Official Report: Tuesday 25 March 2025

Mrs Dillon: Cuirim fáilte roimh an fhógra gur ghlac an Coiste Feidhmiúcháin an cinneadh stairiúil le coimisinéir Gaeilge agus coimisinéir Ultaise a cheapadh. Gabhaim buíochas le pobal na Gaeilge as a gcuid oibre le blianta fada leis an Ghaeilge a chur chun cinn.

I am grateful to the small group of volunteers in Coalisland who fundraised for and founded Gaelscoil Uí Néill. I thank them for the opportunity that they gave my child, and hundreds of other children, to be educated through the medium of Irish. Gaelscoil Uí Néill is a thriving bilingual nursery and primary school that serves all the families in Coalisland and the surrounding area who want their children to be taught through the medium of Irish.

Tá an t-ádh orainn go bhfuil pobal Gaeilge faoi bhláth ar fud mo thoghcheantair, Lár Uladh. Tá a fhios agam gur céim cheart é coimisinéir teanga a cheapadh lena chinntiú go gcuirfear an teanga chun cinn mar is ceart agus go dtabharfar an tacaíocht cheart di.

Mid Ulster District Council introduced an Irish language street-sign policy when I was a councillor over 10 years ago. It is lovely to see many residents across my district of Mid Ulster embracing the bilingual signage, which illustrates an important part of the culture of all of us. Whether our background is Irish Scots, Gaeilge or whatever, it is really important and tells us something about the place from where we came.

I welcome the Education Minister's confirmation that work on the new build for Gaelscoil Úi Néill will begin in the coming months. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire, Paul Givan, as a chuairt ar an scoil le pleananna na scoile nua a fheiceáil agus le blaiseadh a fháil ar a fháiltí atá na daoine óga agus foireann Ghaelscoil Uí Néill.

Mr Kingston: I pay tribute to the pupils and staff of Springfield Primary School in west Belfast. The school made a positive impression on all who attended the Northern Ireland match at Windsor Park on Friday evening, when the team achieved a credible 1-1 draw against Switzerland. A group of 50 pupils and staff from Springfield Primary School were special guests of the Irish Football Association at the match. Sitting at the front of the south stand, they sang for the entire game, and, at half-time, they treated the green and white army to a selection of new songs dedicated to some of our new players, including the three Charleses and Isaac Price, who scored from an excellent free kick routine on the evening. With the turnover of players, and an excellent group of young players now established, many squad members who had songs dedicated to them have retired from international football, so we certainly need to pick up some new songs.

It was no accident that the Springfield Primary School pupils were so clear in their group singing of the songs because the school enters the Belfast Musical Festival of Music, Speech and Drama as well as the Belfast choir festival every year, and it enjoyed great success at both festivals again this year. The school was, therefore, a great choice for that role, and there were a lot of positive comments on social media after the match about how well the pupils did in their singing.

The Education Minister, Paul Givan, enjoyed a performance of the their choral speaking when he visited the school two weeks ago to officially open a new safe drop-off and pick-up area away from the Springfield Road, which has greatly improved pupil and driver safety. The school is making good use of the restored running track at Paisley Park. Pupils are able to walk up the new Forth Meadow Community Greenway to Paisley Park for weekly running sessions, and the school has enjoyed success in cross-country running competitions in Belfast.

On behalf of the green and white army, I again thank the pupils of Springfield Primary School, the staff and the principal, Mr Steven Osborne, for their enthusiastic support on Friday evening and, of course, express our best wishes to Michael O'Neill and the team in their friendly match against Sweden this evening.

Dr Aiken: First, I will make a declaration of interest as chair of the all-party groups on STEM and aerospace.

Last Friday, I had the enjoyable opportunity to attend the Northern Ireland schools rocketry final at RLC Aerospace's historic site at Langford Lodge on the shores of Lough Neagh. The more than 90 schoolchildren who took part had an exacting — I mean exacting — task. They had to build a rocket that would fly to 790 feet, plus or minus a few feet, and then separate, at which point its payload of two eggs — they were not hard-boiled — had to come down by parachute to be safely recovered. The schools and young persons' groups had to weigh, measure, work out the centre of gravity and do the design calculations themselves. Also, the schoolchildren had to build and design the rockets and bring them to the launch site.

