Official Report: Monday 24 March 2025

Mr Sheehan: Tá coicís ó shin, thug mé ráiteas os comhair an Tionóil inar mhol mé Coiste Uladh as a chinneadh an cluiche craoibhe idir Aontroim agus Ard Mhacha a imirt in Aontroim. Ach chuathas siar ar an chinneadh sin ó shin, agus seasaim le foireann Aontroma agus iad ag déanamh a gcáis lena mbuntáiste baile a choinneáil.

Déanaim comhghairdeas le heagraithe Fhéile an Earraigh agus Sheachtain na Gaeilge agus gabhaim buíochas leo as coicís d’imeachtaí a eagrú i mo thoghcheantar: imeachtaí ceoil, laetha spraoi agus seoltaí leabhair, gan ach cuid imeachtaí a lua. Saibhríonn na himeachtaí sin ár bpobal, pé acu as Gaeilge nó as Béarla iad. Guím gach rath orthu sna blianta agus sna féilte amach romhainn.

Go dlúth sna sála ag an dá fhéile rathúla sin atá mé i ndiaidh a lua, fógraíodh go mbeidh Fleadh Cheoil na hÉireann á cheiliúradh i mBéal Feirste sa bhliain 2026 — an ceiliúradh is mó ar domhan ar chultúr agus ar cheol na hÉireann. Meastar gur fhreastail breis agus leath-mhilliún duine ar imeachtaí na fleidhe anuraidh. Is dea-scéala amach is amach é sin, agus ba mhór a rachas an borradh eacnamaíochta sin chun sochair don toghcheantar. Scéala é a thógfas croí agus meanma ár saoránach agus ár ngnólachtaí, agus is cinnte go mbeidh tionchar dearfach aige ar ár bpobail go ceann na mblianta fada. Comhghairdeas le Comhairle Cathrach Bhéal Feirste as glacadh le hiarratas Chomhaltas Ceoltóirí Éireann.

Mr Frew: Today, I pay tribute to Alderman Beth Adger MBE, Mayor of Mid and East Antrim, who sadly passed away on Wednesday of last week. We all knew her as Beth, and she was an absolute champion for her community. She was first elected to Ballymena Borough Council in 2005, serving the people of Ballymena South. After the review of public administration (RPA), she represented the Braid area. That gave her immense pride, as she was a Carnalbanagh woman and she was able to represent that townland when it came over to Mid and East Antrim Borough Council and the Braid area. She represented her people with great strength and courage.

Where did she find the strength and courage to represent so many people? It was in living a life of service and dedication, but she also struggled in life. At the age of 17, she was diagnosed with cancer. She had to leave the townland of Carnalbanagh — the hill country — to go to London, to Fulham Hospital, to take part in one of the first trials of chemotherapy. Beth beat cancer at that young age, and she dedicated her life to service.

Beth was not only a great politician and elected representative but a great mother. She brought up not only her own children, of which there were many, but children whom she fostered. She touched the hearts of tens of children: if it had not been for Beth, who knows where they would be today? She saved and nurtured those children, and she brought them up as if they were her own because, for Beth, they were her own.

It is with great sadness that we mourn the passing of Beth, but we remember the legacy that she has left: in my party, the DUP; in Ballymena; in Mid and East Antrim Borough Council; and not only in those places but across the Province. Beth represented the council on a lot of the regional councillor associations, and she was much travelled and much experienced. We will miss you, Beth, in Ballymena and in the DUP.

Mrs Guy: I have a question for folks here: does anyone here remember Harry? Harry is an autistic boy who is non-verbal. He was found to have been unnecessarily restrained at school when he was just five years old. Harry is non-verbal so he could not tell his mum. She did not know what was happening, and the school had no duty to inform her. I am sure that Members can imagine what it would be like, as a parent, to find out that that had happened to your child without your knowledge.

Harry's mum, Deirdre Shakespeare, launched a campaign to deliver Harry's law, which was endorsed by political parties across the spectrum, by advocacy groups and even by celebrity Paris Hilton. When draft statutory guidance was finally issued in 2023, a number of groups, including the Royal College of Nursing (RCN), expressed concern about the draft. It, along with others, was invited to join a task and finish group to collaborate with the Department of Education on the final policy. The RCN joined the group in good faith to work with the Department to get the statutory guidance right and to align it with existing practices in health settings.

It was concerning to hear, as reported in the media last week, that the RCN has reluctantly come to the conclusion that it must resign from the task group before it became associated with new statutory guidance that it believes that, at the group's conclusion, may not be human rights-compliant and therefore not, in its words:

Since the news was reported in the media, I have heard from Deirdre, Harry's mum. She is massively frustrated at the Department's lack of engagement with families who have campaigned for years for changes in the law on restrictive practices in schools. The RCN's move has left them feeling deeply concerned. On Friday, I met representatives of a special school, and, indeed, the bulk of our conversation also focused on that issue and the urgent need for clarity from the Department.

We must see the repeal of article 4 of the Education Order 1998 and a rights-compliant, child-focused policy to end the use of seclusion in schools and to ensure that there is appropriate recording and monitoring of the use of restraint, in line with its place as an intervention of last resort and with support and training for staff. The Education Minister must urgently outline what is happening with the statutory guidance following the 2023 consultation and restore confidence following the RCN's withdrawal from the working group.

Mr Stewart: First, I associate myself with the Member for North Antrim's comments. I had the privilege of serving on Mid and East Antrim Borough Council with Beth Adger. It was a privilege to work with her, and my thoughts and deepest sympathies are with her friends, her family and all her colleagues in the DUP.

I commend Carrickfergus Rugby Club and wish it the very best of luck as it looks forward to two climactic weekends. This Saturday, the first XV takes on Ards Rugby Club in the Junior Shield final at Ravenhill. It is sure to be a special day for the club and its supporters, and I wish captain, Conor Cambridge, coaches Andrew Hughes and Shane Kelly and all the players the very best of luck ahead of their special day. The whole town will be supporting them, and we look forward to seeing the Junior Shield return to Carrickfergus on Saturday evening.

On Saturday as well, Carrickfergus Rugby Club under-18s will take on Clogher Valley under-18s in Omagh in the Bowl final. The following Saturday, its under-16 team will take on Instonians under-16s in the Plate final. I congratulate both junior teams and wish them all the best in their respective finals. The success at all levels of Carrickfergus Rugby Club is further evidence of and a testament to the hard work and dedication of so many individuals at the club. From the president, Raymond Crooks, down, I commend the coaches, the committee, all the officials and all the volunteers for everything that they do to foster amazing sporting achievement at the club. Here's to hopefully celebrating lifting three trophies in the coming weekends.

Ms Hunter: I express my concern following the disgraceful threats to schools across Northern Ireland today: in Strabane, in Ballycastle and many in Enniskillen. Those threats have resulted in the closure of Holy Cross College in Strabane, Strabane Academy, Strabane Primary School, Cross and Passion College in Ballycastle, Enniskillen Integrated Primary School and more, leaving teachers, principals, staff and pupils absolutely terrified. That is totally unacceptable. Information so far this morning reveals that there have been bomb threats and unconfirmed messages circulating on social media alluding to weapons having been left at campuses in Northern Ireland. The security threats follow on from a primary school in Lurgan receiving an anonymous, concerning phone call on 7 March that alluded to child safety concerns. As a result, the school had to step up its security and take further precautionary measures.

Our children in Northern Ireland deserve to feel safe. They deserve to experience education without there being any barrier to their safety. The mentality of those who threaten the safety of our children is absolutely unacceptable. We will not normalise that shameful and sinister behaviour. The perpetrators must be held accountable.

I put it on the record that, as politicians in this Building, none of us will tolerate such despicable threats of violence towards our primary schools and our children, who are young and vulnerable. My ask is for the Minister of Education and the Department to conduct an immediate safety and security review of all 1,074 schools in the North to ensure that all our children are safe. I ask for that not to create hysteria but to make the safety, health and well-being of our children an absolute political priority.

Mrs Mason: It is a great honour for me to stand here today and congratulate an exceptional young athlete, Niamh Mason from Loughinisland, on her incredible achievements in table tennis. Yesterday, at just 17 years of age, Niamh secured the under-19 and under-21 all-Ireland table tennis titles. She now ranks number one in the country at both levels, which, I am sure that all Members will agree, is an amazing feat. At this stage, I declare an interest and a slight bias, as Niamh is my niece.

Niamh's journey in sport began purely by chance. While she was on holiday with her dad, she discovered a games room with a table tennis table in it. For a bit of fun, they started to play. From that moment on, she has never looked back. Having picked up a table tennis racket for the very first time at just nine years old, she was immediately a natural, and she is now an all-Ireland champion. Niamh now plays with the Ormeau Table Tennis Club, where her passion and dedication have set her apart. She has continually pushed herself to new heights, with the backing and support of her family, who are extremely proud of her achievements.

Last weekend, she truly made her mark by becoming the all-Ireland champion, winning, as I said, the under-19 and under-21 categories in an all-female competition that featured the very best players in the country. It is a remarkable achievement and a testament to her hard work, discipline and, of course, love for the game. At just 17 years old, Niamh is following in the footsteps of sporting excellence in her family. Her father's All-Ireland Minor Football Championship medal for County Down is proof that talent and determination run in the family, not that I am biased. Today, however, it is definitely Niamh's time to shine.

Niamh, we are all incredibly proud of you. Your dedication and success are an inspiration to young athletes everywhere. We have no doubt that this is only the beginning of an even greater journey ahead. Comhghairdeas.

Mr Robinson: Last Wednesday, while working in my constituency office, I was heavily distracted, because I was closely following the Limavady High School under-16 boys who were competing against Bangor Academy. Both teams were desperate to win the Danske Bank High Schools Trophy at the Kingspan Stadium.

I am not a rugby man. Football was always my thing, but, as a Limavady High School old boy, I try, where possible, to take an interest in events that happen within and outside the school. The Limavady boys did their school and the local area proud, eventually running out winners with tries from Brandon Cole, Harry Smyth and a penalty from man of the match, Arthur Hylands, along with two conversions. I convey my personal congratulations to the entire team, its coaches and the school. My understanding is that a request has been submitted for a civic reception, which would be a just and fitting recognition. The team comprised Harry Smyth; Jacob MacArthur; Curtis McIlmoyle; Zac Maguire; Brandon Cole; Isaac Cole; Arthur Hylands; Ross Carmichael; David McCurry; Reuben McCurry; Matthew McMaster; Luca Porter; M J Riley; Alan Pearson; Marc Marten; Danny Colhoun; Otis Irwin; Nathan Carlisle; Cameron Lindsay; Tom Wilson; and Oliver Millar.

Limavady High School always strives to be the very best, but these boys, I can proudly say, are the very best.

Mr McReynolds: I rise both as an MLA and a member of the Policing Board to put on record my sincere thanks to the officers of the PSNI for their professionalism and presence at yesterday's assemblies in Belfast city centre.

Last year, we saw violence on our streets, criminal damage, businesses trashed and fear across communities in Northern Ireland. I remember raising in the Chamber the concerns of my constituents and businesses who, at that time, saw and felt racism in the air.

In advance of yesterday's events, I spoke frequently with the PSNI to ensure that it was prepared, and I was assured that it was taking events seriously. Yesterday, I took time to observe and engage with the PSNI, and I saw officers manage large crowds calmly and professionally. That builds trust with communities and reassures them. Thankfully, yesterday's event took place peacefully, and the PSNI had a clear role in ensuring that.

Last week, I was fortunate to receive a tour of the PSNI's cybercrime unit, and I heard about the role that misinformation now plays in all our lives and how the PSNI polices cybercrime. It was also a timely visit, as I had recently watched 'Adolescence' on Netflix, which highlights the impact that social media now has on all our young people. Immigration does not pose a threat to us: misinformation and division do, and I am grateful to the PSNI for the role that it played yesterday afternoon.

Mrs Cameron: I take the opportunity to raise awareness of the fact that this is the month that we dedicate to ovarian cancer awareness. It is vital that we recognise the significant contributions of individuals who have worked tirelessly to bring this disease to the forefront.

I pay tribute to two extraordinary women: Una Crudden, who sadly passed away from ovarian cancer in December 2014; and Julie Scates, who passed away in April 2019. They fought valiantly against ovarian cancer and dedicated themselves to raising awareness of the issue. It is often a very overlooked disease. As they campaigned against ovarian cancer and raised awareness of it, they did so knowing that the campaign would never help them. It was too late for both those individuals. However, they campaigned and worked hard to raise awareness, especially in this institution, in order to ensure that the women who were coming behind them had a better experience, early warning, early detection and would be better off for their example.

Una and Julie both exemplified the true spirit of advocacy, and they used their voices and experiences to educate others about the symptoms and risks of ovarian cancer, tirelessly organising events and support groups that fostered community engagement and understanding. Their efforts illuminated the importance of early detection and empowered countless women to seek medical advice when they might otherwise have hesitated. Through their passion and commitment, Una and Julie transformed their personal battles into a broader movement for change, ensuring that others would not have to face this disease in silence. Their legacy is one of hope and resilience.

As we observe Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month, let us honour Una and Julie by continuing their mission. We must advocate for further research, education and support for those affected by ovarian cancer. Together, we can create a future in which fewer families endure the pain of the disease and awareness leads to earlier detection and better outcomes. That is what we all want, so let us all stand united in that effort and carry forward the torch that Una and Julie lit with their unwavering dedication.

Mr Butler: There is a wee bit of a feeling of déjà vu this week, because, last Tuesday, I stood up and congratulated a couple of Lagan Valley sporting greats — Lucy Best and Wallace High School — and, this week, I will do the very same. I want to heap praise, which is rightly deserved, on Dromore Rugby Football Club. On Saturday, the wee club on the hill secured the Ulster Championship first division with a win over Portadown Rugby Football Club, which is from Upper Bann, so Lagan Valley had the upper hand over Upper Bann on this occasion.

Under the exceptional leadership of Mr Hughes, who I was told captained the team, the players showed grit, determination and sheer class, not just on Saturday, when the club secured the league, but all season. It has been an exceptional season for the players. Their skill on the pitch, their camaraderie off the pitch, which I have witnessed, and their unwavering dedication to the sport and to their community make them true champions in every sense of the word. If there is one thing that we know about Dromore Rugby Football Club, it is that the team plays with heart and with that Dromore grit. The team is tough, relentless and always up for a good story, like the time a visiting team called and got to look at the Barban Hill pitch for the first time. The players took one look at the slope and asked which half of the match they would be playing downhill. Someone from Dromore quickly quipped, "Both halves, if you are Dromore". That is the spirit of the club: no excuses, no shortcuts, no guff and just a winning mentality.

This victory is not just about lifting the trophy. It is about the years of hard work, the cold training nights and the sacrifices that each of the players, the training staff, the managers and those who run Dromore Rugby Football Club have put in to achieve what they have. I have, and I am sure that those from Lagan Valley who have an interest in rugby — my colleague John Stewart is hoping to bring better news about Carrick next week after its final —a sense of pride when we say congratulations to all at Dromore Rugby Football Club, and we look forward to future victories.

Mr McNulty: I applaud the achievements of a young woman who was born at the turn of the century in Daisy Hill Hospital in Newry. On Friday, Kate O'Connor, a Dundalk athlete, won silver in the heptathlon at the World Athletics Indoor Championships 12 days after winning a bronze at the European Athletics Indoor Championships. That is an extraordinary achievement. Dundalk has a wonderful sporting tradition in soccer and Gaelic games but a hotbed of the heptathlon it is not, which makes this achievement all the more special and wonderful.

Kate is in Ulster University at Jordanstown studying communications and PR. She is coached by her father, who is a teacher in CBS Primary School in Dundalk, alongside my sister Emer. There is huge pride in CBS Primary School, huge pride in St Vincent's Secondary School and huge pride in St Gerard's Athletics Club in Dundalk. There is huge pride among everybody in Dundalk, and there is huge pride across Ireland at this young woman's achievement. She is testament to what you can do if you dream big and work hard. Kate kept saying to herself, "How much do you want this medal?", and she is an example to all of us of what can be achieved if you really push for something and go for it. Huge credit to her and to her father — her coach.

I am excited to see the possibilities that lie ahead for her in Tokyo and Beijing at the next two World Athletics Championships and in Los Angeles at the 2028 Olympics. It is a huge success story, and it has brought huge joy and celebration to Dundalk and across this land. Well done, Kate. Well done, Michael.

Mr Buckley: We were informed at the weekend that the Ministry of Defence plans to apply for a judicial review of the coroner's finding into the deaths of four Provisional IRA terrorists in their attack at Clonoe. I welcome the decision. The coroner's report found that the use of lethal force by the SAS cannot have been reasonable. That decision bewildered citizens with any degree of common sense. It infuriated our veterans community and angered genuine victims of the Northern Ireland Troubles; they see it as another attempt — in this instance, by the courts — to rewrite the narrative of what happened in Northern Ireland's troubled past.

Let us set out the context: 10 heavily armed IRA men, with an anti-aircraft gun strapped to the back of a lorry, alongside AK-47s, opened up on a police station, travelled down the road and open fire again in the air, and were then met by the SAS in the Clonoe church car park. That is the reality of what happened. A coroner's report has the ability to look into who, what, where and when, but it has no ability to take into context the "why". It is the "why" that I focus my remarks on. Why did the SAS open fire on those terrorists? It did so because it was protecting life and property. I listened to Francie Molloy, the Sinn Féin former Member for Mid Ulster, on the radio this morning talking about rules of engagement, war scenarios and the failure to save life. Could it get any more rich? What did those men set out to do? It was to murder and take life. How many lives had they taken before, and how many would they have taken afterwards?

People often ask whether those soldiers felt that their lives were threatened. Let us look at a similar scenario: two and a half years previously, in October 1989, a 25-year-old constable, Michael Marshall, was assassinated in a very similar style of encounter near Bessbrook. His armoured police car was overtaken by a flatbed lorry with a machine gun styled the same as that at Clonoe, which killed him. His colleague, who was left seriously injured, said:

When the shooting stopped, he saw Constable Marshall —

Mr Speaker: The Member's time is up. Draw your remarks to a close.

Mr Buckley: — lying slumped in the blazing car. Those were the actions —

Mr Speaker: The Member's time —.

Mr Buckley: — and the consequences must be taken into account. They were murderers.

Mr Speaker: The Member will be seated.

Mr Gaston: I used a previous Member's statement to draw attention to the fact that the First Minister and deputy First Minister have been sitting on an answer to a question originally tabled by my predecessor and then tabled again by me when I was co-opted into the House. The question was simple and, indeed, factual; it was to establish how much public money the First Minister and deputy First Minister spent on their trip to Washington in March 2024. On Friday, I finally received the answer. Tellingly, it was after the Information Commissioner stepped in and instructed the Ministers to respond to an FOI request submitted by Adrian Rutherford from the 'Belfast Telegraph'.

We now know that, over the course of four days, the Executive Office spent an eye-watering £54,000 of public money: £38,000 on travel, £13,000 on accommodation and £3,000 on other expenses. Each Minister travelled with a special adviser, their private secretary and their press officer. Oh, this is the best bit: they also brought a photographer with them to catch their special moments together. Members, what a waste of money. It is, frankly, obscene to spend £54,000 of taxpayers' money in four days and then come to the House time and time again to lament the fact that there is no money for vital services. It is, simply, outrageous. The vast majority of my constituents could not dream of spending such a sum of money, even after many years of saving. Indeed, many of them would not bring in even a fraction of £54,000 into their household in a year.

Shame on Michelle O'Neill and Emma Little-Pengelly. Now we know why the question went unanswered for so long.

Mrs Erskine: Today, a concerning email was sent to schools across Northern Ireland, including in my constituency. It was sinister and prompted security fears. This morning, police confirmed that an email sent to schools in Enniskillen, Strabane and Ballycastle is believed to have involved nine schools. As a result of the email, the police are conducting inquiries and liaising with schools affected by the incident. The PSNI is also working with the Metropolitan Police in London, as, I understand, such emails were sent to schools in other parts of the UK. I was in touch this morning with the police and three schools affected in my area.

The email was a despicable act that was designed to wreak havoc in communities and among our children. Threats issued against schools are to be unequivocally condemned and have no place in society. Targeting schools, which are places of learning, personal growth and friendship for young people, is particularly reprehensible and deeply troubling. It was a scary incident for our schools — the staff, pupils and parents — especially for the staff, as they daily keep everybody's safety as their highest priority. I pay tribute to the school leadership and to the police, who acted quickly to assist the affected schools. However, I understand that some of the affected schools in Northern Ireland had to close. No child should have their education disrupted in that manner, and no family should have to endure the fear and uncertainty caused by such reckless actions.

Today, in the Chamber, we offer our support to the schools that have had to deal with the incident. Schools should be a safe haven, but incidents such as this cause fear. Thankfully, quick actions this morning helped to ease some of the concerns, and I trust that the PSNI will now act swiftly with the Met to identify the culprit and ensure that safety and justice are secured.

Mr Gaston: On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I draw to your attention again the issue that I raised during Members' statements last week regarding the Executive Office. In response to a point of order from the Member for North Belfast Mr Phillip Brett on 18 February, you said:

On a number of occasions, I have raised in the House the fact that the First Minister and deputy First Minister failed to answer a question about the cost of their trip to Washington in 2024. On Friday, the answer that £54,000 of public money was blown in just four days was revealed. However, as today's 'Belfast Telegraph' shows, the data was released to a journalist — on the same day as it was released to me — only because the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) got involved. Surely that situation is not acceptable. MLAs should be able to get answers to questions without having to go to the ICO.

