds and beliefs learn and grow together and develop a sense of community that transcends division. As the Member who spoke previously rightly said, our diversity is not a barrier but is our strength. It is an advantage that enriches young people's lives in the society that they will one day lead.

For years, our education system has operated in silos, reflecting historical divisions that have left deep scars on our society. Schools should be open to all, welcoming children and young people of all faiths and none, richly diverse and inclusive and reflective of and embedded in the communities that they serve.

When asked what the most important element in selecting schools for their children is, parents and guardians consistently respond by stating, "A good standard of education". Members, together we can build a future where our children are educated not just to pass exams but to understand and value one another and rise as leaders of a peaceful and inclusive society. It is therefore vital that all schools are supported to serve their local communities and be the best schools that they can be.

Mr Mathison: I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in the debate, and I thank my party colleague for securing an Adjournment debate on the topic.

My colleagues and others have spoken in detail about the South Belfast-specific issues. I do not pretend that I will be able to add much to that. However, at the outset, I want to put on record my support for growing integrated education in South Belfast. I hope that we will get a positive update from the Minister in that regard. As it turns out, a few issues in the debate have crossed over into my constituency. I am very pleased about that. Yes, we house Lagan College in Strangford. Maybe not everyone is aware of that, so I will get that on to the record. There has also been progress on mid Down integrated college. I am very hopeful of hearing a positive update on that from the Minister. We know that two sites have been identified. Wherever the college ends up, I know that it will certainly serve many of my constituents as well. I want to put on record my appreciation for the unbelievable levels of work, vision and ambition of those parents to get that school established. That is no small feat. They deserve immense credit. I look forward to that developing. Recently, I visited Blackwater Integrated College on a couple of occasions. That school is bursting at the seams. It certainly cannot wait much longer for the school project to be developed.

Much has been said about integrated education in the past week. I hope that the debate can be a positive reset and that we can get the discussion on to a more positive footing. It is really important that, whatever we think of the decisions that have been taken over the past week, in the context of the debate, we remind ourselves of the three really important duties that the Minister has in that space, which have been mentioned already. They are:

to

and

There may well be differences of opinion about what an integrated school is, particularly about that notion of "reasonable numbers", but, this evening, we are talking about whether the provision that is available in South Belfast meets the demand. The Integrated Education Act is clear about that. I am looking forward to a response from the Minister that is mindful of the context of those duties. Hopefully, we can move away from some of the party political stuff and get on to the pragmatic discussion of how those legal and statutory duties can be met.

I want to pick up on a couple of other issues that were mentioned in the debate. I will put it out there: I am looking forward to hearing what comes from the Minister on growing the provision in South Belfast. David Brooks asked what it is that makes a school integrated. People will have different views on that. The Integrated Education Act provides a clear definition of that. For me, the critical bit is the intentionality. Across my constituency, there are schools that are open, welcoming and diverse spaces. I am not here to criticise any sector in the education system. Every single principal whom I meet, every school that I visit and the teachers in them work at absolute capacity to deliver the very best education in the most nurturing environment that they can for the children in their care. We need to get behind the integrated sector and support its growth — not to the detriment of anybody else — because of that intentionality of ethos; the intentionality of bringing people together from different community backgrounds, different faith perspectives and different socio-economic backgrounds; and the intentional attempt to bring those children together in the classroom.

Mr Buckley: I thank the Member for giving way. I will follow on from Mr Brooks's point about what is special about ethos. I could apply the ethos that Ms Nicholl described to many schools in my constituency. In fact, many parents choose those schools on the basis of the ethos that they provide. Does the Member accept that what he considers to be unique and special about the ethos of an integrated school is applicable to schools across many different sectors and that their representation proves that?

Mr Mathison: I agree, up to a point, that schools in many sectors provide great examples of a really diverse offering and a welcoming school community. I do not think that anybody is suggesting that any school is closing its doors to anybody. I am not suggesting that. However, the next level of integration is the explicit intentionality. For me, that is the key point.

I will speak to some of the issues that Mr Buckley raised earlier about the diversity that exists in the school system. In many scenarios, there is still segregation in the majority of our schools. I am not saying that that is intentional. I am not suggesting that anybody is trying to segregate the system. I am saying that that is the reality. Some examples of real mixing that were highlighted in debates this week do not represent the norm. The academic research that Ulster University produced says that 93% of children still attend schools that are largely segregated along religious lines. That is a pretty big number. For 69% of our schools, the research uses the phrase "strongly segregated", and 47% are almost entirely segregated. That is not to suggest that anybody is trying to engineer a system that segregates children. It is a product of our history and of our conflict, but that does not mean that we should not set our ambitions higher to do more to address that segregation.