The launches themselves were spectacular, even when a few missions, to use SpaceX's terminology, had rapid unscheduled disassembly, but all the children had successful runs. The practical STEM lessons were there in abundance, with girls' and boys' teams using mathematical principles, computer-aided design and manufacturing and engineering techniques to make useable rockets. Being surrounded by those enthusiastic scientists and engineers was a testament not only to their skills but to the leadership and dedication of their teachers and group leaders. I particularly want to thank RLC, which hosted the event; Thales UK, which provided some of the prizes; Airbus UK; and Queen's University. I pay special thanks to ADS, which helped with the administration of the great event.

Finally, well done to all who took part: Friends' School Lisburn, the Air Cadets, and the winners, Slemish College in Ballymena. Slemish's team of rocketeers now go to the UK finals at Farnborough. It the team wins there, it will represent all United Kingdom schools at the Paris Air Show. To paraphrase a certain Mr Armstrong, that was one small step for Slemish but a giant step for STEM.

Mr Robinson: I pay tribute to well-respected and popular flute bands in my constituency that, this year, celebrate significant milestones in their long history. Ballyquin flute band was formed in 1925 and, this year, will celebrate its 100th anniversary. I want to applaud the bandmaster, Mr David McKeegan, who, along with the band members, has been leading a year-long programme of events that is well under way. They have been holding cultural nights and concerts with high-quality line-ups. Later in the year, they will run a marathon, involve themselves in fundraising, among many other ventures, and put on a 100th-anniversary parade in Limavady that will see the streets of that town packed and the finest marching bands travelling from across the Province to show their support for a unique blood-and-thunder flute band that is one of Northern Ireland's finest.

This year, Edenmore flute band will celebrate its 135th year on the road. It is the oldest band in the Limavady district. As a former member, I have a close affinity with the band; indeed, it is a pleasure to walk behind the band during key celebrations during the year as a member of Edenmore "No Surrender" Apprentice Boys. Ten years ago, when I was mayor of Limavady Borough Council, I ensured that the band visited the council chamber, where it was the first fully uniformed flute band, with its standard, to visit Limavady's council chamber and mayor's parlour. The band has an illustrious history, having travelled throughout the Province and participated in events in Scotland.

Being in a marching band is like having a second family; indeed, that can be said of both of those distinguished flute bands. Friendships become bonds for life. Lifelong friendships have developed in Edenmore and Ballyquin; indeed, relationships have blossomed into lifelong marriages outside the band environment. Generations of local families have stepped out in the proud colours of both bands. I have no doubt that many generations will continue to do so, with members not only from the rural areas of the Roe valley but from far beyond the areas where they were born.

Both bands are solely about expressing their proud identities and celebrating their heritage. I want to tell both bands how incredibly proud I am that they continue to promote, partake in and celebrate our treasured culture. On this anniversary year and ahead of the marching season, I encourage them both to continue to wear their uniforms and fly their colours with immense pride. From the seat of government in the Province, I hope that they both have a thoroughly enjoyable year.

Ms Brownlee: I congratulate Skye-Leigh Haighton from Evolution Boxing Club in Carrickfergus for her tremendous achievement at being named junior sportsperson of the year at the Mid and East Antrim Borough Council sports awards. That recognition is a true testament to Skye-Leigh's unwavering commitment, extraordinary talent and, of course, inspiring journey into the world of boxing.

From a young age, Skye-Leigh has shown dedication to her sport, overcoming challenges and pushing herself to achieve greatness in the ring. Her success is evident in her impressive list of accomplishments from becoming the national senior cadet champion to her international appearances, including a standout performance at the Golden Girl Championship in Sweden.