Mr Speaker: The Member knows my position on such matters, as do all Members, which is that the House represents the public and Ministers represent the Government. The public require answers of Ministers, and they should get those answers not through freedom of information requests but through Members' questions. When a Member asks a question, therefore, the logic is that an answer should be forthcoming. To not answer a question for a year is clearly not acceptable. While the Speaker's Office has no sanction on Ministers on that front, it is abundantly clear what the expectation is and what the Standing Orders state and that Ministers should comply with the Standing Orders in that regard.

Miss McAllister: On a point of order Mr Speaker. I wish to apologise for not being in my place last Tuesday for Question Time. Unfortunately, I was ill on the day and did not get my withdrawal in on time. I want to put on record my apologies for missing my question.

Mr Speaker: Thank you very much for that.

Mr Speaker: I advise Members that I have been notified that the Opposition no longer intend to move the motion on funding for childcare. The item of business remains in the Order Paper, and the Chair will invite the Opposition to move the motion formally, but I wanted the Assembly to be given as much notice as possible that there will be no debate on funding for childcare today.

Mr Buckley: On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I welcome the fact that the factually inaccurate motion from the constructive Opposition is not being moved today. How was it that such a grossly inaccurate motion made it into the Order Paper in the first place?

Mr Speaker: The Business Committee meets to assess the work ahead. The Opposition were asked to provide the motions for their time, and the Opposition provided those motions. It is not for the Business Office to check every jot and tittle on those motions. Nonetheless, the Opposition provided them, so, if there are answers to be given about inaccuracies or otherwise, it is for the Opposition to explain.

Mr Buckley: Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. Was a formal apology issued to the Speaker's Office for the wasting of Assembly time and business due to a failure to supply motions that are factually and legally competent, which will, ultimately, result in the House rising early today?

Mr Durkan: We did not waste two years of it.

Mr Speaker: Order, please. We received notice this morning that the motion was being withdrawn. As far as I know, that is all that happened. We only received notice that the motion was being withdrawn.

Mr Durkan: I beg to move

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

Mr Durkan: I note and welcome the amendments that have been tabled. We do not disagree with the sentiments expressed in either of the amendments, as they recognise the interlinked issues that have aligned to leave our health service in such disarray, but the wide-ranging calls in both amendments, worthy as they are, threaten to deflect attention from and prevent action on the focus of our motion.

The whole system needs fixed. We support transformation, but we cannot continue to wait for everything to be fixed before we fix anything. Our focus today is on improving the Ambulance Service and ensuring that people can access emergency care when they need it. While transformation will require tough decisions, as we keep saying and keep hearing, there will be concerns in some areas at the prospect of losing services from the local community. However, the one thing that fills all of us with dread, wherever we are, is the fear that, in the event of an emergency, be it one of our elderly parents falling down the stairs or a young child badly injuring themselves jumping down them, it will take hours for an ambulance to show up, while someone we love lies suffering or maybe even dying before our eyes. What we propose today is something that the SDLP is passionate about. Something that we all agree on is that our health service is in a precarious position. We are passionate about that too. Throughout a patient's pathway, we hear stories of a service that is falling apart at the seams. Whether it is the emergency departments (EDs), the extensive waiting lists or the struggle to allocate care packages, we can all agree that, if we are to improve patient outcomes and deliver a fit-for-purpose healthcare system for the future, we must act now. Quite simply, we must transform our healthcare system if it is to survive.

The SDLP does not believe that it is right to lay all of that at the feet of the Health Minister. One Minister cannot do it all on their own; rather, as our motion proposes, while the Minister has primary responsibility around the details, the buck stops not with him but with the Executive as a whole. I will say again that transformation requires difficult decisions and buy-in from all Executive Ministers, and it should compel all Ministers to consider the way in which they operate. Our health service, rather like our Executive and, indeed, the Assembly, is highly interdependent. What impacts one part will directly or indirectly impact all others. It is in that spirit that we have genuinely and sincerely tabled the motion for today.

The SDLP policy paper 'Help Can’t Wait' makes a number of recommendations, which are not easy. We are well aware that the recommendations that we have made will not sit easily with everyone. However, we ask everyone to consider at the outset that the recommendations are a result of best practices and facts and should be seen through the lens of wanting to improve patient flow in our hospitals and, therefore, improve patient outcomes. In essence, we propose a solid example of transformation in health.

It begins with ambulance handovers. There is a target time across the NHS for ambulance staff to hand over a patient when they arrive at the emergency department. It is 15 minutes. That is 15 minutes to get the patient in and get the ambulance back on the road to do it all again. While that is an aspiration, we know that, despite the best efforts of our heroic paramedic staff, one can only imagine the horrors that they have to face in a day or night at work. They are worthy not just of our gratitude but of better pay, conditions and support.

It is great to see that workforce being bolstered now by the first cohort of graduates from the paramedic course at Magee College. We need to improve our system to maximise the benefit of that brilliant workforce. Paramedics do not want to sit all day at hospitals when there are lives out there to be saved. Every minute and every hour that a patient waits outside an emergency department is a minute or an hour that another patient must wait for an ambulance.

The W45 policy is relatively new and relatively straightforward. In essence, if a patient has been waiting for 45 minutes outside an emergency department and is yet to be handed over, the ambulance crew will safely bring them into the emergency department, at which point, staff can begin their assessments and triage.

Mr McNulty: Will the Member give way?

Mr Durkan: Certainly.

Mr McNulty: Last night, I had my own experience with triage. My son threw his submarine at me and split my eye open, so I had to be triaged through the emergency department at Daisy Hill Hospital. I was most impressed by the efficiency of the triage. Incredibly, when I entered the hospital at 10.30 pm, the emergency department and the waiting room were packed, but the efficiency, compassion and professionalism of the staff were extraordinary. The patience of the patients waiting to be attended to was also extraordinary. The stress placed on emergency departments is extraordinary, and that also needs to be sorted, but, obviously, the emphasis of our motion is on the Ambulance Service.

Mr Durkan: I thank the Member for his intervention. I know that, at the outset, it appears shocking that we would propose putting more pressure on our already overworked emergency department staff. I get that, and I will get to it. That is why the SDLP undertook a fact-finding visit to the London Ambulance Service and to Guy's Hospital and St Thomas' Hospital in London to see the model in practice, and it was startling.

When the model was proposed, the London Ambulance Service heard similar concerns and, indeed, criticism, including rather toxic press coverage. The result, however, has been that category 2 response times have been reduced by 50% right across the London network. At Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, we saw the model in action, from a patient being brought into the ED and triaged to then starting on their pathway within minutes.

What makes it work? Two things: process and culture. The process involves not only the W45 policy, because also enshrined in NHS England policy is clear guidance that, as soon as an ambulance arrives at a hospital — once it goes through the gate — the patient becomes the hospital's responsibility. The culture is one of wanting to make things work. Staff explained that, when the policy was introduced, they consciously decided that they would make it work. There was no other option, and it does work.

What is the process here? What is the culture here? The process here requires some work. The permanent secretary wrote to all trusts in 2020, stating that, from the moment that an ambulance arrives at the emergency department, patient care is the hospital's responsibility. That guidance could be tightened to reflect the fact that, from the moment an ambulance arrives at the hospital, the patient is the hospital's responsibility. In addition, staff capacity needs to be enhanced, hence the reason that we propose a minimum investment of £4·3 million to provide 24-hour band 5 nursing support at our emergency departments and to provide band 7 nursing practitioners to help enhance patient flow. Those processes seem to be relatively easy and cost-effective ones, and they can be introduced and implemented quickly.

Our biggest challenge is the culture here. Right across the North, people are afraid and exhausted. They are afraid of needing to be brought to a hospital or of needing to phone an ambulance. They are exhausted from hearing the endless stories of healthcare falling apart, of political fallouts and of staff having to take highly risky decisions. The public have been conditioned to think that this is the best that it is ever going to be. That is on all of us: on every MLA, every Minister and every media outlet. The truth is that it should not be this way and that it does not need to be this way.

We can do better. We can deliver a healthcare system that works for staff and patients. We know that the entire system needs to be changed, but we must start somewhere, Health Minister.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Mark.

Mr Robinson: I beg to move amendment No 1:

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Alan, you have 10 minutes in which to propose amendment No 1 and five minutes in which to make a winding-up speech.

Mr Robinson: Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I thank the mover of the motion.

I begin by saying something that none of us in the House should ever tire of hearing, and it is that, day after day and week after week, dedicated paramedics, ambulance crews and all other front-line healthcare workers go well over and above their role in order to save lives and to provide comfort in people's moments of crisis.

Let us be honest, however: their ability to do so is being increasingly and dangerously compromised. The Northern Ireland Audit Office's report, which was published this month, made clear the interconnection between ambulance handovers and pressures in the health service over hospital bed space and over delays in discharging patients. Ambulance waiting times are one symptom of the challenges that the health service faces. Without good patient flow through the hospital system, more patients cannot be admitted to EDs, while sick patients in ambulances cannot get into hospitals because well patients cannot leave. Unless the issue of delayed discharge is resolved, the Ambulance Service will only ever be operating at a fraction of its real capacity.

I am on record saying in the Chamber that, when you begin to fix the wider social care system, you begin to fix the health system in the Province. The number-one reason for delayed complex discharges is that no domiciliary care packages are available. That is why my party added that to our amendment. The report laid bare the state of the health service for that sector. At a time when it is being reported that money will be the cure for some of our ills, it is also being reported that £50 million has been lost through Ambulance Service inefficiency since 2019. It gets worse with the high reliance on private ambulances. Just 20 private ambulances were required in 2019, rising to 1,100 in 2023-24 at a cost of £3·6 million, yet handover delays continue to increase. Significant costs are also cited for ambulance staff overtime, which has been running up to £37·8 million since 2019. Those are just some of the negatives.

How can that be fixed? The report recommends fixing patient flow. It also recommends implementing the 46 recommendations in the 'Getting It Right First Time' (GIRFT) report and to use the best practice that is in place in other parts of the UK. The report also makes 11 individual recommendations, calling for trusts to work together, better regulation of the private ambulance sector and well-functioning handover zones at each of the major EDs. The report painted a bleak picture of all nine hospitals having seen their handover performance fall between 2019 and 2024. It points to a Province that is in a crisis of patient safety and resource management. The backlog at our hospitals means that ambulance crews are stuck waiting and unable to respond to new emergencies. At the end of January, the Minister advised us that there is active recruitment for over 1,000 nursing vacancies. We must also ensure that there is staff retention and recruitment in the Ambulance Service so that vital skills there are not lost.

From January to August last year, there were no Saturday nights when the Province had a full rota of emergency ambulance crews. The Northern Ireland Ambulance Service aims to have 52 crews out on a typical Saturday. On three occasions, just 36 were in place. The impact is cascading and far-reaching. Emergency response times are compromised, hospital capacity is choked and healthcare staff are overwhelmed. Waiting on an ambulance is a horrible experience. I have been there twice in as many years, waiting on one for my father, who had suddenly become ill. On both occasions, his wait was relatively short in the grand scheme of things, but how stressful must it be to have to wait hours on an ambulance for a loved one when time is of the essence? Bundling very ill people into taxis and the back seats of cars should never be the norm. How can we ever forget the story from December 2024 of a popular County Antrim man who died when his wife was forced to transport him to hospital in their car due to there being no ambulance available? Our hearts go out to that family and the many others who are in the same position.

My party is happy to explore the introduction of the W45 policy, which the London Ambulance Service has implemented to reduce delays and enhance patient care. The evidence points to the W45 policy being a targeted, efficient approach that aims to significantly reduce ambulance handover delays, in that it requires that no ambulance crew be kept waiting at a hospital for more than 45 minutes. If that threshold is breached, the patient's care is formally transferred to the hospital and the ambulance crew is released to respond to new emergencies. That policy is supposed to prioritise patient flow, which is something that we have all been calling for, and to ensure that ambulance crews are not held hostage due to bottlenecks in hospitals. It also creates accountability in the healthcare system by making it clear that patients must be accepted into hospital in a timely manner. Hospitals can no longer be car parks for ambulances. Implementing the W45 policy here in the Province would send the message that we want to see true efficiency, we value our front-line staff and, above all, we value the safety of our patients. However, we have to recognise that the policy alone is not enough. To do it right, it needs to be paired with an increase in medical capacity, improved patient flow systems, an increase in the number of available beds, standardisation of guidance across all health and social care trusts and implementation of the recommendations of the Audit Office report. The health service can no longer afford fragmented practices that vary from one trust to another. Consistency and acting like one trust are essential.

Mrs Dillon: I beg to move amendment No 2:

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: The Assembly should note that the amendments are mutually exclusive, so, for example, if amendment No 1 is made, the Question will not be put on amendment No 2. The proposer will have 10 minutes to propose amendment No 2 and five minutes in which to make a winding-up speech. All other Members will have five minutes. Linda, please open the debate on amendment No 2.

Mrs Dillon: Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

We all know that ambulance waiting times across the North have worsened significantly. That, alongside the growing delays in ambulance handovers at emergency departments, paints a deeply concerning picture of how patient safety is at risk and the wider health system is being undermined. The recent report from the Audit Office laid that out clearly and highlighted not only the human cost to patients and their families but the serious pressure that is being placed on Ambulance Service staff and resources. We need to hear directly from the Health Minister on how he intends to respond. Recommendations have been made: we need to see their delivery.

I welcome the fact that health has been made a priority by the Executive and, I hope, the entire Assembly. We want to support the Health Minister and ensure that we have a better health service for all our people. Whilst I recognise the significant challenges facing the Minister, people across the North need to see meaningful action, especially in rural areas such as those in my constituency, which stretches from Clonoe to Swatragh. As a resident of Clonoe, I am in the very fortunate position of being 15 minutes up the motorway from Craigavon Area Hospital. However, there are many in Pomeroy, Kildress and Galbally who are much further away from their closest hospital and, therefore, their closest emergency department. Our people need to know that the crisis is being tackled, not just talked about.

We are well aware that ambulances are not a stand-alone service. They are a vital part of our entire health system, but they are not the answer to everything. When a handover stalls, it creates a domino effect, and we all have far too many examples of that. Ambulance availability drops, patients wait longer for help and staff are left stuck between hospital corridors and back-to-back shifts. That is not sustainable, and it is not fair on patients or staff. The problem is not unique to the North, but emergency department attendance here is notably higher than it is elsewhere. Some hospitals are clearly under more pressure than others. We need to understand why emergency department attendance is higher here. At the Health Committee, we have heard in evidence session after evidence session that many people who could and should be cared for in the community end up in our emergency departments. That is not where they should be. That is because of a failure to diagnose early enough and to have proper services in primary care and community care, and we need to seriously address both.

We need to see solutions that are locally tailored, particularly when you consider the added challenge of delivering timely emergency care in rural and dispersed communities such as those that I mentioned in my constituency. That must be recognised and reflected in how resources are allocated, how services are designed and how we, as an Executive, work together across the board to ensure that we deliver for rural communities. We need to look outwards in order to learn from best practice models elsewhere. I absolutely accept that, but we need to ensure that those are tailored for communities and people here. We need to look at things such as the Getting It Right First Time review of emergency medicine, but any strategy must be rooted in the realities of the North: our rurality, our infrastructure gaps and our stretched capacity across the board. The NHS in the North is broken.

The Minister must work across Departments and borders. There is real potential for deeper cooperation with the Minister for Health in Dublin to improve how we coordinate the emergency response in border areas and make efficient use of cross-border health infrastructure, not just in our emergency response but across the board.

As I have outlined, community care is vital, and we should not ignore that when we look at how we can work better together on a cross-border basis.

Those are not just political talking points; they are practical opportunities that could make a real difference to patient outcomes. A truly effective approach must span the entire health system, and that means strengthening primary and community care so that fewer people end up in hospital in the first place. It means ensuring timely discharges with care packages, where needed, so that people are not stuck in beds that they no longer need and, frankly, no longer want. They want to be at home with their family, where they can get better in the way that they want to.

The Member for Foyle, Mark Durkan, made the point that the Ambulance Service can be fixed in isolation without the flow through our hospitals being addressed. Having spoken with health professionals who work in our EDs, I do not believe that that is the way to address the issue. I have given the example before, but it is important to say it again.

Mr Durkan: I thank the Member for giving way. It is not fair or accurate to say that I said that it could be fixed in isolation without further fixes. Later in my speech, I alluded to the additional investment that would be made in band 5 and 7 nurses in emergency departments.

Mrs Dillon: It is important to look at the flow through hospitals first. My reason for saying that is this, and I have given the example before: when I visited the ED in Craigavon, there were 68 people in beds in the emergency department, and there were 62 people upstairs who were medically fit for discharge but were unable to be discharged for a number of reasons. That is not an acceptable position. The lead clinician on the day said to me, "Please do not allow them to extend our EDs. That is not the answer, and we will not have a resolution". Whilst I accept the motion and ask Members to support our amendment, I say that we need to focus on the flow through hospitals. That means making sure that we have the right workforce in place — I support what the Member said — from paramedics and ED staff to home-care providers and community and primary care staff.

Our ambulance crews do incredible work under immense pressure. The delays that we see are no reflection on them: they are the result of a system that is at and beyond breaking point. However, when paramedics are left waiting for hours outside hospitals unable to respond to new emergencies, we all lose. They lose the chance to rest and recover on what are already demanding shifts.

We cannot lose sight of the fact that behind every statistic is a person — someone who is waiting in pain and distress, often with a distraught family — and healthcare workers who are doing their best under impossible conditions. We need a joined-up, system-wide approach that is not only reactive but proactive. As I have said before — we need to say it again — all five heads of our trusts have said that we need a focus on social care. We will not fix the problem in our emergency departments and the Ambulance Service — more people dying who should not die and families being left with trauma — if we do not fix the flow-through and fix our social care system.

I support the motion. I ask Members to support our amendment. I ask again that our social care system be fixed to ensure that we do not end up with a crisis in emergency care and in order that our ambulance staff can get out to those who absolutely need them.

It is important to highlight some information that I was given by the British Heart Foundation. I will not go through all the statistics, but one vital one is that the number of people who self-present at a hospital has increased from 5% to 12% in the last five years. That is concerning, and it means that, potentially, people have worse outcomes. Everything that we have discussed in Committee and with the Minister in the Chamber is about what we will do to ensure better outcomes. We can ensure better outcomes only by having a whole-system approach. Therefore, I ask Members to support our amendment.

Mr Donnelly: I thank the SDLP for tabling the motion. It is timely, following the publication of the recent Audit Office report on ambulance handover times, and the issue affects everyone in the Chamber. We will support both amendments.

In January, the Alliance Party brought a motion on the issue to the Chamber for debate. It called on the Minister to:

I have personal experience of working in busy A&E departments and wards. I know the impact that wards that are completely full of patients, corridor beds put wherever they can be and A&E departments in which every square inch of floor space is being used can have on ambulance handovers. The staff cannot safely accept a patient until there is room for them to do so. Sometimes, there can be up to two wards' worth of patients being cared for in our A&E departments. That incurs a risk of harm to the patient, who is sick enough to have needed an ambulance to take them to hospital for treatment, and it impacts on Ambulance Service staff, who can sometimes spend their whole shift outside a hospital with a patient in the back of the ambulance, and on hospital staff, who work under extreme pressure for extended periods. That is incredibly stressful and can leave staff with the impression that, despite working hard, they cannot give their patients the care that they deserve. That moral injury is hard to accept.

The report is stark and confirms what we have been hearing for a long time. It states that, from 2023 to 2024, there were 36,000 incidents in which patients experienced some harm as a result of handover delays, and that, in about 3,800 cases, patients were potentially exposed to severe harm. Ambulance response times are suffering, and a concerning 25% of ambulance capacity is lost due to those delays. We have all heard from our constituents of cases of overlong stays and ambulances waiting outside hospitals, sometimes with the engine on to keep patients warm. I have heard of many such cases, including a 29-hour wait that included a shift change for the paramedic team outside the hospital. Paramedics and ambulance staff want to be on the road answering calls, not outside full hospitals.

We know that long waits and overcrowding in A&E departments are unsafe and can lengthen the time that patients need to be in hospital. They are even associated with increased mortality. Emergency medical consultant and chair of the Royal College of Emergency Medicine (RCEM), Dr Russell McLaughlin, reviewed the situation of pressures in A&E in 2022 and concluded:

Overcrowding causes excess deaths. The most recent winter was the worst yet for A&E waits, and I can only imagine what the number is now.

While there are many contributing factors, including workflow, waiting lists and the impact that funding of GP services has, the root cause lies in the hospital system, as Linda outlined. It is about patient flow. Patients who are medically fit for discharge cannot be discharged because of a lack of the social care packages required to meet their needs in the community. That is a bottleneck in the system. We recognise the incredible work being done by our Health and Social Care (HSC) staff — in this case, particularly by the Northern Ireland Ambulance Service (NIAS) staff — who continue to work tirelessly under extreme pressures. We must recognise, however, that the situation is not sustainable. We all know that the budget is tight and that the Minister has a difficult job, but it is unacceptable that patients are suffering harm. We need to improve flow, and that means providing alternative care pathways such as minor injuries units; see-and-treat protocols for Northern Ireland Ambulance Service staff whereby patients are assessed by paramedics as not requiring attendance at emergency departments and can instead be referred to specialist clinical teams or to their GPs; and paramedics making informed decisions about patients who are nearing the end of their life and wish to remain at home.