Mr Buckley: I thank the Member for giving way. We are now having an important and respectful debate on the subject, but, going by that theory and the statistics that he has quoted on sectors, segregation and traditional communities, many of the integrated schools that the Minister referred to yesterday would fall into those categories. They are segregated, because they do not demonstrate the diverse community that the Member claims should be the case.

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

Mr Mathison: I appreciate that time could beat me here, but I understand the point. The key point that follows from it is that, when you make the decision to transform into an integrated school, you are making a decision to go on a journey to try to address that segregation. There is an intentional decision that recognises that and says, "We do not want to continue in that segregated context".

We need to move beyond headcounts. It is not about counting numbers in different communities. It is about creating school environments that have intentionality when it comes to creating diverse and inclusive spaces. Again, I am not here to bash any sectors, but I believe that integrated education plays a critical role in that process.

I wanted to speak on those points, and perhaps an Adjournment debate gives us an opportunity to have a debate in a different context, which takes some of the heat out of it, but that is not to take away from my colleague's debate. We are here to hear about what is going on in South Belfast, and I look forward to hearing what the Minister has to say about that.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Over to you, Minister, for a chilled response; taking the heat out of it. You have up to 10 minutes.

Mr Givan (The Minister of Education): Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I thank the Member for South Belfast Paula Bradshaw for securing the Adjournment debate and for setting its tone. It was refreshing to have the conversations that we have engaged in outside the heat of yesterday around specific decisions. Mr O'Toole has left the Chamber, but I was reminded of Paul and the conversion on the road to Damascus — it was remarkable after yesterday's commentary — because I agree with him. There are amazing Catholic maintained schools. There are amazing controlled schools. I only wish that some Members had said that yesterday in articulating their point about integrated schools. The debate today has been much more nuanced. I want to address the issues in South Belfast, and, if time permits, I will pick up the wider issues that some colleagues have touched on of integration and how my Department is developing that.

Let me turn to South Belfast. As colleagues have mentioned, there are six integrated schools in South Belfast: Cranmore Integrated Primary and Nursery School, Forge Integrated Primary School, Harding Memorial Integrated Primary School, Lough View Integrated Primary and Nursery School and, most recently, Cairnshill Primary School, as well as Malone Integrated College. At the outset, I ask Members to join me, as they have done, in paying tribute to each of those schools and to integrated schools across Northern Ireland for their work in educating children and young people from different backgrounds together.

In June 2024, I was delighted to approve the transformation of Cairnshill Primary School, creating over 500 new integrated places and increasing the number of integrated primary-school places in South Belfast by no less than 47%. No one mentioned it yesterday — that is the nature of the to and fro of politics — but I approved that at Cairnshill. I went to the school and met the principal. It is the only school that was found to have reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete (RAAC), and it has had to go through the pretty traumatic experience of dealing with that. In that meeting, I was able to give the board of governors and the principal the news that I had approved the transformation of the school to integrated status.

Demand for integrated education is a complex issue, and we see that in South Belfast. For September 2024, there were 180 applications for 165 places in the four existing integrated primary schools, but only one school, Lough View Integrated Primary School, was oversubscribed. The transformation of Cairnshill Primary School will create another 83 integrated primary-school places annually to help meet the unmet need. However, Lough View Integrated Primary School may, of course, remain oversubscribed. At post-primary level, there are places available at Malone College, where, I note, there were 129 first-preference applications for 130 places this year, indicating that demand is in line with supply.

There are also integrated schools outside South Belfast that enrolled significant numbers of pupils from that constituency. Notably, Lagan College, which the Chair of the Education Committee has claimed authority on, sits in the Strangford constituency but has a large catchment area, including South Belfast, and it is regularly oversubscribed. The approval of the new mid Down integrated post-primary school aims to address that unmet demand for integrated education.

We all know that parents make school choices for a range of issues. It is not simply about a choice of sector — popular high-performing schools with strong reputations in all sectors are frequently oversubscribed. Demand for a particular school does not necessarily equate to demand for a particular school management type. My Department is, therefore, committed to gathering more comprehensive evidence that will inform a detailed report on the demand for integrated education, which will provide the foundation for informed decision-making.

Before I turn to the wider issue of developing integrated education, I will mention some of the accommodation issues for integrated schools in the South Belfast constituency. In recent months, as I touched on earlier, we have addressed the issue of RAAC at Cairnshill Primary School. I am delighted that all the required works have been completed. Other integrated schools in the constituency have also been prioritised for investment.