Beyond the titles and victories, what truly sets Skye-Leigh apart is her role as a trailblazer for young female athletes. She has proven that, with determination, hard work and self-belief, barriers can, of course, be broken. Skye-Leigh's achievements are not just her own; they have inspired so many young women and shown them that they too can excel in sports that were once seen as male-dominated. As a former boxer — many years and, unfortunately, many stone ago — I can truly say that there is nothing as scary as walking into a boxing ring knowing that you are about to be punched in the face. It is a sport that requires immense patience, dedication, sacrifice and grit. Skye-Leigh, her family, her club and, of course, Carrickfergus should be very proud of what she has achieved so far. I have no doubt that she will achieve much more.

Ms Hunter: I rise acknowledging that many of us are not in politics for very long, so it is important to use our platform to speak up on what is right. I wish to use my platform to endorse the importance of Irish neutrality.

On St Patrick's Day, many people across our island revelled in joy and celebrated our shared history and culture. Millions around the world celebrated together. If only for one day, even Ian Paisley Jnr was Irish. I joke, Mr Speaker, but it is important to reflect on and recognise the strength and power of our story North and South and our island, which has been through so much on its journey to reconciliation and peacebuilding. We are the nation of céad míle fáilte

that has overcome such violence and division to seek peace.

St Patrick's Day, 17 March, was also an important day to contemplate the beauty and importance of our Christian faith and ideals, including non-violence and tolerance. Fast-forward to today, and we live in an uncertain world and in a period of accelerated and increased militarisation across the globe. It is important, now more than ever, that the people on this island remain steadfast in their support for peace and diplomacy.

It is the tradition of neutrality that enables the Irish Defence Forces, many of whom I have spoken with, particularly in our border communities, actively to engage in peace support operations, conflict resolution and disarmament initiatives, reinforcing their reputation as a trusted actor and proponent of peace and stability on the international stage. Unfortunately, there are many who seek to undermine the policy of Irish neutrality, and any move to dilute or end Irish neutrality without seeking the expressed will of the people would be scandalous and truly unforgivable. Irish neutrality is deeply rooted in public opinion owing to our historical experience of violence.

As the world looks ever more uncertain, we should remember how Ireland's policy of neutrality has served its people and how our experience of violent conflict should compel us pursue peace and sovereignty, not militarism and polarising alliances. I urge all in the House who have an interest in maintaining Irish neutrality and in protecting the triple lock to use their voice to do so and work to preserve Ireland as a beacon of light for all those in the world who continue to experience war and other issues.

Ms Forsythe: The Mourne Mountains are one of the most spectacular attractions in Northern Ireland. They are our highest and most dramatic mountain range and are in an area of outstanding natural beauty (AONB), with peaks such as Slieve Donard, Commedagh, Binnian and many more. They are my home countryside in the heart of South Down, and it was devastating yesterday to see them on fire once again. That is the third time in just over a week.

At this time of year, the area is very dry, and, when a fire starts, it spreads incredibly fast and is difficult to contain and extinguish. The fires are often started deliberately or are the result of careless behaviour. That is completely unacceptable. They then spread like crazy, and we see from the foot of the mountains the smoke and the huge flames engulfing their sides. The destruction of nature, lands, habitats and the well-managed trails that we all love to walk in our mountains is devastating for us locals to see.

We are so grateful for the amazing response of the Northern Ireland Fire and Rescue Service (NIFRS). During yesterday's fires on Slieve Binnian, it reported having six fire appliances from Newcastle, Kilkeel, Warrenpoint and Rathfriland at the scene, with the command centre from Lisburn down in Newcastle. On Friday, fighting the wildfire up at the Silent Valley, again, six fire appliances and 49 firefighters from Kilkeel, Warrenpoint, Newcastle, Rathfriland and Newry contained it. I record my sincere thanks to members of the Fire and Rescue Service for putting their lives at risk to keep others safe. I am so grateful that there were no reports of deaths or injuries to the public.

In 2021, we saw gorse fires on a horrific scale in the Mournes that destroyed nearly 300 hectares of land. The images are ingrained in our minds, and, years later, the area has not fully recovered. I never want to see that again.