Another example, visited by the Committee last year, is the joint mental health pilot scheme, in which mental health practitioners work with the Northern Ireland Ambulance Service in the control room. That scheme de-escalated 40% of mental health calls over the phone, to the point where those calls did not require an ambulance response. I am keen to hear from the Minister about the long-term plans for that successful service. Another scheme that reduces inappropriate admissions is the Hospital at Home service in the Southern Trust, through which unscheduled care is delivered to an increasing number of older residents who live with more and more complex needs directly in their homes, avoiding unnecessary admissions, promoting quality of life and freeing up space in our A&E departments.

There is an urgent need to progress health service reform in line with the principles outlined in the 2016 Bengoa report. We could have been nine years into a 10-year reform programme had we not had two Assembly shutdowns since that report. That alone is more than enough reason to reform our political institutions to prevent one party from having a veto and collapsing the institutions.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Time is up, Danny.

Mr Donnelly: No problem.

We cannot address problems, if we are not here.

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

Mr Chambers: I suspect that every Member of the House has the same concerns regarding the pressures and delays that the Northern Ireland Ambulance Service faces. Those worries will have been heightened after the recent publication of the Audit Office report. There is no doubt that the current delays are untenable and, ultimately, pose real and significant risks. Whether it is a heart attack, a stroke or a car accident, the sooner an ambulance crew arrives at the scene, the higher the chances are of survival and recovery. I have nothing but praise for how our paramedics deal with the many daily challenges that they face.

We need to ensure that as many crews and vehicles as possible are available to respond. However, we also need to remember that the pressures that our Ambulance Service faces are not unique to Northern Ireland. Over recent months, several ambulance services across Great Britain have declared critical or urgent incidents because of the level of demand. Nevertheless, even with the undoubted strains on the system, we need to make sure that we make the best use of our crews. Therefore, I welcome any and all measures to improve system efficiency and better utilisation of resources.

We also need to be honest and recognise that there is no single or easy solution. If there were, it would have been implemented long ago. I very much welcome the Minister's focus on tackling the broader pressures on urgent and emergency care, particularly in advance of next winter. I hope that, in the meantime, in the weeks and months ahead, the Assembly will approach the issue of necessary investment in our health service with a fair and open mind. The issue of patient flow and timely discharge is at the heart of the problem. While it is essential that the system works as efficiently as possible, ultimately, greater investment in community care will be one of the long-term solutions. That will mean the Assembly doing what it has often said it would, which is to prioritise our health service.

Ms Ennis: While the motion's intent is to find a solution, it misses the point. That is why Sinn Féin has tabled its amendment. The motion calls for the setting of a 45-minute limit for ambulances to wait before leaving patients in hospital corridors, but where will those patients go? They will go into already overcrowded and understaffed emergency departments that are barely coping as it is. What the British Government have tried to do with the W45 initiative is not about improving patient care but about shifting blame. The British Government know that they have failed to invest in hospital capacity, to recruit enough doctors and nurses and to ensure that emergency services can function properly. Instead of tackling the root of the problem, they are putting vulnerable patients at risk, abandoning them in corridors where staff are already stretched to breaking point.

Mr Durkan: Will the Member give way?

Ms Ennis: I will just make a bit of progress.

That is the copy-and-paste initiative that the SDLP wants us to adopt. What happens when a heart attack patient is left waiting on a trolley because there is no one available to treat them? What happens to an elderly person with pneumonia who is left shivering in a cold hallway with no proper medical supervision? That is not efficiency; that is negligence. Worst of all, it is a political trick to shift responsibility away from those in power and on to the backs of our heroic NHS workers, who are already being asked to do the impossible.

We do not need quick fixes, nor do we need bureaucratic targets. We need real investment in our healthcare system. We need more beds, more staff and a Government who care about the lives of their people. If the British Government want to cut waiting times, they should start by fixing and investing in our NHS, not by abandoning patients in corridors like luggage in a lost-and-found.

Miss McAllister: I support both amendments and thank the Opposition for tabling the motion. It is timely because, unfortunately, the problem has not been fixed, particularly since the Christmas period, when my party tabled a motion on ambulance waiting times. Nothing has changed since then, so it is important that, as we move from spring and summer into the winter months, we have the massive change that is needed. The Audit Office report illustrated how dire the situation is, so it is even more incumbent on us to shine a light on the fact that 3,800 patients were potentially subjected to severe harm in the past year.

As many in the Chamber have referenced, those people are not just a figure; they are individuals with individual circumstances, and we should focus on them.

As regards the specific proposal on the W45 policy, I appreciate and understand where the Opposition are coming from. Whilst I do not necessarily oppose outright the implementation of such a policy, it is important to think about how it would work in practice. When my colleagues and I have been on tours of hospitals, particularly emergency departments, we have seen that the clinicians are very concerned about the fact that they cannot stack up more patients in corridors, because there is, physically, no space for people there. There are no rooms. Some hospitals do not have bereavement rooms, because they are using them for patients. We do not have any space for them.

Northern Ireland Ambulance Service has specific ideas on how to manage that. Some of those policies relate to using St John Ambulance paramedics on rotation and on a voluntary basis. The care of those who are, perhaps, being put into the corridors or wherever space has been found for them could be overseen by the ambulance and paramedicine team rather than the clinicians in the hospital. However, that cannot be done in isolation. It has to be done in conjunction with the emergency medicine staff team at all hospitals that have an emergency department. Following the debate on the motion that we tabled in January, I asked the Minister whether he had engaged with the Northern Ireland Ambulance Service as to whether that could be implemented. I look forward to hearing whether that was explored at all.

Social care is really important, and many Members have focused on it. I want to take a moment to touch on something different. Last week, at the Health Committee, palliative care and the role of the Ambulance Service came up. We have a Northern Ireland-wide Ambulance Service that generally has a regional policy around taking patients, but there is no regional policy when it comes to palliative care. People who should not be in hospital are taken to hospitals, despite it being known that they need hospice care. That requires a significant, isolated focus from the Department. What is happening with those particular patients with regard to social care? We also need an update on the work of the social care collaborative forum. I do not doubt that the Minister will reference that in his winding-up speech, but we need to know where we are with policy decisions by the social care collaborative forum. Not everything requires money. Some things require policy direction and policy decisions, so it is important that we hear about any movement on that.

I support both amendments. Either one or both of them represent something that is more like our position at the moment than the original motion does. However, as I said, it is not a case of outright opposition but of finding out how the proposals work in practice.

Mr Gaston: My remarks on ambulance handovers will focus on the Northern Trust, particularly on events on 21 December 2024. On that evening, 14 ambulances were servicing the largest trust, being dispatched to locations in Coleraine, Ballymena, Antrim, Magherafelt, Larne, Carrickfergus and Whiteabbey. On that day, 120 working hours were lost because ambulances were sitting outside EDs. That accounted for a quarter of the entire service capacity for that trust.

Allow me to cite the impact of delays on the Darragh family in my constituency. At 7.05 pm, Willy, who had previous heart problems, took chest pains whilst in his house just outside Cullybackey. His wife, Caroline, rang 999 and was told that no ambulances were available and that she needed to take him to the Antrim ED, which was approximately 25 minutes away. Willy was assigned as a category 2 call, as he was suspected of having a heart attack and was breathing. Whilst travelling to Antrim, Willy's condition deteriorated, and he had a cardiac arrest. Caroline had to find somewhere to pull over and to get help from a passing driver, as she could not get her husband out of the car on her own to start CPR. Caroline called 999 again at 7.35 pm, and an ambulance arrived at 7.40 pm, because that call was classed as category 1, as Willy was now not breathing. Sadly, Willy passed away, lying in a wet lay-by 10 minutes from the hospital. Ms Ennis asked what happens if a patient takes a heart attack on a trolley in a hospital, but what happens to a patient who is in a car and takes a heart attack on his way to hospital?

Last Wednesday night, I attended a meeting with the Darragh family to seek answers from the Ambulance Service. We were told that there is a target time for category 1 calls — eight minutes — but that the average response time on that day was 14 minutes and 43 seconds. A category 2 call has a target time of 18 minutes but that the average response time on that day was 60 minutes. Crucially for that family, we were also told that a category 2 call is not assigned to a crew that is in the final hour of its shift. Members, that is as a result of the action short of strike that Unite and NIPSA are taking over the waiting times outside EDs that is causing staff not to finish within a reasonable time at the end of their shift.

What were the 14 operational ambulances doing at 7.05 pm? Coleraine had two ambulances. One of them was sitting outside Antrim ED for five hours and 30 minutes, while the other was parked up in the station and due to be manned by only one person from 4.00 pm. It could respond to category 1 calls only. Ballymena had four ambulances. Two were sitting outside the ED for 50 minutes and four hours and 26 minutes respectively. One was at the scene of a call, while the fourth ambulance was sitting in the station. Antrim had two ambulances. Both were sitting outside the ED for six hours and 15 minutes and five hours and 15 minutes respectively. Magherafelt had two ambulances, both of which were sitting in the dispatch area. Larne had one ambulance, which was also parked in the dispatch area. Carrickfergus had two ambulances. One was at the scene of a call, while the other was parked up in the dispatch area. Whiteabbey had one ambulance, which was outside the ED for six hours and four minutes.

We have already been told that 120 hours were lost in that single day owing to turnaround times at EDs, but how many of us realised that, in the final hour of a shift, because of the current union action, no ambulances are assigned? How many hours are being lost each day as a result of strike action by the unions? When pressed specifically on whether the ambulance crew that was sitting in the Ballymena dispatch area at the time of the first call were members of a union, the Ambulance Service could not tell us, as it does not know and does not ask its staff. To make matters worse, any crews in an ambulance dispatch area during the final hour of their shift are not even made aware that a category 2 call has come in. The current service is therefore not fit for purpose, and people are dying as a result. The system has serious issues, and one of them is the unions' approach, which needs to change and change today.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Timothy. I call the Minister of Health to respond to the debate. Minister, you have up to 15 minutes.

Mr Nesbitt (The Minister of Health): Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I must say that I am heartened to note the near-universal acceptance of the fact that the issue is not just about the Ambulance Service but about a whole-system response to the pressures faced and about the flow through our hospitals. If I have time, I hope to return to some of the comments that the Member who moved the motion and the Members who moved the two amendments made.

When we were here in January to discuss ambulance waiting times, I commended the hard-working and dedicated staff of the Northern Ireland Ambulance Service, and I make no apology for my doing so again. The staff — those working on the front line and those working in support of them— are, like all staff across Health and Social Care, the lifeblood of the system. They have worked too hard for too long in a system that does not deliver the type of care that their commitment and resolve deserve. I suggest that, as political representatives, we owe it to them to do better and to relieve them of that moral distress. That is why I welcome the Northern Ireland Audit Office report on ambulance handovers. As we know, it was published on 11 March, and it underlines the seriousness and scale of the pressures facing HSC services. Alongside key officials, I will carefully consider the report's recommendations. I have already noted the recognition of the fact that the root cause of delayed ambulance handovers is wider severe HSC whole-system pressure and hospital discharge delays. Patients are waiting for far too long in ambulances outside our EDs, and that is a direct consequence of poor flow in our hospitals and social care constraints, as Members noted. I also recognise the risk of harm to patients who are delayed at handover on arrival at EDs and the impact of that delay on NIAS's capacity to respond to the next emergency call in the community.

Reducing ambulance handover delays has been and remains one of my key areas of focus, but it is important to reiterate that, while pressures manifest at the emergency department, flow through the system and getting people medically fit for discharge into the community remain significant issues. It has been widely referenced in recent weeks and months that hospital flow is hampered by delays in discharging individuals who are deemed to be medically fit. My Department is taking a number of steps to minimise the challenges in coordinating those delays. To support the adult social care reform programme, we have established a social care collaborative forum. That provides vision and strategic advice and guidance on the delivery of social care. The forum will take forward agreed action across a number of work streams to support improvement and transformation in adult social care.

That work will include a comprehensive review of the regional care home contract and specification, with a revised contract expected to be in place by June of this year. It also means taking forward my commitment to end minimum wage jobs in social care, ensuring that all staff are paid at least the real living wage. The work involves the extension of the early review team pilot model, which reviews needs and ultimately allows additional capacity to be recycled into the system. It also involves digital interventions, such as CareLineLive and the care home availability app, using technology to help ease pressures.

The work involves direct payments and emergency direct payments to enable packages of care to be provided through the employment of a personal assistant. That will improve flow and discharge transitions. The work also involves the extension of the trusted adviser model to a seven-day model across all hospital sites, promoting safe and timely discharges from hospitals.

Mrs Dillon: I thank the Minister for giving way. I am sure that, if the Minister was not able to watch the Health Committee meeting on Thursday, officials will have listened to what was said. Will the Minister commit to meeting those who are involved in palliative care provision in order to ensure that people who receive palliative care, as was mentioned earlier, do not unnecessarily end up in hospital when there are services that could look after them much better in their home?

Mr Nesbitt: I thank the Member for her comment. I have absolutely no difficulty in agreeing to that meeting.

Work to address the wider system pressures has to be prioritised. That does not mean that NIAS has been sitting idle, waiting for issues to be resolved elsewhere. Flow and discharge issues are key aggravating factors, but there is much that NIAS can do and, indeed, is already doing. My Department is actively engaged in developing a 10-year workforce plan with NIAS to further develop capacity, capability and the utilisation of the right skills mix. That will allow the Ambulance Service to better meet the needs of our communities by developing the enhanced paramedic role, innovative care pathways and strategic collaborations across the health system.

In 2023-24, NIAS established a new integrated clinical hub, which incorporates senior clinicians. NIAS subsequently changed clinical practices in the integrated clinical hub team to support the management of patients in the community where possible, thus reducing conveyances to EDs while ensuring that patient safety is maintained during extended response times. The integrated clinical hub's highly skilled senior clinicians can identify alternative pathways for patients through the increased use of Hear and Treat and See and Treat pathways, which can be managed through an urgent care liaison desk. That enhanced clinical team provides increasing numbers of patients with advice in order to reduce conveyances to our emergency departments. It also provides advice to support crews, enabling referrals to a range of other pathways, including Hospital at Home and the falls, epilepsy and diabetes pathways.

Learning from the Scottish Ambulance Service, which has integrated mental health professionals into its control room, the integrated clinical hub contains mental health professionals from the South Eastern Health and Social Care Trust who work at weekends to provide expertise that supports patients in accessing alternative pathways for mental health issues. The service currently operates Friday to Sunday from 6.00 pm to 2.00 am. Early data from NIAS shows a 40% reduction in conveyance to emergency departments among patients who are experiencing mental health crises. That has led to much-improved patient experiences. Western Health and Social Care Trust staff are finalising training to work with the NIAS control room, which will enhance their service even further. Funding for the scheme is being provided until the end of March 2026. This year, an external evaluation will be carried out by the Public Health Agency to inform plans for further expansion of the service.

I have previously rehearsed my concerns about the pressure on NIAS staff, who must deal with the welfare and distress of their patients and their carers on a daily basis. Those concerns remain with me. Nevertheless, NIAS is making great strides in supporting staff back to work, improving their long-term absence rates and increasing the available workforce. It is right that the improved absence rate was acknowledged in the Audit Office report, and I hope to see that trend continue.

I remain determined to find better ways for the system to work to tackle the complex issues that we face. That is why I initiated a series of winter planning workshops aimed at identifying new, innovative solutions to the system-flow issues that we face collectively. I attended the first of those events on 4 March and was encouraged by the engagement and enthusiasm from HSC leaders from across the system. The workshop was attended by a wide range of stakeholders from across HSC, including the royal colleges, clinicians and other front-line services. Our system leaders are all involved. There will be three more workshops over the coming months, with the final workshop in June. That will inform a sharper, more focused plan for next year. I expect to see better outcomes in advance of winter, including improvements to ambulance handover times.

Improving those times and response times in the community is a key focus, and, as part of work to explore new methods of working, my officials and the trusts have engaged with the London Ambulance Service to understand better its scheme for releasing ambulances no later than 45 minutes after arrival. We know that that scheme has resulted in significant improvements in handover times across the London area. My officials, alongside clinicians and management from trusts, visited the King George Hospital in London with the London Ambulance Service on 10 March to discuss the adoption of a robust protocol for the escalation of ambulance handovers that exceed the 15-minute target. Those discussions continue at pace with trusts on how the learning can be used to improve handover at our hospitals.

One of the key messages from the visit was that, for the protocol to work, there is a need for a whole-system approach and that emergency departments and the Ambulance Service, on their own, cannot bring about the changes without the support of the rest of the system. It will require leadership, ownership and cultural change, which are at the heart of the planning workshops that I have been facilitating with leaders across HSC. I am pleased that everybody seems to be up for the challenge.

More broadly, my vision remains to keep emergency departments for emergency cases. That is why I have continued to implement the recommendations set out in the urgent and emergency care review. Like elsewhere in the United Kingdom, the pressures across our system are immense, meaning that the long-term vision that I have articulated — improving services and the service that you experience by making it easier to access the most appropriate services at the right time — remains essential.

We published the urgent and emergency care review in 2022 with strategic priorities, including the roll-out of urgent care centres across all trusts, greater use of rapid-access clinics and ambulatory care, the introduction of local and, ultimately, regional Phone First services and improving intermediate care to treat patients in their home as an alternative to hospital admission. An additional recommendation from the review was the initiation of the Getting It Right First Time — GIRFT — review of emergency medicine. Following the completion of that report, commissioned by Robin Swann, my Department considered its recommendations and produced an improvement plan. My Department has also worked with trusts to address specific issues highlighted in that report. I know that there is interest among some in the House in having sight of the GIRFT report on emergency medicine and the associated implementation plan. That is why I will publish both on my Department's website tomorrow. I am pleased to be able to assure Members that the GIRFT implementation plan is on track for delivery.

Since the completion of that review, the GIRFT team has continued to work with my officials and the trusts on their improvement plans and played a key role in the development of the trusts' local winter plans for 2024-25. The GIRFT team has also been involved as external advisers on work to improve and standardise same-day emergency care (SDEC) services, which were commissioned and expanded through the No More Silos programme. I welcome the ongoing support and challenge provided by the team.

Although some progress has been made in delivering changes to services to meet the needs of patients and service users, I am afraid that there is no quick fix, and addressing the current situation will require sustained, long-term effort, additional recurrent funding and support across the political spectrum. The Audit Office report was clear on the need for urgent action — I hear that call — but I stress yet again that we will be limited in the impact that we can make without additional budgetary support, and that impact will be much less again when I am being asked to make additional baseline reductions. I have accepted the challenge to transform the system, as outlined in my recently consulted on 'Hospitals — Creating a Network for Better Outcomes' document, but the long-term, meaningful change that is required to see results must have cross-party support in the Executive, and that must be backed by adequate resources.

Mr Durkan moved the motion. He made just one comment that I take issue with. He talked about the workforce making "highly risky decisions": I do not recognise that phrase. On my visits to the EDs post Christmas, many of the workforce talked about having to make decisions that were the "least worst option", but I gently suggest that that is substantially different from making "highly risky decisions".

Mr Robinson moved amendment No 1. He clearly gets it: a whole-system solution is required. It is about the flow, and I absolutely agree with him that, while we have five separate geographic health trusts, we need standardised regional protocols and to have the five trusts operating as though they were one.

Mrs Dillon talked about looking elsewhere. When I was in Washington earlier this month, I visited a brand new $800-million facility, an enormous emergency department in which corridor care was a thing. Every day, corridors filled with patients to the extent that they had specific corridor care teams. In the other ED that I visited, they said that their ambulances queued up daily to hand over. Therefore, it is not just a problem in Northern Ireland.

The motion calls for money. Sinn Féin's amendment calls for investment. My final message is a simple one. This is planet earth calling the Northern Ireland Assembly. There is a £400 million gap in the projected budget for the Health Department. We cannot commission new services.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: I call Órlaithí Flynn to make a winding-up speech on amendment No 2. Órlaithí, you have five minutes.

Ms Flynn: Go raibh maith agat.

I thank my colleague Linda Dillon for opening the debate on the amendment. She set out clearly the scale of the challenges that we face and the type of response needed. The points raised reflect what many of us hear time and again in our constituencies about ambulance delays that put lives at risk in a system that is under unrelenting pressure and with staff — for me, this is the crucial point — who are already doing their best in really difficult circumstances.

I completely understand that the motion is extremely well intended. Given the financial position that the Health Minister and the Executive are in, it is always important to look and learn from other models of best practice. We can then look to introduce any new model within whatever financial options we have. Mark Durkan touched on the point. If we see a model that is working, that is proven to work and that we want to introduce, it comes back to this issue: how can we fully introduce it to do what it is designed to do, if the staff are the same as those whom we have always had? The staff are already working in really difficult circumstances, and, if we are potentially going to bring in this new model, we will have the same number of staff and the same number of blockages. Obviously, you mentioned —.

Mr McGrath: Will the Member give way?

Ms Flynn: Yes.