Following the removal of Fresh Start funding by the UK Government, I demonstrated my commitment to Forge Integrated Primary School. Mr O'Toole is not here. He remarked yesterday that I had taken money away, characterising unfairly the outworkings of the UK Government's decisions on Fresh Start. I demonstrated my commitment to Forge Integrated Primary School and other integrated schools by moving them into my Department's major capital works programme. The project for Forge Integrated Primary School aims to provide a new-build school at the former Knockbreda High School site in Belfast. The design of the new building is progressing, and discussions are ongoing with Belfast City Council as part of the pre-application process for submission of a planning application.

Last year, I was pleased to lift the pause on planning for seven of the highest-priority new-build projects announced in 2022, including the project for Malone Integrated College. The appointment of a design team for that project is now almost complete. The integrated estate has benefited from and will continue to receive significant levels of capital investment.

I know that Members are particularly concerned about the development of the mid Down integrated post-primary school. My officials are taking a proactive approach to that school since approval of the development proposal late last year, and have been liaising with NICIE and the mid Down steering group. A site search has been completed by LPS, and two potential sites, including one in the Carryduff area, have been identified. A project brief is being prepared for the appointment of an integrated consultancy team to complete feasibility studies on the suitability of those two sites. My Department has never before led the capital development of a newly established integrated school, as schools previously had to demonstrate capital viability before receiving investment. Members have raised other issues specifically about those schools, and I will come back to Members on those in more detail.

I turn to the wider approach to developing integrated education. Over the past 10 months, I have been out visiting schools of all types and from all sectors, in South Belfast and across Northern Ireland, and witnessed the excellent work that they are doing. In recent months, I visited Methodist College in South Belfast. Whilst it is not designated as an integrated school, it educates a diverse range of children from a wide range of community and ethnic backgrounds. Such visits have cemented my view that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to delivering a high-quality education. Education in Northern Ireland is based on the guiding principle, set out in law, that children are educated, as far as possible, in accordance with the wishes of their parents. Diversity and choice are a strength of our education system, not a weakness. Every child, every school and every sector are important and valued in our education system. They all have key roles in building a reconciled and shared society, which is a key priority for me and our Government.

Integrated education is designed to provide opportunities for children and young people from different community backgrounds to learn together, and it has an important role to play in that process. The number of pupils accessing integrated education continues to grow. Over 27,000 pupils are now enrolled in 73 integrated schools. That represents over 6,000 additional places in the past 10 years. I assure Members that I take my Department's statutory duty to "encourage, facilitate and support" integrated education extremely seriously. My officials are developing an updated integrated education strategy and action plan in collaboration with key stakeholders. A consultation on the updated strategy and action plan will be launched in the coming weeks. The updated strategy and action plan will set out a clear vision to create a vibrant and supported network of sustainable integrated schools, providing high-quality integrated education to children and young people. The vision is underpinned by five strategic aims, which are, in turn, supported by clear targets and actions.

However, there is also an important question to ask about the nature and direction of integrated education and its USP in the changing world of the 21st century. The current legislation is clear: integrated education includes "the education together" of "reasonable numbers" of Catholics and Protestants. That has been a defining legal and, indeed, core principle and feature of the integrated movement since its inception. The aspiration for the main communities to each comprise 40% of an integrated school's enrolment is enshrined in the NICIE statement of principles. Those numerical targets are not arbitrary; they are rooted in a commitment to equality of status between communities within the integrated school. In keeping with the equality criterion and contact theory, that helps to create the conditions for positive interaction and an improvement in intergroup relationships.

I am conscious of the time. Ten minutes is the limit.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Ten minutes, yes.

Mr Givan: OK. There are some other points that I was going to make but, for the purposes of —.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): I will give you an extra minute.

Mr Givan: I appreciate that. Thank you. Hopefully that will enable me to conclude my remarks.

Integrated education has achieved a balance of religious backgrounds at system level and continues to do so, yet increasingly there are new questions to be answered. If a school has overwhelmingly drawn pupils from one community, what should be the considerations for its transformation to an integrated school? If integration is now to be primarily about ethos and not about bringing two communities together, what does that mean in the current law? In turn, what does that mean for an integrated school that has children who are largely from one community background? Those are important questions for us to consider. That is why the Department is committed to conducting a wider review of the operation of the transformation process to ensure that it is working effectively.

I thank Members for allowing us to talk about these issues outside of yesterday's debate. I am sure that we will also do that in other forums. That is important because, on these things, although we may not entirely find a consensus, there will not be a lot that we differ on in terms of the inclusive schooling environment that we want, which is open to all, irrespective of the official sector that it comes from. Sharing and inclusivity is something that I think that we all subscribe to. Certainly, I do, as a Minister, and I am happy to continue that conversation with colleagues in due course.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Thank you, Minister, and thank you, Paula. Thank you, everybody, for the Adjournment debate.