I say to anyone out and about who spots fires, please ring 999 immediately, as the fires spread rapidly. If you are out in the countryside, please exercise fire safety. Please extinguish cigarettes, barbecues and other flammable materials properly. Please avoid lighting open fires. Please do not leave glass or bottles behind, and please be considerate when parking, because vehicles that are parked improperly impede our emergency vehicles' access. Please stay safe and respect the countryside, especially our beautiful Mourne Mountains and surrounding nature, which is a huge asset to Northern Ireland, our environment and our tourism industry.

Mr Gaston: Yesterday in the House, I asked the Minister for Infrastructure for an assurance that she would commit to undertaking a consultation and equality screening exercise before taking any decision on the installation of Irish language signs at Belfast Grand Central station. Far from providing the assurance that I sought, the Minister informed the Assembly that she had:

The Minister clearly had no thought of the need for consultation or an equality screening. She has chosen to impose her will without so much as consulting her Executive colleagues, it would appear. Therefore, this morning I have lodged a petition in the Business Office to refer Minister Kimmins's decision to the Executive for a cross-community vote. Every Member of the Chamber who believes that Minister Kimmins's divisive decision should be opposed will add their name to that petition accordingly.

The power to stop the Minister's plans to weaponise Irish in the signage at Belfast Grand Central station and on all Translink ticket vending machines lies in the hands of MLAs. I note that the DUP infrastructure spokesman has questioned the cost and has challenged Sinn Féin on its misguided priorities. There is now an opportunity for her and her party to do something about it other than to simply issue a statement. The only question is this: will the DUP and Ulster Unionist Members demand equality for our community, or will they roll over to Sinn Féin? I trust that unionism will take a stand on the issue and will sign the petition to stop the solo run by the Infrastructure Minister.

Mr Mathison: I raise again the issue of the lack of services for patients with facial palsy in Northern Ireland. I am privileged to sponsor an event today in the Long Gallery that has been organised by patient advocate, Janet Robb, and the charity Facial Palsy UK. The event forms part of an awareness-raising campaign by the charity to shine a light on the struggles of patients with facial palsy who are desperately trying to access appropriate healthcare.

In 2019, the then Health and Social Care Board (HSCB) made commitments to facial palsy patients that it would develop a pathway in Northern Ireland for treatment and that, crucially, while we waited for it, an in-reach service from GB would be put in place. Six years later, in 2025, the pathway remains under development and no in-reach service has been established, despite my understanding that funding was made available for it.

It is unacceptable that facial palsy patients, who need interventions across a range of clinical disciplines, are left on waiting lists indefinitely. They are often then seen by a clinician who does not have the relevant expertise to treat them. Some progress has been made, and I welcome the investment in signposting on nidirect for those patients, the awareness-raising work that has been done with GPs and the work of a small team in the Health Department to map out a pathway. However, anyone living with facial palsy in Northern Ireland needs help now; they cannot be asked to wait any longer. That is why I support the call that will be made at the event today for what are, initially, small, modest asks: access to specialist facial therapy treatments and access to psychological support, which can be vital for those patients. They are very small stepping stones to a better, properly mapped service in Northern Ireland.

I welcome the fact that the Health Minister plans to speak at the event today, but I urge him not just to make a speech and leave. I urge him to take the time to engage with the patients who will be there today and to listen to their stories about their journey in trying to access healthcare so that he can understand the impact of not getting the right treatment and how that affects their lives every day.

I encourage all Members to attend the event today. This morning, there will be an opportunity to meet local patients and clinicians who want to be part of the solution. From 1.00 pm, there will be formal contributions to set out the group's asks. Those patients have waited years to see even very small progress. I hope that Members from across all parties will engage with them and get behind their campaign for better services.

Mr Speaker: Mr Buckley will be the last person to speak, as nobody else has stood up to speak. If anyone else wishes to speak, please stand.

Mr Buckley: I suspect that every Member has experienced the grief of losing a loved one. They may have experienced holding the hand of a parent, child or friend in their dying moments. They will have had the painful task of arranging a funeral.