Mr McGrath: I am sure that Sinn Féin Members will not spend a long time reading an SDLP document, but it includes additional staff. That is the purpose of it. The premise is that the model cannot be introduced unless there are extra staff to deal with it, or you could use the cohorting method, which is a well-recognised method in the rest of the UK. This is not mentioned without consideration of staff. It is not the same number of staff. You could not do that.

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

Ms Flynn: Thanks very much for clarifying that. That is important.

On the basis that we get the additional staff and then have the new model, it goes back to the point that Linda made. When we had that session at the Health Committee last year with the five chief executives of the trusts, they were banging on about the point, "Social care, social care, social care". It is then a two-pronged approach. If we can deal with the blockage of social care in the hospitals and if we can get additional staff in the EDs, in theory, this model would work really well, but it is about how you get to that point.

The other wee issue that I want to raise is the staff themselves. It is interesting that Linda mentioned — obviously, it is just one example — the consultant whom she spoke with in the emergency department in Craigavon, where there seemed to be a bit of fear. That consultant said, "Listen, whatever you do, please do not put more pressure on EDs. Please do not put more patients into EDs". It is about how you get around all that. I was really glad to hear the Minister outline some of the work that he has been carrying out around the winter pressures and the workshops that are taking place. We will all look forward to the conclusion of the June workshop, if that is the final workshop, to hear what practical solutions he will be able, hopefully, to deliver coming out of that.

Mr Donnelly: Will the Member give way?

Ms Flynn: Yes.

Mr Donnelly: Thank you. Your colleague mentioned that, on one of her visits to an A&E department, 60-odd patients were waiting for a decision to admit and 60-odd were medically fit. Sixty patients in an A&E department who should be on a ward is three wards' worth of patients in A&E. The A&E staff have to deliver that care within the confined space of A&E. Does the Member agree that there is simply no space to have three wards' worth of patients in a functioning A&E department?

Ms Flynn: I totally agree. Think about that in practical terms. I do not need to preach to you, because you have worked in the health sector. Even in that circumstance where there are wards' worth of people in the emergency department, on top of that, you get all the walk-ins and all the additional ambulances, so you get a continuous stream of emergencies coming in on top of what the staff are trying to deal with.

I will bring my remarks to a close. Hopefully, something positive can come out of the June workshop, and we look forward to that. Hospital at Home in Daisy Hill in the Southern Trust, Phone First, the integrated clinical hub and the 40% reduction that Danny mentioned are all really brilliant things that are happening. It really is good work that is happening, but we need to find ways to do more of that. Again, I totally get that the motion is clearly well intentioned in respect of how we make this better. We all want to make it better, so, hopefully, in the next couple of months, after today's motion and after the workshops, we can find a way to bring forward workable, practical solutions that will make a change.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: I call Diane Dodds to make a winding-up speech on amendment No 1. I advise you, Diane, that you have five minutes.

Mrs Dodds: Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.

First of all, I will say, "Thank you", because the tone of the debate has been helpful, and there is consensus across the House on some of the themes. We are happy to support the motion, but we thought that we should maybe recognise that, although this is a potential solution, there are other issues that need to be addressed. They are ours to address, and we need to get on with doing that.

I thank my colleague Alan Robinson for proposing the amendment and highlighting the difficulties in the health system. At the end of the debate, I put it on record once again that the Audit Office report said that delayed ambulance handovers cost us £50 million over five years, including £13·2 million in the most recent year. They caused a 25% reduction in operational capacity and placed close to 4,000 patients at risk of serious harm. They also contributed £37·8 million to an overtime bill for Northern Ireland Ambulance Service staff. At a time when the health service is under pressure in all directions, those are issues that we cannot ignore. During December and the first half of January, we had ambulance handover delays of 16 hours and nine minutes at the Mater Hospital; 19 hours at Causeway Hospital; 23 hours and 36 minutes at the Ulster Hospital; and 25 hours and 15 minutes at Antrim Area Hospital. Those figures in the system really are unacceptable.

Debates such as this are important, but it is also important that we have a plan of action to understand exactly what we can do to make things better. Sadly, harm comes to patients. Mr Gaston demonstrated that very well when he talked about the shocking and untimely death of his constituent. I do not think that any one of us can feel anything but shame about the system over which we preside. I know that you, Minister, feel the same. I hope that we will be able to make improvements, so that our community across Northern Ireland is not left at risk of those things happening again.

We have discussed across the House many of the issues that are really important when it comes to trying to fix the system, but the one that we keep coming back to is that of the flow of patients through our hospitals. We are in the almost absurd — I use that word advisedly — position in Northern Ireland in which we have sick patients who cannot get into hospital because we have well patients who cannot leave hospital. I do not think that anybody can stand over that kind of situation. No matter what we do, it will come down to fixing the flow of patients through hospitals, including getting them into hospital, onto the ward for treatment and discharged in a timely manner. Any winter health plan to improve the situation will have to demonstrate that that is at its core. That is what will fix ambulance handovers and the harm that is being done to patients and patient safety.

I also refer in passing to our session last week — this was brought up by Nuala McAllister — on the issue of palliative care. There are people whom ambulance crews clearly have to take to hospital because there is nowhere else for them to go. At Christmas, at the Southern Area Hospice Services ceremony of remembrance, a lady spoke to me about her sister-in-law, who died in an ED in Craigavon with, as she described it, not even a pillow —

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Time is up.

Mrs Dodds: — for her head.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Time is up.

Mrs Dodds: Minister, I know that you are not —

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Time is up.

Mrs Dodds: — in favour of any of this, but I urge you to take urgent action.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you. Much appreciated.

I call Colin McGrath to conclude and wind up the debate. You have 10 minutes, Colin.

Mr McGrath: Thank you very much, Principal Deputy Speaker. I am glad that we have had the opportunity to have this debate and that we have heard from all sides of the House on the issue. Perhaps the Health Minister expected me to raise it during Question Time last week, but we went down a different route, because it was better to give the issue a proper airing through a motion that would give us a full hour and a half to debate it. It is really important because, as Diane Dodds eloquently put it, sick people are looking to get into hospital, but they cannot do so. We can all agree on that.

I and, I am sure, many Members were contacted by a number of organisations about today's debate. They highlighted the problem that people are getting sicker because they cannot get access to emergency care. Ultimately, people are dying because ambulances are not arriving for them in a timely manner and they cannot get access to treatment. I give a big shout-out to our paramedics. They, along with the whole network of staff throughout the Ambulance Service, work to the best of their ability and beyond it, but they are absolutely constrained. Those highly trained, highly skilled individuals in our community log on for work, get into the back of an ambulance, sit with one patient for eight hours and then come out and log off again. That does not utilise the skills that we have trained them to have or give them the opportunity to perform their life-saving techniques.

I recently visited the Northern Ireland Ambulance Service and got a good snapshot. There were screens showing us exactly what the situation was at any moment. When I was there, there were 21 ambulances sitting outside emergency departments and 22 people waiting for an ambulance. I am not thinking about working through all the solutions; it is not rocket science. Those who were waiting could not get an ambulance because the ambulances were sitting outside the hospitals. By asking a question for written answer, I found out that, in the past five years, 97,000 people's conditions deteriorated whilst they were waiting for an ambulance. In other words, their category was upgraded because their condition got more serious as they waited for an ambulance. One has only to think about the cost to our health service. We are bringing sicker people to hospitals because it is taking us so long to go and get them. Think of the money that could be saved. The Northern Ireland Audit Office did a wonderful job of putting lots of flesh on that bone and telling us exactly what the cost to the system is.

There were two amendments to our motion. From an Opposition perspective, they do, somewhat, speak to the situation that we see in our Executive. The Executive are our Government. Our Government are charged with coming up with solutions to the problems that we face and with the proper and effective delivery of public services. In this matter, however — a matter of life and death — it is about health outcomes and responding to urgent calls. We have one Executive party producing one view in an amendment and another party producing a different view in another amendment. Both amendments obfuscate the matter. In some respects, they offer a bit of grandma and apple pie to the situation and will not result in anything being changed.

I am a bit bewildered that the amendments were accepted, because our motion clearly asks for one thing and one thing only: it is about the Ambulance Service and the W45 policy. We said, "Let us deal with ambulance handovers. Let us smooth that process and get them back out on the road and into the communities".

Mrs Dillon: I thank the Member for giving way. Your point, which is that you are asking for one thing and one thing only, takes away from what Mr Durkan said, which was that we are not asking for one thing and one thing only but are accepting that a whole-system approach is needed. You know this, Colin, because you are on the Health Committee with me: we cannot fix what is happening in our emergency departments if we do not fix the flow through our hospitals.

Mr McGrath: That speaks to some of the problem. It is possible to fix some of the problem and let that contribute to solving the overall problems that there are. If the other way to look at this is to say that you cannot fix any of it until you have a solution for the entire system, we will wait years and years before there will be any solution. Why will we wait years and years? We have been waiting for years and years. How many of us here were a lot younger — much younger than we are today — when we first heard that there were problems with people getting out of hospital, with domiciliary care and with patient flow? The issue is nothing new. It is not something that has arisen in the past year or two. It has been happening for more than a decade.

Where are the solutions? We are still waiting for them. What happens as a result of our still waiting, and why are we debating the Ambulance Service today? People are dying. It is not just me who is saying that. The Audit Office is saying it as well. People are dying because they cannot get an ambulance. Ninety-five-year-old grandmothers are lying in the street for six or seven hours waiting for an ambulance, yet our Executive say, "Let's fix the whole problem. It's about patient flow here, and we've to fill domiciliary care there, and we've to train staff there". I cannot remember the exact figure, but I think that it would take over £40 million to resolve the issues with domiciliary care. We are being told that we cannot get £2 million or £3 million for our suggested model, yet we are being told that the whole system should be fixed. One part alone of that solution will cost over £40 million.

That is why we have been driven to the point of talking about what has happened in London. Its Ambulance Service recognised that a problem existed, and it said that it could not wait any longer to resolve it. It has now managed to reduce its category 2 response times. It has cut them in half, from 50 minutes down to 25 minutes. Members may not know what category 2 cases are. Category 2 cases comprise acute strokes, heart attacks, significant breathing problems and serious trauma. The London Ambulance Service introduced the W45 policy and cut its category 2 response times in half. Our category 2 response times are worse than what London's were, and it managed to cut them in half by introducing its model. Is it a perfect model for the whole system? No. Do I want to see the whole system fixed? Yes. Is the whole system going to get fixed in the next three or four months? No. I was told in London that it took three weeks to introduce the system.

Mr Nesbitt: I thank the Member for giving way. A quotation on the wall in my ministerial office reads:

Let me assure the Member that I am not waiting until everything is ready.

Mr McGrath: I welcome the Minister's saying that, because I know that he is not waiting. I know that he constantly says that he does not have the money to deliver the projects that he needs to deliver to be able to fix the whole system. That is why I say that if he is not going to get the money to fix the whole system, there is no point in parties tabling amendments that state, "Fix all of the system".

It is important to put into context why we are suggesting the W45 model. It is not that we are saying that we should ignore everything else. I am a realist. I know that the Health Minister is not going to get £200 million, £300 million, £400 million or £500 million simply to address the issues that need to be addressed in order to sort out all the problems that exist. Based on what we saw in London, we estimate that a couple of million pounds would address the problem. I know that everything that we suggest requires money and that the Minister asks, "Where will it come from?". If we can be told that a couple of million pounds cannot be found to enable us to lift a 95-year-old grandmother off the ground and that we cannot help people in our community who suffer a heart attack or who collapse from a stroke but that people can be told, "About an hour is time enough to get to you", we have even bigger problems than patient flow and other issues.

We will support the amendments, because how could we not vote to support fixing all the problems? We have, however, brought a little bit of focus to one specific issue. I do not know how amendment No 2 was accepted, when it completely rewrites the meaning of the motion. We all understand and are passionate about the issue, and we are generally moving in the same direction. We want to see our Ambulance Service be able to be responsive in our communities and to be there when people lift the phone and dial 999. We want people to know that help is coming, and I hope that that can be the case.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Colin. Question Time begins at 2.00 pm, so I suggest that the Assembly take its ease until then. Following Question Time, the Question will be put on amendment Nos 1 and 2 and then on the substantive motion.

Ms Kimmins (The Minister for Infrastructure): During 2024-25, NI Water invested £1·8 million at Grange waste water treatment works in North Antrim. The Grange waste water treatment works is located to the south of Taylorstown village, and construction is due to be completed in May 2025. The Grange waste water treatment works upgrade builds on the £1·1 million sewer network improvements that NI Water completed earlier in price control (PC) 21. However, the fact remains that there are several waste water treatment works in North Antrim that have no available capacity for development. Those are the waste water treatment works at Armoy Bush, Dervock, Mosside Ballymoney and Stranocum.

Capacity issues have also been identified in parts of the waste water network in Ballycastle, Ballymena, Ballymoney, Bushmills, Portglenone and Rasharkin. Unfortunately, that may lead to negative planning responses for developments in those areas. However, each application will be assessed individually depending on the location and level of capacity constraints in the area. Where possible, NI Water will work with developers to identify solutions. I will continue to work with Executive colleagues to secure funding for the capital investment programme through 2024-27.

Ms Mulholland: Thank you, Minister. For areas such as Armoy, where planning applications are in place and there is space for development, it is just a really difficult situation. Rural communities are suffering as a result of the lack of waste water infrastructure. What engagement are you having with NI Water, specifically on rural communities, about trying to increase capacity before communities are decimated because people cannot continue to live there?

Ms Kimmins: I appreciate the issues that the Member has raised about rural communities. It is important. I engage with NI Water frequently on all the issues. The approach that I outlined and that I am taking on the whole is to look specifically at unlocking capacity where we can at the earliest possible stage. Bearing that in mind, specific work on rural communities needs to happen, and I am committed to working on that with all parties to address the issue.

Mr Speaker: I remind Members, before I call them, that supplementary questions are to be relevant to the initial question.

Mr McAleer: Minister, will you elaborate on what your Department is doing to address waste water capacity issues?

Ms Kimmins: As I outlined, I continue to build on the three-pronged approach that is already in place. That includes working with Executive colleagues to increase investment in waste water; exploring the options for developer contributions with the consultation that launched last Friday; and introducing a water, flooding and sustainable drainage Bill to the Assembly. My Department has provided NI Water with £500 million this year to enable it to deliver essential water and sewerage systems. NI Water has advised that 18,500 properties can be connected, if developers design, fund and construct alternative solutions such as storm water offsetting, and a further 19,000 properties require NI Water capital upgrades. If NI Water's price control 21 investment plan were fully funded, connections would have been limited to 4,500 of those 19,000.

Mr Dunne: The Minister will be aware of the impact on the greater waste water capacity issues that pausing certain aspects of the Living with Water programme has had and will have, including in my constituency at the Kinnegar waste water treatment works. Will the Minister outline any update on prioritising action on the general issue of waste water capacity?

Ms Kimmins: As the Member will know, we have had discussions in the Chamber on that matter since I came into post. Again, my officials and I have been engaging with NI Water as frequently as we can to try to move it forward. There have been challenges, and it will continue to move at a much slower pace than we would like. However, by going back to the overall approach of trying to increase the investment to enable those upgrades and the work to happen, my priority and focus are on bringing in the funding that is needed to deliver on all those issues.

Mr McGrath: Will the Minister update us on how many times her Department has used enforcement powers against NI Water over the past year to ensure that it complies with its legal obligations, including those relating to water quality?

Ms Kimmins: Water quality is an issue for the NIEA. I do not have the exact figures on enforcement in front of me, but I am happy to come back to the Member on that in writing to make sure that we have the most accurate figures.

Ms Kimmins: I am committed to the visibility and promotion of the Irish language across public services and in our society.

Grand Central station is not just for the people of Belfast; it is a transport hub for people from across the island. It is important, therefore, that it is reflective of all citizens. I have therefore taken the decision to install bilingual signage at Belfast Grand Central station and on all Translink ticket vending machines. As we have just come out of Seachtain na Gaeilge, that is an important and positive development to demonstrate my support for the Irish language as a living language used daily by citizens across the North and the actions being taken by my Department.

Mr Gaston: The Minister comes from a party that once described every word spoken in Irish as another bullet in the freedom struggle. Why is she abusing her position to fire cultural bullets in a loyalist heartland in Belfast?

Ms Kimmins: OK. The Irish language is for everyone and reflects the culture across this island. The transport hub is not just for the people of Belfast; it is for all people across our island. There is nothing to fear. The important point is that the Irish language is protected in law, and Belfast is one of the most thriving areas in the North, if not in Ireland, for the Irish language. I am committed to delivering equality for everyone across that area.

Mr Sheehan: What signage will be provided at Grand Central station, and when will that happen?

Ms Kimmins: I thank the Member for his question. The bilingual signage will include wayfinding signage for passenger movements; passenger information, including all safety, welcome and customer service signage; and platform IDs. The signage will be installed later this year.

Ms Kimmins: There are no plans to replace the section10B permit for community transport operators with section 19 and section 22 permits, which are used in Britain. However, my officials are reviewing the operation of the section 10B permit scheme as part of the overall review of community transport.

Ms K Armstrong: Thank you, Minister. Introducing section 19 and 22 permits would allow community transport to address the lack of transport in rural areas and increase the amount of accessible transport in rural areas. What is the barrier to bringing forward legislation that is used in the rest of the UK?

Ms Kimmins: I am not aware of specific barriers, but we are developing broader transport plans that will feed into that issue. I am happy to look at that in more detail for the Member to understand where the challenges are. It is my understanding that the 10B permit is being reviewed, but I can look at section 19 permits in more detail.

Miss Brogan: Will the Minister outline the next steps in the review of community transport?

Ms Kimmins: At the conclusion of the review, officials will provide me with a final report of their findings and recommendations. At that stage, we will know better the next steps and share them with Members.

Ms McLaughlin: Minister, what engagement have you had with the First Minister and deputy First Minister in the past year on the delivery of an infrastructure commission?

Ms Kimmins: I have had no specific engagement with the Executive Office on that, but I hope to have such engagement in the coming weeks and months.

Ms Kimmins: I do not have question 4 here. Sorry, just bear with me for two seconds.

During this financial year, NI Water has been — sorry, I have not been provided with question 4. Apologies: it has been missed off my list.

Can I come back to the Member? I am really sorry about that.

Mr Speaker: That has never happened before, Minister.

Ms Kimmins: No, I know that. I have question 3, and then my notes go to question 5. It is a technical difficulty.

Mr Speaker: Paper is very good, so it is. I would recommend it.

Ms Kimmins: I definitely have that one.

The timetabling of services is primarily an operational matter for Translink. The public service agreement allows Translink to amend services, but it must do so in a cost-effective manner consistent with the required level of quality and performance and minimise costs. My Department has been operating in a difficult financial environment for a number of years due to underfunding and austerity by the British Government. That includes the funding available for the public transport network.

The Belvoir estate is serviced by the 6C and 6D services, which collectively offer two buses per hour throughout the day and three during peak times. Translink monitors on an ongoing basis the passenger loadings, which indicate that the level of patronage would not support an increase in capacity at this time. Therefore, there are no immediate plans to develop frequency on the 6C and 6D routes. Translink will continue to monitor those and other Metro services for opportunities and network growth.

Ms Bradshaw: Thank you, Minister, for your answer. In taking forward plans for the north-south Glider route, is consideration being given to incorporating the Belvoir estate as an offshoot of that?

Ms Kimmins: Given that we have scope left within the extension of the Glider route, I am happy to speak to officials about that to see whether it is possible. I am not aware of it at this time, but I am happy to take that forward, and, potentially, in the next phase, we can look at that.

Ms Kimmins: Major road schemes are an important part of the work that is delivered by my Department as we seek to reduce journey times, increase reliability and improve road safety. My Department is in the process of developing a new transport strategy that will help to shape the vision and strategic priorities for transport through to 2035. Once that is published, it will help to inform the transport plan for the regional strategic transport network, which includes the A2 at Ballykelly.

A preferred route for the Ballykelly bypass was announced in 2010. However, in advance of any decision to prioritise that scheme, officials would need to undertake a reassessment of the route due to the passage of time. The estimate for the bypass compiled in 2008 was in the region of £35 million to £40 million. Again, that would need to be brought up to date and would be subject to the high levels of inflation and cost increases experienced by the construction sector in recent years.

As you will know, my Department has been operating in a difficult financial environment for a number of years due to a lack of funding. Any decision to proceed with the A2 Ballykelly bypass can be made only when I am confident that there is the budget certainty that will help to deliver that scheme.

Ms Hunter: At the weekend, it took over 30 minutes to go between Greysteel and Ballykelly. Understandably, residents in the area want to see as much progress as possible on that road. Minister, can you give me more clarity on what the timeline would be to conduct a reassessment of the road?

Ms Kimmins: I do not have a timeline at this point, but I am happy to come back to the Member on that. I can speak to officials to get a sense of what that would look like and inform the Member going forward.

Mrs Erskine: Road infrastructure projects are very important. They are important to an awful lot of people outside the Chamber. On 27 January, I asked the then Minister when the review of the prioritisation of major roads programme would be published. I was told that it would be within weeks: we are now two months down the line. When will it come out? What is the cause of the delay?

Ms Kimmins: I can speak to officials on that one, because, as you said, the response came from the previous Minister, so I do not have that to hand either. I am happy to come back on that to the Chair of the Committee at the earliest possible stage. Hopefully, it will be sooner rather than later.