I suspect — I know — that there are Members in the House who have had the painful experience of losing a loved one through sudden death or have had a member of their family taken from them due to an accident or a murder. Nobody in the Chamber, however, has experienced a loved one being disappeared — abducted, murdered and placed in a secret grave somewhere on these islands — with no information, no court case and no justice. That is the experience of many families in Northern Ireland: the families of the disappeared. Their loved ones were abducted, murdered and secretly buried by republicans during Northern Ireland's Troubles. Extensive searches have been carried out for their remains, but four remain missing. Remains have been found in bogs, on beaches and on mountains. Every so often, we hear of another dig. It can pass us by in the blink of an eye as we think of the family that is nervously waiting for information about their loved one's passing. Cruelly, those families are still being denied the justice of a Christian burial.

In recent times, there have been many accounts of the experiences of the disappeared. In some instances, those cases have been dramatised through TV series and documentaries. Disney's 'Say Nothing' recounted Joe Lynskey's disappearance. At the end of each episode, it is audaciously declared that Gerry Adams denies that he was ever in the IRA. Does anybody in the Chamber believe that? He trots around the world stage, while families sit in corners in grief as they try to find their loved ones. There are people within the membership of Sinn Féin who know the whereabouts of the bodies. I encourage them go to the Independent Commission for the Location of Victims' Remains and give the families the respect —

Mr Speaker: The Member's time is up.

Mr Buckley: — of having a dignified Christian burial.

Mr Speaker: Members should take their ease for a moment.

Mr Speaker: I have received notice from the Infrastructure Minister, Liz Kimmins, that she wishes to make a statement. Before we move to the statement, I note that it was received at 10.31 am. Ministerial statements are supposed to be received 30 minutes before the debate. Members' statements ran slightly shorter than usual, however, and I am sure that Members will not object if we proceed with this item of business a couple of minutes early. Some might object, but we will do it anyway.

Ms Kimmins: Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle

for the opportunity to address the Assembly. My statement is on my decision to start the process of engaging forensic accounting services to investigate why NI Water has been unable to live within its resource budget allocation this year.

Members are fully aware of the budgetary challenges that my Department faces following years of underfunding by the British Government. In the current financial year, my predecessor was required to take difficult decisions in order to balance the budget while maintaining the range of essential services that are delivered by my Department. Those essential services include maintaining our road network, providing public transport and delivering essential water and waste water services. Opening capital and resource budgets were provided to fund those essential services, which included allocations to the Department's arm's-length bodies (ALBs). It was recognised that, in all cases, those allocations fell short of the need that had been identified and meant that further difficult decisions and prioritisation by the ALBs would be required.

NI Water was allocated an opening resource budget of some £137 million, which represented almost one quarter of the total resource allocation available to my Department. Recognising the importance of water and waste water services, bids were submitted for additional funding for NI Water as part of the in-year monitoring process. An additional £11·5 million of resource was secured for NI Water in-year. In addition, £2·9 million was provided to deal with the aftermath of storm Éowyn, bringing the current allocation to just over £152 million.

Following the October 2024 monitoring round, it was made clear to NI Water that it was required to live within the increased resource allocation, as it was unlikely that any further funding would become available. Unfortunately, in recent weeks, NI Water's board has indicated in writing that it is minded to instruct NI Water to overspend unless additional budget is made available. It is estimated that any potential overspend could be in the region of £3 million, although the exact quantum of that remains subject to cost variations between now and the year-end close.

Protecting public funds is of the utmost importance, particularly in light of the wider pressures that are being faced not only by my Department but across all areas of our public services. Difficult decisions are having to be made across all Departments and arm's-length bodies; therefore, it is essential that I fully understand the budgetary management decisions that NI Water has taken this year, which have led to NI Water's board proposing this unprecedented and disappointing course of action.