Ms Ferguson: Can the Minister provide an update on phase 2 of the A6 upgrade?

Ms Kimmins: Part of the works on phase 2 of the A6 upgrade between Caw and Drumahoe will encroach on the illegal waste site at Mobuoy. My Department is working with the NIEA and other stakeholders to ensure that any remediation proposals take account of each party's requirements, including those associated with the A6 phase 2 project. My officials await the publication of DAERA's draft optimum remediation strategy. Once that information is available, we will be in a position to consider its implications and develop a delivery strategy and timeline for the phase 2 project.

Mr Robinson: Does the Minister agree that having 18,000 vehicles a day —?

Mr Speaker: Mr Robinson, you are asking question 7.

Mr Robinson: Apologies, Mr Speaker.

Ms Kimmins: There are many ways in which the routes to schools can be improved and made safer. Since 2020-21, the Department has delivered two tranches of part-time 20 mph speed limits at 216 schools, through an investment of £4 million, bringing the total number of schools with part-time 20 mph speed limits to 233. A review of that recent initiative was undertaken and is available on my Department's internet site. The report concludes that a targeted approach is needed to ensure that the correct safety intervention is selected, and work to update the policy is under way.

In addition to that, my Department is updating its design guidance for active travel and has recently carried out a public consultation on a draft active travel delivery plan. Routes to key destinations, including schools, have been prioritised in the plan. The updated design guidance will include a toolkit of measures around schools to encourage more people to consider walking, wheeling or cycling for the school journey.

Mr Robinson: I thank the Minister for her answer. Will she ask her officials to consider two schools in my constituency, namely Ballykelly Primary School and Macosquin Primary School, that have concerns about child safety?

Ms Kimmins: I am happy to ask officials to assess any specific requests to see how we can move those forward. I hope to be able to make an announcement about the next stage of the 20 mph scheme, which is very important. In Wales, 20 mph zones have been rolled out not just outside schools but in residential areas, town centres and other areas, with a 63% reduction in road traffic collisions, and I have been watching that closely. We should look at that important piece of work here. I am keen to take that forward.

Mrs Mason: Minister, what measures are being considered as part of the active travel toolkit?

Ms Kimmins: The toolkit is being developed by drawing on national and international best practice. It includes a range of measures such as the provision of greater priority for pedestrians at crossings in the vicinity of schools and the discouragement of inconsiderate parking that can cause difficulties for those walking or wheeling. Reduced speeds around schools are also important, and 20 mph speed limits are an additional measure that can be introduced as part of a particular scheme, depending on whether the main issue is speeding motorists, congestion at school times or inconsiderate parking.

Ms Kimmins: With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will answer questions 8 and 9 together. St Mary's Primary School in Killesher is certainly the type of school that would benefit from a further roll-out of the part-time zones at schools programme, which has been very well received.

Since 2020-21, my Department has delivered two tranches of the 20 mph speed limit at 216 schools. The total is now 233 schools. As I said, a review of the recent initiative was very positive and can be viewed on my Department's website. The review recommends the provision of a third tranche of part-time 20 mph speed limits at schools. However, that will be more modest in size and is dependent on the availability of funding. The report also concludes that a more targeted approach is needed to ensure that the correct safety intervention is selected, and work to update our policy document is under way. I have asked officials to prepare the programme of schools to be targeted in the next financial year, based on the existing scored listing, but with preference given to rural schools that are located on roads where the national speed limit applies, and consideration of the safety of introducing such measures. St Mary's Primary School in Killesher will, subject to the school's meeting the threshold for inclusion, be considered as part of that work.

Ms Murphy: I thank the Minister for prioritising rural schools in all our constituencies. What are her plans to address speeding in general?

Ms Kimmins: I would like to see what can be done to improve attitudes to speeding, not only for road safety purposes but to make places cleaner and greener. I have therefore asked officials to prepare a paper on the use of permanent 20 mph speed limits, particularly, as I said, near schools, in predominantly residential areas and in places such as town centres where a high number of people walk, wheel or cycle. I have also asked that consideration be given to the national speed limits that apply on rural roads and HGV speed limits. To ensure that others' views are considered in the setting of speed limits here, I plan to hold a public consultation exercise on the issue later this year.

Ms Egan: Will the Minister's Department prioritise 20 mph speed limits outside those schools where children have previously been involved in road traffic collisions, such as Grange Park Primary School in my constituency?

Ms Kimmins: I thank the Member for the question. Given the severity of those issues, all of that will have to be considered and prioritised in the round. We will publish more information as it becomes available and we look at what the permanent scheme might look like. I am happy to take the point on board, if officials have not already done so.

Mr K Buchanan: Following the recent accident near Castledawson, when Caitlin-Rose McMullan tragically lost her life, what are the Minister's thoughts on changing the law to stop vehicles overtaking stopped or parked buses that are letting children on or off?

Ms Kimmins: I thank the Member for raising that. It is important to send my thoughts to Caitlin-Rose's family, her friends and the entire school community in that area. It was a very tragic incident. I have two small children, and it impacted on me and on all of us. It is an important issue, and I have looked at what has been done elsewhere in relation to overtaking buses when children are entering and exiting them and how we can improve safety in those areas. I have spoken to my officials and asked them to look at the options, because it is a critical issue and particularly pertinent, given what happened recently.

Ms D Armstrong: I thank the Minister for considering rural roads in the forthcoming scheme, if it is implemented. Minister, there have been a number of reported near misses at Fivemiletown Primary School and Nursery. Will the Minister advise how much weight is given to schools that are located on A roads?

Ms Kimmins: As I said, the Department is working on the application and the criteria. The existing scoring will be kept for the latest tranche, but, where specific issues have arisen, that needs to be strongly considered. I am happy for officials to meet the Member, if they have not already done so, to look at that specific case.

Ms Kimmins: My officials engaged with Translink prior to and after the introduction of the hourly Enterprise service to assess any potential traffic impacts in Lurgan. A traffic study was undertaken to assess the potential impacts of the new train timetable prior to its introduction in October 2024. The results of the study showed a minimal potential impact on traffic queues. In January 2025, after the Belfast transport hub opened, my officials completed a subsequent traffic study to determine the actual impact of the new timetable. The study highlighted no significant increase in queue lengths, and so my Department has no current plans to install mitigation measures.

Mrs Dodds: Minister, my constituents in Lurgan will be gravely disappointed by your answer: no plans to do anything. I highlighted the issue to your officials during the consultation period, and numerous constituents have complained about the traffic disruption. Do you at least have plans to look at car parking facilities in the vicinity of Lurgan train station, so that we can at least enhance the number of people who can park their car and travel to Belfast or onwards?

Ms Kimmins: I thank the Member for her question. It will be disappointing, but we have to work with the data available to us, and it is about trying to find the balance. Translink is in the process of procuring a new signal system that will automate the raising and lowering of barriers. The system is anticipated to take about five years to introduce, but could significantly decrease the current barrier downtime, reduce queues and improve traffic flow at level crossings in Lurgan. The Department considered variable message signs for Lurgan town centre to advise drivers to avoid William Street, but that would likely encourage traffic to divert to alternative routes and cause additional congestion, particularly at the other level crossings and on Francis Street.

Translink is also considering park-and-ride rationalisation as part of the planned redevelopment of Lurgan station. That will hopefully remove conflicting access points from the vicinity of the level crossing on William Street and, therefore, decrease the time that it takes the queue to clear after the barriers are raised. Translink will continue to monitor the barrier downtime to minimise possible delays. I am happy to keep in contact with the Member on the matter.

Ms Kimmins: We are flying through these today. The upgrade and signalisation of Caw roundabout is included in the planning conditions for the adjacent H30 housing development, and it is the responsibility of the developer to deliver those works. My Department agreed an expedited programme with the developer that will see the upgrade being delivered prior to the occupation of the 263rd dwelling and prior to 30 November 2026. That is subject to ratification by Derry City and Strabane District Council's planning department. My officials are working with the developer to agree the detailed design. The upgrade and signalisation will reduce traffic congestion and improve road safety at Caw roundabout.

Mr Middleton: I thank the Minister for her response. She will be aware that people living in my constituency are deeply frustrated by the inaction on addressing the issues at Caw roundabout. Will the Minister commit to giving a timeline in which those issues will finally be addressed and a commitment that the roundabout will receive the proper measures that it deserves?

Ms Kimmins: I have outlined the timeline for moving the programme forward, subject to its ratification by the council. I appreciate that it has taken some time. When I came into post, one of the first meetings that I had with officials was on the roundabout. We have agreed to an expedited programme, and I hope to see it delivered earlier than would otherwise have been the case.

Ms Kimmins: As someone who was a strong supporter of the design of a lifting bridge at a time when very few in the Chamber supported or spoke out about it, my position has been very clear from as far back as 2020.

Since then, however, a decision was taken when the Assembly was down. My predecessor reviewed that decision to try to find a way forward. When I took office, on 3 February of this year, the proposals and detailed assessments for the southern relief road were out for a period of statutory public consultation that commenced on 21 January 2025 and concluded earlier this month, on 4 March. That consultation was based on the installation of a fixed bridge across the canal. However, officials are reviewing the responses and compiling a report for my consideration. I am not in a position to comment on any of the responses, as the process is ongoing. Once that process has concluded, I will decide whether to move to a public inquiry.

Mr McNulty: I think the Minister for her answer. Minister, Newry has an incredibly rich and proud maritime heritage. Have you not learned anything from the short-sighted destruction of the past, with our railways having been ripped up, our canals left to go to rack and ruin and our town centres bulldozed? Do you intend to close off our heritage for the future by putting in a fixed bridge: yes or no?

Ms Kimmins: Having been born and bred in Newry, I am acutely aware of and a keen supporter of its heritage. Had the Member listened to my answer, he would have heard that I have not decided yes or no, because the consultation period has just ended. As Minister, I have a responsibility to abide by the process. If I had done it the other way round and taken a decision outside of that process, I am sure that the Member would have stood up to criticise me. The process will run its course, and, when the report is provided to me, I will make a decision on the next steps. The decision to proceed with a fixed bridge was taken when the Assembly was down, and the Member is aware of that.

Miss Hargey: Will you confirm again, Minister, whether you would consider undertaking a public inquiry into the scheme?

Ms Kimmins: Aside from everything else that I might represent, as a citizen, I am keen to make sure that all information is made available and all views are considered as part of the decision-making process for a project as critical as the fixed-bridge design for the southern relief road. That is why I want to make sure that the process is thorough. As I said, the consultation is closed, the responses are being compiled, and my officials will prepare a report that will enable me to make a decision on whether to go out to public inquiry.

Ms Kimmins: Major road schemes are an important part of the work that is delivered by my Department as we seek to reduce journey times, increase reliability and improve road safety. The A2 Buncrana Road scheme will be considered as part of the north-west transport plan 2035, which has been subject to a public consultation process. Views were sought from the public to help to shape the vision and objectives for the transport plan, and local transport concerns in the district were identified through a process of public engagement that commenced on 27 August 2024 and concluded on 5 November 2024.
As the Member will be aware, my Department has been operating in a difficult financial environment, and any decision to proceed with the A2 Buncrana Road project can only be made when I am confident that there is budgetary certainty for the scheme and that its delivery is in line with the north-west transport plan.

Mr Durkan: I thank the Minister for her answer. This issue predates not just the Minister but these institutions.

She referred to the Buncrana Road's place in the north-west transport plan, but, given that it appears in the investment strategy for future years, is she able to confirm that her Department has or will bid for the money to carry out that overdue work?

Ms Kimmins: We have not made any decisions on the budget for the incoming year or on prioritising projects. We are very aware of the scheme, and, as I said, it has to tie in with the transport plan. I hope to have further updates to give very soon.

Mr Buckley: Large-scale infrastructure projects appear to go to your Department to drown in delay and multiply in cost, so, as a newly appointed Minister, what confidence do you have that your Department can bring projects from concept to reality and provide good, affordable bureaucracy and costings for the taxpayer?

Ms Kimmins: That is an issue that affects all Departments. For a lot of major projects, we have to ensure that all our i's are dotted and all our t's crossed. I appreciate that there have been delays. Some of the delays that occurred in the past were to do with planning and waste water. Those are the priorities on which I, as the Minister, am working to try to ensure that there is more timely processing of projects in order to avoid additional costs.

If we are talking about major projects, let us look at the A5. Some of the issues that have delayed its delivery have come in the form of legal challenges, which are beyond my control. There are therefore many factors that can cause delays, but I can say that we are working very hard to alleviate the things that are in my gift to do and to streamline processes to make them smoother for everyone.

Mr Speaker: We now move on to topical questions.

Ms Kimmins: That is the subject of ongoing debate. My Department has a specific remit to remove things that obstruct or otherwise have an impact on motorists' vision on our roads. As the Member knows, however, and the Member for South Belfast outlined, because of their contentious nature and the difficulties that they can cause, there is engagement taking place on the removal of flags and on whose responsibility it is to do so.

Mr Durkan: I thank the Minister for her answer. I am aware of action that the PSNI has taken, with the Department and sometimes in the absence of its support, on removing items that are considered to be inflammatory. Where items that do not meet the threshold are concerned, however, what sort of message does she think is being sent out when our roundabouts and roadsides are festooned with her party's completely unauthorised political posters?

Ms Kimmins: If you can point me to examples, I will be happy to ask officials to consider them. I am sure that many political parties have signs and banners up everywhere. We look at each case on an individual basis.

Ms Kimmins: As I said earlier, quite a lot of work is being done to see such projects move at a much faster pace. On Friday, we launched the consultation on developer contributions, which is about trying to get more investment into the system so that we can move ahead with the much-needed upgrades. No one in the Chamber would disagree with the need to move forward with the projects, but, at this time, the funding is not there to enable me to do that. I will continue to work with NI Water, the NIEA and all other stakeholders to ensure that we can continue to move at pace on delivering those really critical schemes.

Mr Butler: Multiple reports have highlighted pressures on planning and, indeed, on our climate. I will, however, raise another issue, which is that of the growing number of cold-water dippers, who bathe in cold water in our rivers, lakes, reservoirs and coastal waters. What steps can the Department take in the short and long term to protect those people?

Ms Kimmins: The NIEA is responsible for monitoring water quality. We continue to work closely with it and other partners to ensure that our water is safe. NI Water's role is to treat our water and ensure that it is safe for drinking and to manage the treatment of sewage. In that respect, the NIEA could probably provide the Member with more information about cold-water dipping, but my Department does work with all its partners on such issues.

Ms Kimmins: At this stage, we do not have the budget allocations, as the draft Budget is still out for consultation, but we are working through those things. I have not made any decisions on specific allocations.

Mr Crawford: Minister, will you commit to including Harryville Primary School in Ballymena in the next tranche of part-time 20 mph zones that are established outside schools?

Ms Kimmins: I am happy to take that request forward. As part of the process that I mentioned that will decide which schools will be included, we can consider that school.

Ms Kimmins: I thank the Member for his question, and I apologise for the earlier technical difficulty. I am happy to come back to him about his listed question.

At this point, I have not considered that matter in any great detail. His colleague raised it when I was in with the Committee a number of weeks ago. I am happy to look at such a commission to see what benefit it might have for capital projects and their prioritisation.

Mr Donnelly: Thank you, Minister, for that answer. Your Department received the largest capital budget of any Department in 2025-26 and in the history of the Northern Ireland Civil Service. In order to spend that money strategically and wisely, do you share my colleagues' and my view that an infrastructure commission would help us to achieve that?

Ms Kimmins: Without an understanding of the commission's exact terms of reference or what it would look like, it is very hard to make a judgement about that. As I said, if a proposal were put forward about a commission, we can consider it and look at its benefits and at whether it is more onerous than what we already do. I am open to all suggestions. My priority is to move the issues forward, and I am happy to take suggestions on what a commission would look like.

Ms Kimmins: Since coming into post, I have not had any direct discussions with the Department of Justice. However, the Planning Appeals Commission sits outside my Department. We are working through the planning improvement programme to improve the whole planning process. Hopefully, the programme will feed into those issues as well.

Miss McIlveen: I thank the Minister for her answer. As the Minister will know, following the ABO Wind NI Ltd case, if a PAC decision is not challenged by way of judicial review, it must be accepted or respected by local planning authorities. That places a potentially huge financial and time burden on those authorities. Will the Minister raise that issue with her counterpart in Justice in order to accommodate a review mechanism in the PAC that would improve decision-making and allow for more consistent and robust decisions?

Ms Kimmins: I am happy to take the Member's suggestion on board to see whether we can do that. Given the fact that the PAC is an independent body that sits outside my Department, I do not know whether I can instruct it to take that action. I will take it forward and speak to officials to see whether we can potentially look at that.

Ms Kimmins: I thank the Member for her question, and I am looking forward to meeting her in Hannahstown to see the scheme. I am very aware of how important the scheme is to the people who live in Hannahstown village. I assure the Member that improving facilities for pedestrians in Hannahstown and many other areas is a priority for my Department.

As part of the detailed design stage for the new footway, my officials are meeting landowners who will be affected by the scheme in order to explain our land requirements and agree their accommodation works. The first round of face-to-face meetings with landowners is substantially complete, and the second round of follow-up meetings is now well under way. However, officials face some challenges in coordinating those meetings due to landowner availability and employment and personal commitments.

Due to the scheme's high cost, which is currently estimated to be around £1·8 million, a business case and separate procurement process are required to appoint a contractor. Once all elements of the scheme have been designed, including the accommodation works that affect residents, it will then be possible to update the cost estimate and business case for the new footway. It is difficult to accurately predict how long it will take to conclude that process, as it relies on the Department reaching an agreement with individual landowners on the type and scale of work that we will undertake, but I hope that it will be substantially complete later this year.

Ms Flynn: I thank the Minister for that response. I completely understand all the realities that mean that it is hard to put a timeline on these things, but can the Minister reassure the local residents in west Belfast that the project remains a priority for her and her Department?

Ms Kimmins: Absolutely. I know how important it is to the people in Hannahstown whom you represent. I assure you that improving those facilities is a key priority for me and my Department. I also appreciate residents' frustration that the footway has not yet been constructed. We are 100% committed to progressing the design of the 550 metre-long footway as soon as we can. I am happy to continue liaising with the Member on that, and we will be out on site. We will continue to move the scheme as quickly as possible.

Mr Speaker: Question 7 has been withdrawn.

Ms Kimmins: I have agreed to meet with the head of Logistics UK, who happens to be one of my predecessors. I am happy to speak to her on any of the issues that may be arising.

Mrs Dodds: Minister, I do not know whether that means that you intend to raise the issues or that you are not aware of them. There are significant changes coming for businesses and consumers in Northern Ireland, which may limit choice and bring greater disruption. I would be grateful for your assessment of what those difficulties might be.

Ms Kimmins: For any such issues that arise, the Windsor framework was put in place to streamline and make sure that we have ways of mitigating them. I am happy to work with the sector and any other stakeholders who see such issues, and maybe we can find solutions by working together. Since taking up my post, those issues have not come on to my desk, but I am happy to work with all involved to see where we can provide solutions.

Ms Kimmins: The consultation is looking at those options and taking people's views, so we do not have an accurate figure for the revenue that they would bring in. There has been commentary to the effect that it would be a drop in the ocean. From the outset, my predecessor and I have said that developer contributions are only one part of the broader solution that is needed. As the options are out for consultation, it would be prudent for me to wait to see what comes back. I have met with representatives from the construction industry in the past week on a number of issues, and the issue of developer contributions was discussed. I am keen to hear all those views to shape how we move forward. If there is a strong negative view of the options in the consultation responses, we will be back to the drawing board. There have been very few other suggestions on what we could do. I am keen to move things on as much as possible, even if that is on a smaller level. I hope that the consultation can help us to move things in the right direction.

Mr Blair: The Department's consultation document acknowledges that, in many cases, developers may pass on the cost of those contributions to customers and, therefore, make houses more expensive. Does the Minister accept that other funding models are available to help Northern Ireland Water that do not risk making our housing crisis worse or pricing lower-income families out of housing ownership?

Ms Kimmins: I have heard that point raised. We saw recent figures that suggest that there was a 15% rise in the price of housing in the past year. That was before developer contributions were even being talked about, so there are other factors that feed into house prices. The reality is that, at present, developers have to pay to find connections.

If we can find a more equitable, fairer solution that brings in a more consistent amount of funding, we have to consider it. All those concerns can be looked at as part of the consultation response.

Other models, as the Member outlined, have been looked at time and time again. The model in the North is similar to that in Scotland and in the South. My priority is to ensure that we do not put additional costs on domestic water users. That would be problematic, and I am committed to not doing it. There are other things that we can do with what is available to us that will improve the situation.

Ms Kimmins: I am loath to say that decisions on where houses are built are taken based on the area of the community that people are in. Everything has to be assessed on its merits. I will say that, where there are difficulties, NI Water's developer constraints team engages with developers to find solutions. The broader issue is not specific to North Belfast but is something that we face in our constituencies across the North. That is why we are trying to find a solution that will help us to deliver on all the challenges that we face in housebuilding and in all the other building schemes, whether healthcare, education, retail or hospitality, that are really important to us.

Mrs Long (The Minister of Justice): The PSNI has published the final number of applications received, with just under 30% of applications from members of the Catholic community. Whilst that is comparable to previous campaigns, I would wish to see figures more reflective of the wider community. It is therefore important that we listen to and learn from the lived experience of those from minority communities who have served and are serving in the PSNI.

The reported comments of the chair of the Catholic Police Guild of Northern Ireland indicate that legacy issues continue to influence the decision to apply to the police amongst a range of other considerations. I emphasise once again that it is incumbent on us all, as elected representatives, to encourage members of our community to consider joining the PSNI and to help to create the societal conditions where that is most likely to occur.

I have been encouraged by the number of applications received and wish those who have applied success with their applications. It can only be a positive for Northern Ireland if we have a Police Service that truly represents the diversity of the community that it serves.

Mr Durkan: I thank the Minister for her answer. I reiterate my party's desire to see a Police Service that is truly representative of the community that it is here to serve and protect. Threats from so-called republicans to deter Catholics from joining certainly do not help. Does the Minister believe that the UK Government recognise the damage being caused by their handling of legacy to confidence in the rule of law?

Mrs Long: It is difficult for me to give an opinion on that because I cannot speak for the UK Government. I have, of course, publicly shared my concerns about the approach taken, which will impact across the board not just on confidence in policing but on confidence in the wider justice system. That is of concern to all of us in the House. What the UK Government do is, sadly, outwith my responsibilities and powers, but I stress the importance of considering the impact of those issues on our contemporary justice system and on public confidence in it.

Mrs Dillon: Minister, do you agree that other factors affect the number of Catholics and Catholic representation, importantly, at every level. Do you agree that we need to see better representation not just in the numbers and percentages but at every level in the PSNI?

Mrs Long: There are two schools of thought on why people are deterred from membership of the PSNI or, indeed, progression. The first is that there is a fundamental flaw in the organisation's recruitment practices. The bald numbers of applications and successful applicants suggest that that is not the case. There is a wider issue, and that is one of attrition over time: people, because of threats received, intimidation, the disconnect between their community and the work that they do, find it difficult to maintain their working arrangements. As a society, we need to consider that. If, however, there is evidence of a culture in the organisation that militates against career progression through that organisation or against people wanting to remain in the organisation, we should not be blind to that issue. We should address it, look at it carefully and ensure that that is no longer the case.

Mr Buckley: When discussing legacy and its impact on police recruitment, will the Minister give her assessment of the disgraceful conduct of the Police Ombudsman, Mrs Anderson? Despite numerous requests from my colleague the Chair of the Justice Committee, Joanne Bunting, she continues to hold up a report on the Kingsmills massacre — an atrocity that resulted in 10 innocent workmen losing their lives on the side of the road and the sole survivor, Alan Black, being left with life-limiting injuries. Minister, do you believe that two-tiered justice has infected the ombudsman's office?

Mrs Long: There are two things. First, I do not accept that there is two-tiered justice in the ombudsman's office. Secondly, it is not a matter for me to comment on how and when the ombudsman issues her reports. I am aware that she is processing a number of legacy reports. There is a deadline for those to be issued, and she intends to comply with the deadline. Beyond that, I suggest that the Member take up his issue with the ombudsman.

Mr McReynolds: Does the Minister agree that the racist commentary on social media during the recent recruitment campaign was completely unacceptable?

Mrs Long: Absolutely. It was disappointing to see the response to the small number of adverts that showed racial diversity in the PSNI. The reaction to those was incredibly disappointing for those of us who wish to see a more inclusive, more representative Police Service. Let us be clear: an inclusive and representative Police Service will also be more effective and more able to connect with members of the public whom it serves and seeks to protect.

It has also been a disgrace to see the many anti-PSNI posters that appeared during that campaign and threats to new officers in the community. Those are wider issues that we need to look at as a society. We do not see those things happening solely with regard to the police, but it is incredibly disappointing when they do.

Mr Gaston: Will the Minister assure us today that there will be no return to discrimination on the basis of 50:50 recruitment?

Mrs Long: I am not convinced that we have reached the point where we need to reconsider the introduction of 50:50 recruitment. However, the Member will be aware that, as the Minister, I must remain open to that request should it be presented to me by the Policing Board or the Chief Constable. When previously utilised, it was linked to a severance scheme. Of course, that was established as a temporary measure to hasten the restructuring of the policing at that time. We are in a different arrangement now. As I say, I did not support it at that time, and I do not see a need for it at this time.

Mrs Long: I am delighted that my Department was successful in its bid for transformation funding, which is worth £22·64 million over five years. The funding will be used on efforts to speed up and transform the criminal justice system and to modernise electronic monitoring.

Justice is demand-led, with funding, quite appropriately, being allocated to front-line services first. Given the financial pressures that my Department has faced and continues to face, that has left little opportunity to support projects aimed at transforming the system. Despite the financial constraints, the Department has continued to prioritise transformation as part of its business-as-usual operations and has sought to identify areas for further transformation and to develop proposals should the opportunity to progress them arise. The funding is therefore extremely welcome and will enable much-needed change to the criminal justice system as a whole, helping to improve the time taken to complete cases and, for example, to better manage offenders on bail. I am wholly convinced that the funding will provide opportunities to improve effectiveness and efficiency and to meet the increased and changing demands on the system, thereby providing stability for the future.

Ms Bradshaw: Will the Minister please outline how the transformation funding will be used?

Mrs Long: Some £20·45 million will be used to support work to speed up and transform the criminal justice system, which is a key departmental commitment in the Programme for Government. The remaining £2·19 million will help to modernise our electronic monitoring systems. The funding for speeding up justice focuses largely on work to establish new ways of working between key justice stakeholders such as the police, prosecutors, the defence and courts, with a view to speeding up particularly the early stages of criminal cases, helping to ease pressure on courts and other parts of the system. The funding will also support work to expand the use of existing out-of-court disposals so that, where it is appropriate to do so, more low-level offences are diverted away from the courts entirely, helping to ease pressure on the system.

The £2·19 million allocated for electronic monitoring will enable my Department to take forward work to transform the way in which it monitors individuals released into the community. That will include considering the implications of GPS location monitoring for those on bail or on licence fitted with an electronic tag as part of their release conditions. That enhanced monitoring could be used to strengthen bail conditions, probation orders or prison release conditions. The availability of transformation funding is therefore a huge boost in light of the significant funding pressures that my Department has worked under for a great number of years, which have affected our ability to deliver the much-needed reforms.

Miss Hargey: I am coning in on electronic monitoring. As you said, it was part of the transformation bid. The Department has recently given a new contract to Buddi to look at monitoring across the board, and it was said that funding was the issue with electronic GPS. Can you confirm whether there is now a timeline with the new transformation bids? Will this form part of that contract looking at GPS monitoring?

Mrs Long: The contract that we have can be expanded to include GPS monitoring, and so we were prepared for this. Whether or not we were successful in the transformation bid, we were prioritising this in the Department. The fact that we have been successful with the transformation bid simply means that we do not now need to take that money from other key priorities in order to make this happen. Work has still to be done on how we manage the data, what data will be held and for how long. All those issues will have to be worked through to ensure that we are fully compliant. It may, helpfully, create more confidence with the judiciary about people being released on licence or on bail. Also, it will hopefully create more confidence in the public that people are properly supervised when they are on licence or on bail.

Mr Beattie: On funding as a whole, will the Minister outline the effects on sex offender monitoring and visits due to the insufficient resources for her Department?

Mrs Long: Thus far, my understanding is that, where the probation service has had to live within its budget, it has focused on, for example, the reporting to courts, so pre-sentencing reports to courts have slowed down somewhat in order to maintain the level of supervision that is required of those sex offenders and others who are in the community. There is also a responsibility through the Public Protection Arrangements Northern Ireland for the monitoring of people who are in the community, and that will be affected by all parts of the justice system. As I have said before, sometimes people underestimate what is at stake with the underfunding of the justice system. Public safety is key amongst those factors.

Mrs Long: I have been eagerly awaiting this one.

This is something that both the current and previous Finance Ministers have raised with Treasury. I understand that the Chief Secretary to the Treasury has not agreed that there will be access to the reserve for these costs at this time. However, we will continue to jointly make robust representations to Treasury about the merits of our case. Should the Executive need to fund those costs from its existing Budget, that will be extremely challenging and will inevitably have an adverse impact on funding for public services. I will continue to engage with ministerial colleagues to agree how best the costs can be managed.

Mr McGrath: I raise the matter because the issue of Treasury reserve funding will have an impact on PSNI resources. The issue of resources was mentioned in the Programme for Government consultation by the Chief Constable, who said that the resource for neighbourhood policing is shrinking. Will the Minister confirm whether she intends to make any application under June monitoring to help develop and provide resources for neighbourhood policing?

Mrs Long: At the moment, I am not in a position to discuss what I intend to make bids for under June monitoring. Obviously, that will be contingent on the PSNI bringing to me a strong case for any bids that, it feels, should be taken forward. My focus is twofold. The first is to deal with the current business case, which has been provided to the Department of Finance, to increase police numbers.

That is one key priority that the Chief Constable and I share. The other issue is to look at those outstanding items. In total, there is about £227 million in identified pressures that have not yet crystallised but, should they do so, could not be absorbed by the police, by the Department of Justice or, indeed, by the Executive. It is for those that we are trying to seek recourse to Treasury.

Mr Speaker: I call Mr McGrath.

Mr McGrath: I am going to bow out.

Mr Speaker: I call Colin Crawford.

Mr Crawford: Will the Minister outline how many police officers have had to move home due to the data breach?

Mrs Long: That is information that I do not hold. The PSNI may, however, hold it, and I would be happy were the Member to contact the Chief Constable directly to ask that question.

Ms Bunting: The Member's original question sought the up-to-date position on the data breach. However, as the Minister referenced, there is also the McCloud judgement and the holiday pay situation. Could the Minister perhaps give us the most up-to-date position on each of those elements and any information that there may be on timelines for progressing those?

Mrs Long: At the moment, we are not aware when these may crystallise, so we are still in a situation where there are exceptional pressures of around £227 million. The data breach is just one of those, and the Member has rightly identified holiday pay and McCloud. They will also impact on other Departments. That £227 million is only for the Department of Justice, but those issues will have impacts elsewhere also. However, I have to say that they are probably more significant in the Department of Justice relative to budget.

From our perspective, we have been seeking the opportunity to look to the reserve. We have not yet submitted a formal claim to the reserve, as the costs have not crystallised. However, it has been raised with Treasury, including in a bilateral on 27 February. At that point, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury's position was that those matters do not meet the criteria for a reserve claim as set out in the funding policy, which apply when:

The only part of that that anyone could argue is that they must be unforeseen, and, of course, they are foreseen. What we cannot foresee, however, is when they will crystallise, so I would argue very strongly that we do indeed meet the funding policy criteria for a reserve claim.

Mrs Long: In the past three years, an average of 1·7% of all community orders made in the Youth Court were community service orders. The figures for the individual years were 1·7% in 2021, 0·8% in 2022 and 2·7% in 2023. Those figures relate to cases where the main disposal was a community order. The figures are for initial disposals at court and do not include appeals.

Persons given a community service order must undertake at least 40 hours of unpaid work in the community within a 12-month period. The orders are supervised by the Probation Board. The young person must be 16 years of age or over and must consent to the order. The unpaid work must not interfere with their education, work or religious beliefs.

Mr Harvey: Thank you, Minister. I am sure that you will agree that community service is a useful tool in the youth justice system. Will the Minister consider what more can be done to partner youth justice with appropriate charities to expose these young people to the amazing work that they do?

Mrs Long: Community service is indeed a good solution in justice, not just in the youth justice system but in the adult justice system. We talk a lot about restorative justice, but one of the elements of restorative justice is paying back the community from which you have come and to which you have caused harm. There is an opportunity, through cooperation with voluntary and community sector organisations, to find placements for young people and adults that allow them to make a genuine contribution to their community. Often, the result of that is that people continue to volunteer or to contribute in some way to that organisation beyond the terms of their community service. That is a really positive outcome from those orders.

Mrs Long: My Department has been working with partners and stakeholders to develop arrangements to test pre-recorded cross-examination (PRCE) in response to the Gillen review report recommendation. Significant progress has been made through a cross-organisational PRCE working group. For example, a draft process map has been developed, a broad approach to pre-agreed questions has been agreed, including by defence representatives, and much of the detail has been worked through on how sessions will be managed and recorded, although the technical aspects of recording and editing are yet to be finalised. Progress has also been made in the area of disclosure, which is a key PRCE consideration.

PRCE also has linkages and interdependencies with other child-focused work streams, and planning is ongoing to deliver a PRCE pilot, which will complement and support those initiatives. An impact evaluation of similar work in England and Wales has recently been published. My officials are considering the findings of that report to gather any insights for Northern Ireland. The launch of a pathfinder project will, however, be subject to the agreement of partner organisations and the securing of relevant funding.

Miss McIlveen: I thank the Minister for her answer. That is just one of 253 recommendations from the Gillen review, the report of which was published in 2019 and led to the 2020 implementation plan. How many of the Gillen review recommendations remain outstanding? When are we likely to see the full implementation of the accepted recommendations?

Mrs Long: I do not have the final figure for the number of recommendations that have been either progressed or substantively completed. I can, however, assure the Member that, at this time, the percentage is well over 70%, and heading towards 80%, and there will be further developments as part of the victims and witnesses Bill that we hope to introduce in this mandate. That Bill will allow us to progress some of the outstanding elements of the recommendations. There are other complex recommendations that, although they are in train, have not yet been fully delivered, one of which is PRCE and another of which is how we deliver the Barnahus model for responding to child sexual offences.

Ms Egan: When will pre-recorded cross-examination be implemented?

Mrs Long: Costs for the project have not yet been finalised, but it is very likely that additional funding will be required to introduce automated case tracking and appropriate recording and editing equipment, as well as for the arrangements and staffing needed to launch the pathfinder project to which I referred earlier. There is already a significant financial pressure on the Department's budget. Officials are reviewing budget plans to consider whether a pilot can be supported in the 2025-26 financial year. That will, however, be subject to an analysis of a range of priority projects for delivery being done. My officials are working closely with the Office of the Lady Chief Justice and other stakeholders involved in the judge-led under-13 protocol to expedite children's cases. The two processes share the overarching objectives of reducing delay and unnecessary anxiety for vulnerable child complainants, so it is important to ensure that they dovetail with and complement each other.

Ms Hunter: Early intervention is important in the prevention of sexual offences. The Minister will be aware of the recent show 'Adolescence', which touches on the complex issue of the radicalisation of young men online from harmful, misogynistic attitudes. Does she agree that that important show should be shown in schools? Will she commit to discussing the matter further with the Minister of Education in order to end violence against women and girls in Northern Ireland?

Mrs Long: I have only just started watching 'Adolescence', so I do not want to comment on whether it is age-appropriate for pupils. I understand that the content is particularly triggering and quite traumatic. The Member is quite right, however, on a wider point: we need to have a range of resources and tools that are relatable for young people today so that they can understand the consequences of online radicalisation. Misogyny is no different from any other kind of extreme ideology in how it reaches people and pollutes their mind. It is just one of a number of ideologies that people use the internet for in order to influence attitudes. Many of our young men are vulnerable. We always focus on ending violence against women and girls, but many young men online are incredibly vulnerable to that kind of radicalisation, but it serves them no purpose and does them no favours. We must therefore find meaningful and impactful ways of connecting with them to prevent their being dragged down rabbit holes online.

Mr Speaker: Mr McCrossan's question was withdrawn after the deadline.

Mrs Long: Engagement with the legal professions and other stakeholders has been ongoing since the launch of the programme. The substantial 16% uplift in fees that I am implementing is based on the recommendations of the independent fundamental review of criminal legal aid, which was informed by 10 months of engagement with, and evidence submitted by, the Criminal Bar Association and others. My officials and I have also met professional bodies regularly since the review report was submitted. Since I announced my decisions in December, I have taken a number of further steps to address their concerns, including delaying publication of, and subsequently reprioritising, my delivery plan and enhancing fees for the whole profession at the earliest opportunity, which will be in May. Following constructive engagement with the Law Society and the Solicitors Criminal Bar Association (SCBA), I have also taken the unprecedented step of backdating the uplift to December 2024. In light of concerns that the CBA expressed, I have also undertaken to implement a scheme of interim payments that should assist with cash flow for the profession.

In short, I feel that I have gone as far as I possibly can with my duty to ensure that public funding decisions are supported by robust evidence. However, and importantly, in establishing the working group under an independent chair, Judge Burgess, I have created an opportunity for additional evidence to be submitted to inform further decisions on fees. The work of the group and its subgroups is already well under way, and I welcome the CBA's decision to participate and to continue to engage with us.

Mr Kingston: I thank the Minister for her answer. I appreciate that it is only two or three weeks since we last discussed the matter in the Chamber, but what more can the Minister do to achieve a resolution, given that the clients who are suffering from the current boycott are among the most vulnerable?

Mrs Long: I very much recognise the vulnerability. That is one of the reasons why I was very keen, in the interim, to find some kind of derogation for the most serious and severe cases where the harm was likely to be greatest. I am glad to say that there has been some progress on that. It is an improved position over where we were even a few weeks ago when I spoke on the matter.

My long-term intention is to put the profession and the legal aid system on a footing that is sustainable for the long term, that meets the needs of the public at their point of greatest need and that means that there is, at the same time, an efficient, effective and transparent use of resources in line with the Public Accounts Committee's recommendations. I have to balance all those things as I move forward. Provided that I can get the evidential basis, which, I hope, the working group will be able to provide, I am open to having that conversation.

Ms Ferguson: Minister, following your recent statement to the Assembly, have there been any meetings between the Department and the Bar to resolve the issue?

Mrs Long: There have been meetings between my officials and the Bar. I have not met the Bar, because I believe that the discussions should now happen through the working group. It is important that the evidence base goes through the working group and that that group then produces its report.

As you are aware, the issues that I described as being potentially "low-hanging fruit" may be able to be delivered by the end of this month, so we are talking in the next week or so. If we can identify them, we can include them in the secondary legislation that I hope to bring to the Chamber in May. We hope to have resolved the remaining items by June, which will allow us to deal with any outstanding issues in subsequent secondary legislation.

The important thing, of course, is that the working group is successful in reaching a conclusion and bringing recommendations to me that are adequately evidence-based to allow me to go forward and look at how I can implement them.

Mr Honeyford: What action has been taken to support victims and witnesses during the withdrawal of services?

Mrs Long: Those affected by the action are the victims and witnesses, who will have been readying themselves to give evidence and hoping that their journey is near an end. They will now need to wait longer for justice. Over the past few months, I have had the opportunity to meet the victim and witness care unit in the Public Prosecution Service (PPS) and to speak directly to prosecutors and affected victims. Those discussions have served only to increase my alarm at the acute impact that the withdrawal of service is having. Every effort is being made to ensure that victims and witnesses are kept apprised of developments and that they can avail themselves of support, but that can be only so much help when people are vulnerable. We face a real risk of witness attrition, victims and witnesses suffering significant harm and justice coming a little too late for some. I pay tribute to those in the victim and witness care unit and in Victim Support for the added work that they have put in over recent months to support the most vulnerable victims.

Mr McNulty: Will the Minister explain why she told the Justice Committee that the Family Bar Association was happy with a 16% fee increase before the Family Bar Association had submitted its views on the issue via the consultation that is ongoing and without her ever having met the family Bar to discuss the issue?

Mrs Long: What I said was that the remainder of the Bar had not taken action in response to the 16% offer and that we had applied it across all sections of the Bar. Remember that the 16% was originally recommended only for the criminal Bar. I made the decision to do the uplift across the entire Bar to ensure that all parts were treated equitably.

I doubt that there is anyone in the Bar who would not welcome a 16% uplift, but there will, of course, be other opportunities through the reform process for us to look at other significant and distinct parts of the Bar, if they are able to make their case based on evidence, as was the case for the criminal Bar.

We had already looked at things that we could do regarding immigration solicitors. We have moved ahead with that and are working with those immigration solicitors to resolve their issues, because their cases have a particular complexity that the 16% does not fully reflect. I have shown myself to be fair and equitable in how I have applied the 16%, and to be open to listening to a case where it is evidence-based.

Mrs Long: The sexual offences legal adviser scheme has had, and continues to have, an overwhelmingly positive impact for victims in serious sexual offence cases. The SOLA service, which is funded by my Department and delivered by solicitors who are employed by Victim Support NI, has provided free, independent legal advice to 2,000 victims since its launch in April 2021. Victims have told me directly how valuable access to such advice has been.

A high-level evaluation, conducted after the first year of the pilot, found that stakeholders largely agreed that the pilot was meeting its objective to improve the experience of complainants who are going through the criminal justice system and was leading to enhanced confidence in the process. It found that the main benefits to SOLA service users were enhanced communication and understanding of the legal process; victims being kept up to date and involved with the process; a lowering of early attrition rates and disengagement; increased confidence and a voice in the process; and the provision of an avenue of support and reassurance.

In 2022, my Department established a SOLA monitoring and evaluation group, which meets quarterly to analyse scheme uptake, user data and user feedback. That ongoing evaluation continues to support the earlier findings. Many victims who have used the service say that, without a SOLA, they would not have continued with their cases. Others have said that having the support of a SOLA gave them a voice in the justice system. Those positive evaluation reports, and hearing from victims about how important it is to have access to legal advice, helped inform my decision, in November 2024, to extend the pilot for a further two years until March 2027 and to launch a new children’s service in February 2025.

Mr Speaker: We move now to topical questions.

Mrs Long: I cannot answer that question today as I do not have the details at my fingertips. I am happy to write to the Member with the details that he has requested.

Mr McNulty: Minister, your Department has been either unable or unwilling to confirm a timeline for the publication of those reports. Will you do so now, and will you advise on whether it is proper for those reports to be used as evidence by your Department without their being made available to the Assembly?

Mrs Long: It is entirely appropriate that we use whatever evidence we have from any reports that we have developed. That is a given. However, as I said to the Member, I do not have a publication date, so I will have to respond to him in writing.

Mrs Long: There have been a number of such incidents, including unauthorised access to Dundonald House, which began on Sunday 16 March. The apparent intent has been to create social media content about the building and its environs. However, the individuals concerned have also engaged in destructive and antisocial behaviour.

Whilst Dundonald House has been largely vacated since June 2023 as a result of health and safety concerns, it remains a government asset within the Stormont estate and has a category B listing due to its unique architectural features. It is not open to, or safe for, the public to access, and any unauthorised access will be reported to the PSNI.

While the Prison Service relocated its headquarters to a new location, some areas of Dundonald House remain in limited use. For obvious reasons, I do not want to explain in public that use in any detail, but I can be absolutely clear that no sensitive or personal information has been compromised during those forays into the building. The Northern Ireland Prison Service is liaising with the PSNI, the Department of Finance, which manages the Stormont estate, and DAERA, which has premises officer responsibility for the building. We should have a reasonable expectation that all government buildings, particularly those on the estate, are protected and secure from this kind of activity. I am sure that Members will support me in condemning the actions of a few people who do not respect the boundaries of acceptable behaviour and the law.

Mr Butler: I thank the Minister for her answer. The Minister referred to the period since the building became defunct. Will she outline at what point security was put on the building? It is my understanding that, certainly from December until March of this year, there was no security and that previous access may well have happened. Will the Minister stand over those periods when accessibility to that sensitive material may have been compromised for people, such as me, who served many years ago? They require that confidence.

Mrs Long: I can give the Member my assurance that no sensitive information has been able to be accessed at any time. I can give that assurance not because I am assured about access to the building but because I am assured about access to the information, how it is held within the building and how it has been secured. We are doing a review of that now, given the incursions that there have been over the last week. There is no risk to the information that has been held in Dundonald House.

When it comes to the security of the building, as I said, DAERA had the premises officer responsibility for the building, and, I think, the assumption was that it had passed that to the Department of Finance to resolve when it exited the building. Our presumption was, however, that it would remain under 24-hour security, as had been the case when DAERA and the Department of Justice were present. We are now working through that to ensure that it is the case until we find an alternative location in which to store the materials that we have there.

Mrs Long: The Prison Service has demonstrated a real commitment to delivering on a wide range of sustainability and climate initiatives. It has progressed a wide range of energy-efficiency measures over a number of years that has seen it reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by an impressive 44% from a 2016 baseline. That has been achieved through the installation of energy monitoring and targeting software used in conjunction with upgraded building energy management systems, LED lighting upgrades, the installation of a solar farm and small-scale photovoltaic (PV) project, the upgrading of heating systems and the recent conversion of a number of diesel vehicles to sustainable hydro-treated vegetable oil fuel.

Furthermore, it is addressing several environmental initiatives across the prison estate, working with the Northern Ireland Environment Agency, the RSPB, the Woodland Trust and conservation specialists to protect endangered species and flora and fauna. That has included the creation of a tree nursery at Magilligan to supply native tree species, which is nationally important for biosecurity.

Mr McReynolds: I thank the Minister for her response. It is encouraging to hear about how our prisons can play a key role in tackling climate change and in supporting our environment. Can the Minister expand a little bit on the tree nursery at Magilligan?

Mrs Long: I can. I visited Magilligan on Friday. The prison has created a native tree nursery. It is nationally important for biosecurity, as it is only the second such location on the island of Ireland to grow native trees. They have planted and nurtured 40,000 native tree saplings — everything from Scots pine to oak, chestnut and birch, which are all in short supply. The Justice for Woodlands project is a joint venture between Magilligan prison, the local Binevenagh landscape partnership, the Woodland Trust and Causeway Coast and Glens Heritage Trust. Last year, 7,000 of those trees were transferred from the prison and planted in the local area, which included a scheme to prevent erosion on the banks of a local river. Northern Ireland is one of the least wooded countries in Europe. Previously, a lot of the tree stock had to be imported. Having a native tree nursery producing local seeds for local projects is a really important step forward.

Mrs Long: I am happy to meet the Member to discuss any specific issues in the east Belfast area. I am conscious that, across the city, there have been a number of disturbances at interfaces. Not all of those have been the normal interface disputes. Some have been due to roving gangs of young people who assemble around the interfaces to engage, often, initially, in social activity, and then it moves on to something slightly more sinister. It is important, first of all, to look at the money that we give to policing and community safety partnerships (PCSPs) to support their interface work, as well as the work that goes through the Department of Education in the tackling paramilitarism programme, which works with young people who are at risk of offending. There are lots of opportunities for us to get involved if we know where particular problems are. Ultimately, it is much better that we prevent offences than convict people for them. We do not want young people to have criminal convictions and criminal records. We want them to grow up healthy, safe and free from intimidation or threat.

Mr Brooks: Some of that approach to policing is undertaken by some very good neighbourhood policing teams. Among the frustrations fed back to me, and, I am sure, to you, by the community is that officer rotations happen all too frequently and, at times, when the trust that makes relationships possible has just been built. Is there anything that you can do to encourage consideration of how that works and whether greater stability can be brought to neighbourhood policing teams?

Mrs Long: As the member will know, Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland (CJINI), in its recent inspection report on policing, raised the issue of the abstraction of neighbourhood officers from their routine duties in communities in order to take on other roles at key times. That is an almost inevitable consequence of the low number of officers at the moment. The first thing that I can do is to get the business case approved through the Department of Finance so that we can, over the next five years, start to build the numbers back up, which will make a huge difference.

Where communities have that engagement, they very much welcome it. They also welcome the level and quality of the engagement and the helpfulness of the officers. Their only complaint is that people see that churn: not seeing the same officers to allow the building of a relationship. Some of that is about recognising that, whilst policing is, of course, an excellent career with lots of opportunities, we should not diminish the importance of neighbourhood policing. It is in and of itself an important service to the community and can be transformational in people's experience of their lived environment.

Mrs Long: When you look at figures such as those, it is easy to make presumptions about why they are as they are. We know, for example — the Member is very vocal on this — that offending behaviours are often linked to deprivation. We also know that many parts of the community that are nominally Catholic tend to have higher levels of deprivation. We therefore have to be careful before making a case for institutional bias. We have to look at the underlying causes of offending behaviour, and we need to unpack all of that.

It is absolutely my view that, at all points, justice has to be blind to people's religion, politics and so on. It needs to treat each individual with dignity and respect and, ultimately, with fairness and equality.

Mr Carroll: I agree that justice should be blind, but it is not always. It is also concerning that those from a Catholic/nationalist background are twice as likely to be stopped and searched as those from a Protestant/unionist background. Will the Minister explain, in addition to her previous answer, why that is? Given that she has the remit for the strategic policy of the PSNI and for setting out its long-term objectives, will she commit to raising those issues with the police?

Mrs Long: The use of stop-and-search is entirely an operational matter for the Chief Constable, and it is one on which he is answerable to the Policing Board. It is not part of the strategic framework for policing in Northern Ireland, nor is it part of the long-term objectives.

We all recognise that there are, of course, dangers with stop-and-search. I have attended quite a number of events, particularly with young people, who are more likely to be affected by stop-and-search than other members of the community. They feel that profiling happens and that they are targeted because of their age or background. Those perceptions, whether true or not, impact on the relationship that people have with the police, so it is important that the powers that the police have are used proportionately and appropriately and that, at all times, the police are accountable for and transparent in what they do. That is the best way for us, as elected representatives, to have confidence and to build confidence in the PSNI and the work that it does.

Mrs Long: I thank the Member for his question. I was fortunate last week, as were a number of other Members in the Chamber, to be present at Walkway Community Centre for an event on violence against women and girls.

I was asked quite a similar question, and I suppose that I gave three Ss. The first is sentencing. Whilst we have the highest sentences for such offences when you look at the maximum, we need to ensure that they are reflected in what is handed out in the courts. That requires the PPS, judiciary and others to work together to ensure that things are prosecuted in the right forum.

We need to ensure that there is support for people who decide to go through the criminal justice system and for those who wish to, for example, leave an abusive domestic relationship. The other issue around support is that we have sexual offences legal advisers, to whom I referred earlier. There is also an issue around the advocacy support service, which we have, again, to try to support people. We also have the remote evidence centres. I hope that all of those help to build confidence.

I guess the other element for me is survivorship and how we ensure that people who have been victims of sexually motivated crime, domestic abuse or violence or, indeed, any other kind of violence against women and girls can move from being a victim, where they still feel under the control of the perpetrator, to being a survivor, where they feel that they have regained control and agency in their life. One of the key things that we are looking at in that regard is how we can deal with issues around disclosure in cases and allowing people to exercise privacy and how we can deal with, for example, the right of a victim to read out their victim impact statement in court so that they are not denied a voice, which so often happens.

If we do those things, among others, we will be able to transform how people experience the justice system. Most of all, we need to speed up justice, because, until the delivery of justice is effective and efficient —

Mr Speaker: The Minister's time is up.

Mrs Long: — people will not have confidence in the system.

Mr Speaker: That concludes questions to the Minister of Justice.

Mrs Erskine: On a point of order, Mr Speaker. We are all human, but today the Infrastructure Minister failed to answer a question in the Chamber. I understand that Ministers are briefed before they come into the Chamber for Question Time. The question was not withdrawn, and I wanted to ask a supplementary question on it. We all prepare in advance. We seek answers on behalf of our constituents. Can you make a ruling on that, Mr Speaker? Can you investigate how and why that happened and report to the Assembly?

Mr Speaker: I thank the Member for raising that point of order. In my experience, that has never happened before. It shows the dangers of using electronic devices on their own. Electronic devices are great when they work, but, sometimes, when they do not, it is a disaster. I am happy to look at the issue and come back to the Assembly on it.

Mr Durkan: Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker, far be it for me to question your integrity or timekeeping, but I just want to point out that Question Time with both Ministers overran the allotted time. I just suggest that the Speaker might have his clock cleaned.

Mr Speaker: Well, if the Member begrudges other Members getting maybe an extra half a minute to ask a question, that is up to him. As you know, the Speaker is generous to Members and wishes to ensure that there is the greatest opportunity to hold Ministers to account. I am sure that the Member, as a member of the Opposition, would wish that Ministers be held to account and would not complain about such matters.

Mr Gaston: On a point of order, Mr Speaker, I would like you to review the Hansard report of the deputy First Minister's comments to me during the Programme for Government debate on 3 March, when she claimed that, in the Programme for Government:

On Friday, the Justice Minister responded to a question about that by saying that the target was approximately 7,000 officers and 2,500 staff via a five-year recovery plan that extends beyond the end of the mandate. On the basis of the deputy First Minister's misleading comments in the House, I trust that you will require Mrs Little-Pengelly to return to the Chamber to correct the record.

Mr Speaker: As I have indicated to other Members previously, we do not have a fact-checking role in the Speaker's Office. People may say things that are not entirely accurate — I am not saying whether it was or was not in this instance — but we do not have a fact-checking role. The Member has put his case on the record.

We will move on to the next item of business. I ask Members to take their ease while we change the Chair.

No 1:

No 2:

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Before I put the Question on amendment No 1, I remind Members that, if it is made, I will not put the Question on amendment No 2.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: I ask Members to take their ease.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): The motion has not been moved, so we will move on to the next item of business. The Minister was here, but she has disappeared. She will be back shortly. I suggest that we take our ease for a few minutes to allow Members time to prepare.

Ms McLaughlin: 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 in which to propose and a further five minutes in which to make a winding-up speech. Two amendments have been selected and are published on the Marshalled List, so the Business Committee has agreed that 16 minutes will be added to the total time for the debate.

Ms McLaughlin: I am deeply concerned about Northern Ireland's renewable energy future. While the Programme for Government (PFG) commits to upscaling renewables production, the reality is that we are failing to act with the urgency required. At our current rate, we will not reach net zero until 2118. Scotland is installing renewable electricity capacity at 33 times our rate, and our share of renewable electricity has declined since 2022. That is why we cannot support the DUP amendment.

Progress has, of course, been made, but the pace of change has contributed to rising costs. Our inability to match the pace of our neighbours puts us at a disadvantage and forces our people to bear the burden of government inaction. Our pace of change is not just disappointing but a failure of leadership, planning and investment. It puts our climate targets at risk, keeps us dependent on expensive fossil fuels and costs us jobs and investment.

The biggest barrier to progress — our outdated planning policy and weak infrastructure — must be tackled urgently. That is why the motion calls for a renewable energy support scheme. The Assembly should support planning reform. In 2022, 51% of our electricity demand was met by renewables, but that fell to 45% last year. Instead of scaling up, we are moving backwards. Developers face long planning delays, an outdated grid and uncertainty about investment and support.

As a result, investors are looking elsewhere and key projects are stalling. Companies such as North Channel Wind, ERG-Evolving Energies and RenewableNI want to drive us towards net zero, but their calls are being ignored. If we do not act now, we will miss our target of 80% renewables by 2030, which we are legally bound to achieve. Unlike Great Britain and the Republic of Ireland, Northern Ireland still lacks a dedicated renewable energy support scheme. That has left us at a competitive disadvantage. We need a structured, long-term support mechanism that encourages the production of onshore and offshore wind energy, solar energy and battery storage to create a stable, low-cost energy system.

The transition to renewables is not just about climate targets but about economic opportunity. The north-west, with its rich wind and tidal resources, should be leading the way. Offshore wind in the North Channel, the tidal energy along the Donegal coastline and solar expansion in rural areas would create a thriving renewables hub. For example, investing in the infrastructure at Lisahally port, expanding supply chain capabilities and supporting the Magee campus and the North West Regional College (NWRC) to train the workforce of the future would establish Derry as a key player in the green economy. It is a chance to reverse years of economic neglect.

Meanwhile, planning remains one of the biggest obstacles to progress. Wind and solar projects are stuck in the system for years, while offshore development is held back by outdated policies and bureaucracy. The Department for the Economy and the Department for Infrastructure must work together to streamline approvals and ensure clear timelines for projects. The System Operator for Northern Ireland (SONI) has repeatedly warned that the current developer-led grid approach is inefficient and costly. We need a plan-led system that expands grid capacity proactively rather than reactively. A key part of that is the urgent need for the second North/South interconnector, which remains stalled and may not be completed until 2031. That delay is unacceptable and risks having a devastating effect on our energy security.

Of course, planning reform must be done responsibly with consideration being given to local communities, but we cannot let endless red tape hold back progress. The people of Northern Ireland are behind us. Only 5% of those who were polled in Derry oppose the 80% renewables target, while 72% believe that their council is not doing enough to promote renewables.

One party in the Assembly controls the Infrastructure, Finance and Economy portfolios. It has the power to make real change, yet we have seen no delivery on an energy support scheme since the Northern Ireland renewables obligation (NIRO) collapsed in 2017, no significant grade upgrades, which has led to the excessive curtailment of wind energy, and we have a planning system that is slower than it was a decade ago. The SDLP —.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Sinéad, bring your remarks to a close, please.

Ms McLaughlin: The SDLP is committed to a greener and more prosperous future. The longer that we wait, the more opportunities that we will lose.

Mr Middleton: I beg to move amendment No 1:

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Gary, you have five minutes to propose the amendment and three minutes to make a winding-up speech. Please open the debate on amendment No 1.

Mr Middleton: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I thank the Members for tabling the motion. I am, however, disappointed that they will not support the DUP amendment. A thread runs through our amendment that is about making sure that a just transition is affordable for local communities.

In speaking to the motion and our amendment, I will highlight four broad issues. The first is the upscaling of renewable energy production. We can all embrace a greener and more sustainable economy. Such an economy can create jobs, increase prosperity and lead to stronger and healthier communities while protecting our natural environment. We are in favour of building on the work of DUP Ministers Dodds and Lyons and their 10X Economy vision. Sixty per cent of our manufacturing companies sell into the green economy, generating £1·5 billion in turnover. It is undeniable that reducing emissions will create significant economic opportunities for Northern Ireland. Of course, as we seek to upscale renewable energy production, we must also protect customers from cost shocks. That is reflected in the Programme for Government and is crucial for several interconnected reasons, not least of which are ensuring energy affordability and equity, maintaining public support for energy transition and facilitating a just transition.

The second area that I will highlight is ineffective renewable energy infrastructure and planning policy, which act as barriers. In our amendment, we note:

Significant progress has been made over the past decade, and that should be celebrated. Our maritime and offshore wind supply chain is evolving. We have ports that are in ideal locations to be bases for offshore energy projects, and Northern Ireland is home to the only dedicated purpose-built port facility for offshore renewables on the island. In 2024, 81·7% of all renewable electricity that was generated in Northern Ireland was generated from wind. In the past year, 43·5% of the electricity that was consumed in Northern Ireland was generated from renewable sources. Increasing that figure to 80% in the next five years will require significant investment in our infrastructure. As we seek to do that, we must ensure that we respect our local environment, our landscape and areas of natural beauty and heritage, such as the Giant's Causeway.

In our amendment, we highlight the fact of:

As we transition to a greener economy, we must ensure that ratepayers do not suffer and that those who can least afford it are not expected to pay more. As we go forward, we must do so in a way that is fair to all. Affordability should be a chief concern, given the fact that the cost of infrastructure maintenance and upgrades will be shared in Northern Ireland by a population of 1·9 million, which the Consumer Council has shown has an average household discretionary income that is 41% below the UK average.

The third area that I will highlight is the introduction of a new renewable energy support scheme. We support the calls for the Minister for the Economy:

However, we believe that financial assistance should be provided to increase energy efficiency and small-scale energy generation by businesses and households. The Electrical Contractors' Association (ECA) has suggested:

We believe that that should be explored. A report that was compiled by KPMG warned:

Again, that is something that the Minister should address.

The final area relates to cooperation with the Minister for Infrastructure in order to reform planning. There is no doubt that delays in the Planning Service and in the processing of planning applications contribute further to the delay in our decarbonisation. Many of the applications are for developments that would improve our environment and reduce our emissions, but as those decisions continue to be delayed so too does our just transition.

Our amendment adds to the motion, strengthens it and encourages the Minister and all Departments to place an onus on ensuring that customers, consumers and businesses in Northern Ireland are not adversely impacted on as we move towards a greener economy.

Mr Honeyford: I beg to move amendment No 2:

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): 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. David, you have five minutes to propose and three minutes to make a winding-up speech. All other contributors will have three minutes.

Mr Honeyford: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I have spoken many times in the Chamber on Alliance's position on renewables. As this is an SDLP mini-motion and time is limited, I will pick up on just a couple of issues.

Alliance submitted its amendment in order to enhance the motion. Very simply, the "80 by 30" target cannot be achieved without the North/South interconnector. Unfortunately, EirGrid recently stated that the completion date for that has been pushed back to 2031. SONI estimates the cost to consumers in Northern Ireland of not having the North/South interconnector in place and in use to be £55,000 a day. That means that the cost to the person in the street is approximately £100 annually. The acceleration of the North/South interconnector is fundamental if we are to meet our targets. The motion is only words on a page if the North/South interconnector is not included in it. As it is not included in the DUP amendment and the amendments are mutually exclusive, we will oppose the DUP amendment.

The Department is bringing forward a new renewable scheme. In its current form — or, what we have been briefed is its current form — the scheme will fail to deliver on our potential and will not accelerate our capacity to meet the "80 by 30" target either. Sinn Féin talks a lot about unity and a DUP motion tomorrow will focus on the United Kingdom. We have consistently said that Alliance will focus on the best outcomes for people and look at actions not words. We already have an all-island energy system. I question why a Sinn Féin Minister's Department is bringing forward legislation for a renewables scheme in Northern Ireland that will not be applied equally on an all-island basis. The creation of different entry-level conditions for investment will result in an investment border between Northern Ireland and the South. That will, effectively, create a barrier to and a restriction on investment in Northern Ireland and push further investment south. I have raised that matter so many times and I will continue to highlight it. Any new scheme must have an entry point that is equal to that in the South. We continue to see investment moving there: we need investment here and the entry point has to be the same. The experience in the South has shown that that difference will limit investment here by up to 50%.

It is massively disappointing that the Department for the Economy has recently worked on a scheme that limits our potential and is using the prospect of further delays as a reason not to amend it. If that is the case, there must, as a bare minimum, be a commitment from the Minister for a lower rate in the second round of auction in 2027 that is equal to that in the South. Given the ridiculous amount of time that planning takes, which the motion highlights, that would at least give hope and long-term certainty to businesses and investors. I have been contacted directly by several companies, one of which is in my area, that are about to draw a line through Northern Ireland and put their investment into the South and Scotland.

The SDLP motion states that ineffective planning policy is a significant barrier to renewables expansion. I completely agree with that. I agree with every word that has been said. Sinéad talked about leadership being missing and calls being ignored. The SDLP has repeated in the House that it is a serious Opposition, yet, with the support of Sinn Féin, it recently voted against renewables in Derry City and Strabane District Council, the very place that planning controls are upheld.

The motion that the SDLP supported stated that the council "reaffirms its presumption against" wind farms and, therefore, against renewables. In front of the cameras in the Chamber, for everyone to see, the SDLP raises concerns about the rates of growth in renewables and what the Executive parties are doing about it, but it opposes it in the place where it is not in opposition and where it controls planning policy. I will give way to any SDLP Member who wants to explain how it is that they say one thing in here but something different in the place where the planning conditions are upheld.

Mr McGlone: Will the Member give way?

Mr Honeyford: I will give way.

Mr McGlone: It was an operational issue.

Mr Honeyford: An operational issue? Right, OK. Was the council team wrong, then? Either the council team was on a solo run and does not have a policy or the Assembly team is making one up on the hoof with the mini-motions that it tables here. We all want to see renewables being brought forward, but we have to get serious. The industry needs time and the confidence that we will deliver. I will leave it there.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): I call Emma Sheerin. Emma, you have only three minutes.

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

I welcome the motion, the Opposition's tabling the item for discussion, and their support for and endorsement of a key Programme for Government commitment that relates to the climate action plan and the agreed position of all Executive parties on what we need to do to meet our net zero targets. As outlined in the Programme for Government, we need to meet those targets in a fair and just way that is affordable for households, homeowners and businesses alike. It has been a key priority for our Minister, and work is ongoing on a renewable energy support scheme, because it is vital not only to encourage but to allow people and businesses to make the investment that we need in green energy if we are to be successful. We need the infrastructure to be in place to allow us to decarbonise our energy generation, such as the aforementioned interconnector, and we have always said that our preference was for it to be undergrounded. I welcome the debate.

Ms D Armstrong: I thank the proposer of the motion. We all agree that a green energy transition is vital to help us to reach our climate targets and fulfil our statutory commitments as agreed by the Assembly. The climate crisis that we face is bleak, and it calls for action. It is right that we aim to increase our renewable generation prior to 2030. However, we need to make sure that we approach it in a way that means that consumers do not pay the price in pursuit of those goals and that the savings promised are delivered. I share the concerns raised in the amendment proposed by my DUP colleague. The costs to support the transition need to be evaluated and accounted for.

It is no secret that Northern Ireland has found success in renewable energy generation, but that success is being held back by inadequate planning and infrastructure and the dark cloud of the renewable heat incentive (RHI) scheme. If we are serious about our commitment to green energy generation, we must recognise that it will not deliver itself through words alone. Projects need long-term planning and, of course, the finance to support the transition. Therefore, it is imperative that the Northern Ireland renewable energy support scheme, the renaming of which as the renewable energy price guarantee is now proposed, is delivered, but it needs to be balanced, fair and transparent. It also needs to support smaller projects, even with financial assistance.

The Department for the Economy must acknowledge the amount of power generation that comes from smaller projects. Almost 205 megawatts or 15% of current wind generation in Northern Ireland is from projects under 5 megawatts. Therefore, the insistence on a 5 megawatt entry point for the scheme will lead only to a stagnation in generation due to complications and bottlenecks in planning across Northern Ireland. My party supports the call for lowering the scheme's entry point to projects that are greater than 1 megawatt.

I raised that with then Minister Murphy in October last year, as I believe that every effort should be made to maximise renewable generation on our grid in the five years to 2030.

There is agreement that we must achieve 80% renewable energy by 2030. That is less than five years away, and it is increasingly acknowledged that that target cannot be reached by 2030. The foundations needed to achieve that should have been signed and sealed by now. I may not agree with the sentiments of our Chancellor at Westminster, but she is cutting the red tape and wants to unleash the potential in the sector. Can Northern Ireland follow suit? That is the question that we need answered.

On that note, I thank the signatories to the motion, and I will support the balanced amendment from the DUP.

Mr McMurray: I welcome and support the motion. Growing our capacity to produce, store and distribute renewable energy is absolutely vital to our climate, environment and economy. It is alarming to see that the share of electricity consumption that comes from renewables has been steadily decreasing over the past few years. We should be well on our way to achieving the target of 80% by 2030; instead, we are regressing. We know that many of the key growth sectors of the future come with even higher energy demands. We must be able to support them.

Renewable energy is not just a means to an end. The renewables sector can make a huge difference to our economy. RenewableNI estimates that as little as 1·5 gigawatts from the Northern Ireland offshore projects installed by 2032 could produce up to £2·4 billion in gross added value for Northern Ireland companies and produce employment up to the equivalent of 32,400 people working full-time for a whole year. Many of those would be highly skilled and well-paid jobs.

The offshore sector could give a real boost to coastal communities in my constituency. Much of the work involved in offshore renewables will be centred around the smaller ports and harbours that host offshore maritime services, bases and storage facilities. We already have a healthy and innovative sector of small and medium-sized businesses in Kilkeel that could latch on to offshore projects off the South Down and Northern Ireland coast. It would be absolutely transformative for South Down.

The planning system is rightly referenced in the motion. Major planning applications have a 30-week target, but applications for wind farms take, on average, three years to be processed. That is much too long, and there is not enough accountability for those timelines. Our neighbouring jurisdictions, as already referenced, handle it much better. We also need to reform planning policy so that renewable applications stand a chance. At the moment, decarbonisation is not given enough weight, and a revised —.

Mr Durkan: Will the Member give way?

Mr McMurray: Yes.

Mr Durkan: I appreciate the Member's giving way. I apologise for not being quicker to respond when his colleague invited an intervention. I was digging out the piece to which he referred: Derry City and Strabane District Council voted for a:

Alliance has no councillors in Derry and Strabane, but it has power in DAERA. Can the Member tell me whether his party colleague the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs will change DAERA's approach to planning applications in areas of outstanding natural beauty (AONBs)?

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

Mr McMurray: I am not sure why that interjection came to me. I am not the Environment Minister, and I am sure that the Member could raise that by various means rather than interjecting. Anyway, we will carry on.

Where did I get to? A revised strategy and policy statement (SPS) for renewables and low-carbon energy should have been published before Christmas to rectify that, yet, three months on, we are still waiting for it.

Infrastructure is also a big issue for the grid and for storage. Every year, an increasing share of wind energy is lost because the infrastructure needed to store and distribute it efficiently is not there. The North/South interconnector is a key piece of infrastructure and is absolutely vital to achieving the 80 by '30 target, reducing energy waste and bringing down electricity prices. Eirgrid now estimates that it will not be completed until 2031, which is much too late. I understand that the main delays are rooted south of the border, so I urge the Minister to engage with her counterpart to ensure timely delivery on that essential piece of infrastructure.

Mr Gaston: The motion should cause anyone who supports it or, indeed, the amendments in the Order Paper to pause for thought. I say that because the record of this place is anything but impressive when it comes to renewable energy. However, such is the madness of many to be seen to be in tune with the green lobby that the mere mention of buzzwords such as "renewables" will have them positively drooling at the prospect of being able to support it, regardless of any consequences. I remind the House that, in the past, that spirit saw Stormont pass the renewable heat incentive, which resulted in cash for ash for those who abused the scheme and, importantly, for those who did not abuse the scheme, the breaking of promises made to them by then Minister, now Baroness Foster.

I turn to the amendment from the Alliance Party. I have deep concerns about its call for an upscaling of offshore renewable energy production. Should the Scottish Government's plans for a massive offshore wind farm go ahead, there is a real possibility that the beautiful view from one of the jewels of natural beauty of my constituency will be destroyed. Do we really want to pass a motion in the House that would give succour to those who want to construct a forest of wind turbines spoiling the view from the Giant's Causeway? I certainly do not.

The whole premise of green energy transition is flawed. I say that because there are fundamental, basic questions that no one can answer. Can you provide any data on the impact on global temperatures if Northern Ireland goes net zero? What about the whole of the UK? Why is Northern Ireland so keen to appoint a climate change commissioner, with a £1 million per annum budget and 15 staff, ahead of any other region of the UK?

This is utter madness: committing that public money 25 years from our commitment to net zero is not the best use of public money. Let us say that one accepts the premise that man-made climate change is taking place. If one believes that it is happening, would anyone argue that the impact of Northern Ireland on the world's temperatures is not negligible? Let us look at China. As of 2019, that country's greenhouse gas emissions exceeded the combined emissions of the developed world. Happy to provide everyone else with solar panels, it is not interested in using any of them itself. With the Trump Administration withdrawing from the Paris Accord, it is time for even the eco-fanatics to face up to the truth: we should not damage our economy by chasing the unicorn of our wee country having an impact on global temperatures. It will be negligible.

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

Dr Archibald (The Minister for the Economy): Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

I too welcome the opportunity to speak about this important issue. It is clear that we need to accelerate progress if we are to meet our climate targets and ensure energy security for the future, so I am pleased that the Assembly has committed to supporting industry to increase renewable electricity capacity by 40% by the end of the mandate.

Climate change is one of the defining challenges of our time, and moving away from fossil fuels is a vital part of the transition to a more sustainable way of life. Our net zero targets are legal requirements, but, more than that, they are a moral obligation to the well-being of future generations.

We have made significant progress in deploying renewable generation. That is largely due to the NIRO, which helped to increase renewable electricity consumption from around 3% in 2005 to 40% in 2018, meeting the 2020 40% target two years early. Since the closure of the NIRO, there has been no support scheme for the North, and we must now significantly increase renewables capacity to meet our 2030 legislative target. My Department has been developing a new support scheme based on the Contracts for Difference mechanism commonly used in many countries to incentivise investment in renewable energy. That auction-based scheme is crucial in enabling the delivery of the 80% target. Unlike direct subsidy models such as the NIRO, the contractual approach ensures that generators receive a stable and predictable revenue stream while shielding consumers from excessive price volatility.

We are now in the delivery phase of the scheme, and I plan to bring primary legislation before the Assembly this year, with subordinate regulations to follow as we move towards implementation. The success of the support scheme and, ultimately, of renewable targets depends on several factors that need collaboration across government and with the Utility Regulator and energy companies. I hear the issues that David has raised. Last week, I met RenewableNI in relation to those as well. Obviously, I want to see the support scheme progress, but I gave a commitment to look at those issues in detail as we progress it.

The Department for Infrastructure has revised its policy on renewable and low-carbon energy so that it better supports the transition to net zero. I support the updated strategic planning policy statement on renewable and low-carbon energy and hope that it will be considered by the Executive without further delay. I also recognise that increasing renewable deployment must be matched by investment in infrastructure. Work is ongoing with key partners to ensure that our grid and energy systems are prepared to accommodate greater levels of clean energy.

The Utility Regulator approved the Northern Ireland Electricity Networks RP7 business plan late last year. It allows for £2·23 billion of investment over the next six years for the operation and expansion of the electricity grid. It is the largest amount approved in our history and will go a long way to delivering the network that we need. We also need to continue to work with counterparts in the South to progress the North/South interconnector, which will benefit electricity consumers, increase security of supply and facilitate more renewable electricity onto the grid.

Offshore development represents one of the biggest opportunities for renewable energy. My Department is working closely with key stakeholders to ensure that we have the right policy, regulatory and market structures in place to enable offshore development for the North from 2030. Our offshore renewable energy action plan (OREAP) has been collaboratively developed across Departments and delivery partners, including the Crown Estate, DFI, DAERA and industry. In February, as part of that work, my Department launched a public consultation on the strategic environmental assessments for offshore renewable energy in our marine area. The consultation will help to identify areas for the potential development of offshore renewable energy.

The renewables sector presents a significant economic opportunity, with an estimated pipeline of investment worth hundreds of millions of pounds in new projects. Since the energy strategy was published in 2021, my Department has taken forward several initiatives focused on providing financial assistance for energy efficiency and small-scale renewables. Over the past four years, an energy invest-to-save fund has operated in the government estate and has supported over £73 million worth of energy projects, delivering cost savings across eight Departments, including Health, Infrastructure and Education. Savings are currently valued at over £8 million annually. That includes revenue generation. It has been incredibly important at a time when all Departments face financial constraints.

In May 2024, Invest NI launched the energy and resource efficiency programme, which helps businesses to install energy-efficient equipment, including renewable technologies, whilst supporting resource efficiency and offering technical support for businesses to go green. The programme has supported the wider business community to make savings at a time when operating costs are challenging.

I now turn to households. My Department has worked with the Utility Regulator to provide £3·5 million in additional funding to the NI sustainable energy programme (NISEP), over the past two years. The funding has helped support insulation measures in 1,500 low-income households.

Our Programme for Government commits us to decarbonisation and economic development through renewables. While challenges remain, we are taking positive steps through the renewable electricity support scheme, energy and resource efficiency and infrastructure investment. Ongoing collaboration across the Executive is also essential to ensure a sustainable, secure and affordable energy future. We must continue to work together across government, industry and communities to seize the opportunities of the green energy transition. I look forward to further engagement with Members on those crucial issues.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Thank you, Minister. I call on Kellie Armstrong to make a winding-up speech on amendment No 2. Kellie, you have three minutes.

Ms K Armstrong: Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. Because I only have three minutes, I will speak really fast, and I will not take interventions. I start by saying that, when King Charles confirmed his Government and gave a commitment to clean energy transition, I did not see him salivating. I thought that that may be worthwhile for Mr Gaston to consider.

I rise to support the Alliance amendment, which calls for urgent action to accelerate the delivery of the North/South interconnector, because, without it, all of this is just words.

Northern Ireland stands at a crossroads. Our energy security, economic growth and environmental responsibilities demand that we take bold action to expand our renewable energy capacity, yet outdated planning policies remain a major obstacle to progress. Without reform, we risk stalling investment, missing our climate targets and failing to provide affordable clean energy for households across the region.

I am on the Committee for Communities, and, my goodness, fuel poverty is causing so much harm across our society. At present, the planning system is not fit for purpose for renewables. The strategic planning policy statement (SPPS) for Northern Ireland and Planning Policy Statement 18 on renewable energy are outdated and do not reflect the scale of ambition that is required in order to meet our legally binding Climate Change Act (Northern Ireland) 2022 commitments. If we are to achieve at least 80% renewable electricity by 2030, we must streamline planning proposals for wind, solar and emerging technologies such as battery storage and green hydrogen. We must also update the standards for what we are building, because there is no point in our Minister for Communities having a housing strategy if it pumps out houses that still rely on oil and gas.

Our neighbours across these islands are moving forward. The Irish Government have launched new offshore wind auctions under their renewable energy support scheme, while Scotland is rapidly expanding its offshore wind sector. Northern Ireland cannot afford to be left behind, and that is why I welcome the call in the motion for the introduction of a new renewable energy support scheme: one that will unlock investment, drive innovation and ensure that communities benefit from locally generated clean power. Would it not be great if we could see the SONI able to connect Drumlin Wind Energy Co-op and so on across Northern Ireland so that local communities might be involved?

A critical element is the North/South interconnector. It is vital infrastructure that will increase grid capacity, reduce consumer bills and enhance our energy security by allowing greater flows of renewable electricity across the island. Delays to that project are no longer acceptable. I fully support cross-border cooperation to accelerate its delivery and to ensure that our electricity market functions efficiently for all.

I reiterate the call for the Minister for the Economy to work along with other Ministers, in particular the Minister for Infrastructure, to reform planning policy in a way that balances environmental protections with the urgent need for energy transition. I ask all Members to support the Alliance amendment, because, without the interconnector, everything else is just words on a page.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Thank you, Kellie. You were spot on. Deborah, please make a winding-up speech on amendment No 1. You have up to three minutes.

Mrs Erskine: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. To ensure that green energy transition does not create shocks in our system, it is important that we have such a debate in the Chamber. Our amendment pinpoints where we need to do better in order to have a true just transition. We have included in it the need for Departments to work with the Infrastructure Minister.

I will focus briefly on the impact that our inefficient and ineffective planning policy has had. It has been mentioned a number of times already, but I will add some figures. It is no surprise that our planning policy creates a delay to further decarbonisation of the network, which my colleague Mr Middleton mentioned. The scale of the problem is huge and was laid bare in various pieces of written evidence to the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee inquiry. The RenewableNI report indicated that, on average, it took 1,136 days for onshore wind projects to gain planning permission in Northern Ireland between 2020 and 2023. That compares with 217 days in England and 413 days in the Republic of Ireland.

In its written evidence, SSE warned:

A stark reality is also painted in KPMG's 'Accelerating Renewables in Northern Ireland' report, which surveyed developers. Some 82% of them said that Northern Ireland was currently not an attractive place in which to invest and that that was because of the lack of planning support that they felt that they received.

That leads me on to a matter that was raised earlier. I will use the example of Encirc, which is a business in my constituency. I have met Encirc representatives a number of times, as well as along with my party leader. It wants to continue to move to a greener form of manufacturing by investing in cleaner energy such as biomethane, which is now three times more expensive than natural gas. That would lead to increased costs for our businesses, which, ultimately, would be placed on customers, given that that company makes bottles for a range of companies and household names. A pricing policy framework needs to be introduced so that businesses in Northern Ireland do not become uncompetitive. Whilst that company welcomes the Department's recent call for evidence on biomethane, it wants to see that policy area progress.

I commend our amendment to the House.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Patsy, you have up to five minutes to wind.

Mr McGlone: Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. I will start by saying, "Thank you" to everyone who contributed to the debate. It has been a very valuable debate that flagged up a number of issues. I will pick up on them as I go through my speech. My colleague Sinéad mentioned how we are really falling behind the pace of development and delivery in neighbouring jurisdictions. She said that climate targets are at risk, there is an increased dependence on fossil fuels, planning policies are outdated and there is need for increased commitment. She also said that we are scaling down our use of renewables instead of increasing and incentivising them. She also mentioned investors going elsewhere, the need for long-term support to stabilise the cost of offshore wind and the expansion of solar supplies. She also talked about bureaucracy and outdated policies.

I will add that the Department's policies and practices are not just confined to renewables. Many other areas, whether they be local development plans or other major issues, are called into the Department, where they seem to get engaged in interminable delays. That is creating major problems not just for renewables development but for developments elsewhere. A major project is required in the Department that is based solely on that. The planning system has been proven to be slower than it was a decade ago. We had the review of public administration (RPA), which was supposed to suggest at least some improvement to the efficiency of our local authorities, including in planning. It seems that that has got sucked back into the bad old ways of how it was in the former Department.

Gary Middleton referred to a "just" and "affordable" transition. While there has been a lot of debate in the Assembly on what a just transition is, with a focus on how it applies to agriculture, it should be said that just transition applies to every single walk of life and every single Department. Therefore, I remind Members that, when they talk about just transition, that applies not just to the Department for Infrastructure or DAERA but to every single Department that your colleagues are sitting at. You are at the helm, including in Finance and other bodies, so it is up to you to lobby your colleagues to make sure that a just transition is not only financed but implemented to allow a transition in the future that is smooth for the farming community, businesses and people with disabilities or transportation difficulties. Just remember that, Members. KPMG was referred to, and Gary Middleton talked about the lack of growth and halting growth in the green sector.

I welcome the Alliance Party amendment, even though David Honeyford had a wee touch at us. My good comrade Mark here has given you a sufficient rebuttal. That is maybe food for thought for your party colleagues.

Mr Durkan: I thank the Member for giving way. I just went down a bit of a rabbit hole. Does the Member share my shock, horror and surprise at discovering that Alliance councillors in Mid and East Antrim Borough Council voiced concern about and opposed a wind farm a couple of years ago?

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

Mr McGlone: What do I say? Oh deary, deary me. Tut-tut.

To get back to the serious matter, I welcome the Alliance amendment.

Mr Honeyford: Will the Member give way?

Mr McGlone: Sorry, I am running out of time, David. I welcome the fact that your amendment mentions taking an all-island approach to the matter. Yes, that is very important, especially when the rest of our island is way ahead of us because of, again, efficient and good government. The Department needs to get its act together. We accept that. You referred to companies that are about to draw a line through Northern Ireland and move their investment to the rest of the island and to Scotland, and you said that planning is a major issue.

Emma Sheerin welcomed the motion and the need for the Programme for Government to make investments. Diana Armstrong referred to just transition. I get your point about support for smaller projects, because their cumulative benefit is very important. Those projects should be nurtured because, as we know in Northern Ireland, the small business sector is crucial to us all. Andrew McMurray referred to the issue with the planning system and the time that it takes to process major planning applications. That goes back to DAERA. Timothy referred to RHI and broken promises, but I have to take a wee bit of a deep breath and say this: we had a storm recently, we have had serious rainfall and the polar ice cap is melting. We all have a collective responsibility to do what we can to prevent such things.

The Minister referred to a number of issues, including meeting targets and cross-government collaboration. When it comes to just transition, it is about not just talking the talk but making sure that every Department works up its policies to ensure that we justly transition to a new future. We are looking ahead to how things might be in 50 —

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Thank you, Patsy.

Mr McGlone: — or 100 years' time and the future for our young people.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Before I put the Question on amendment No 1, I remind Members that, if it is made, I will not put the Question on amendment No 2.

Some Members: Aye.

Mr Gaston: No.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Thank you, Mr Gaston, for your contribution. The Ayes have it. Mr Gaston, your contribution has been noted.