I was, therefore, faced with a number of options, given the serious nature of the board's intention to instruct NI Water to incur a potential budget overspend and, in particular, the wider implications for other key essential services that my Department funds. I have considered those options carefully, and my decision to appoint a forensic accountant is a necessary step that takes a measured approach to help us to work in partnership with NI Water and to enable better planning going forward in these times of constrained budgets.

I wish to reassure Members that I am taking the possibility of an overspend very seriously, while adopting a pragmatic approach to understanding how we have ended up in this situation so close to the financial year-end. I hope that any learning from this investigation will be useful for both parties and will help to prevent such an occurrence in future years.

In line with my decision to proceed, I have instructed my officials to put in place the necessary steps to urgently appoint suitably qualified forensic accountants to progress this investigation as quickly and thoroughly as possible. Members will appreciate that, because this will be a live investigation, I do not propose to comment further until such times as the investigation is complete.

In closing, I very much hope that my decision will help us to move forward together in partnership. These are difficult times for us all, and we must ensure that we do the best that we can with the resources that are available.

Mr Durkan: I thank the Minister for her statement. Despite the initial, sizeable allocation to Northern Ireland Water and monitoring round increments to that, the total that it has received still falls short of the amount that was identified in the price control. Minister, are you able to clarify whether the forensic accountants' remit will extend beyond this year's internal financial management to include any assessment of the structural adequacy of Northern Ireland Water's funding model? Furthermore, if systemic issues are identified, will you commit to taking action?

Ms Kimmins: Without going into the detail of the investigation at this stage, I hope that, ideally, it will help us to see exactly what position NI Water is in from a budgetary perspective. This is an opportunity for us to cross-reference the information that has been provided to us so that we can agree a proactive way forward. The Member and others have asked questions in the Chamber about my confidence in the figures that we have been provided with to date. This investigation should be seen as a pragmatic approach that will affect how we move forward with funding. As I said before, however, the funding model that is in place is the best one, but we have to look at how that money is being managed internally by NI Water and whether it is being used in the most effective and efficient way to allow it to deliver what we need it to do.

Mrs Erskine (The Chairperson of the Committee for Infrastructure): I thank the Minister for her statement and for the opportunity to have a pre-brief. It is interesting that she has taken this decision in the dying days of this financial year. Northern Ireland Water's overspend is nothing new, and I would have thought it prudent to take this action before now. What outputs is the Minister hoping to achieve, and does this decision undermine the Utility Regulator's determination, which was made through the price control process?

Ms Kimmins: We have had frequent engagement with NI Water throughout the year. We have engaged with NI Water regularly since I came into post. We gave it as many opportunities as possible to ensure that it did everything that it could to live within its budget. That was made clear not only by me but by my permanent secretary, officials and my predecessor, John O'Dowd. This is not the first year in which it has happened. I hope that the fact that it has happened close to the end of the financial year indicates how hard everyone has been working to get us to a point where we did not have to take those steps. However, in the past number of days, NI Water indicated that it is still looking at an overspend of close to £3 million. It is therefore incumbent on me to make a decision.

For me, the investigation is not about undermining the work of the Utility Regulator. It is an opportunity to look as thoroughly as possible at the issue and at where there are any gaps or things that could be done internally. If there are not, it will strengthen the case for additional funding, and I can bring that to Executive colleagues at a later stage, but it is very important that we do the investigation at this stage.

Mrs Mason: I thank the Minister for her statement. Does the Minister have confidence in the NI Water board?

Ms Kimmins: It is not an issue of having confidence in the board. It is hugely disappointing to me that, despite ongoing engagement with the chair on the need to live within budget, the NI Water board decided not to take action to do so. I hope that everyone recognises that my decision to appoint a forensic accountant is a necessary step that takes a measured approach. A number of options were available to me, and that is the best way forward: it will help us to work in partnership with NI Water and, going forward, to plan better in a time of constrained budgets.

Mr McMurray: Thank you, Minister. Do you intend to make the findings of the investigation public?

Ms Kimmins: Yes. I hope that I will be able to provide feedback to the Committee and the Assembly. At the end of the day, that is one of the key reasons why I took the decision. I am very mindful that I am accountable to the Assembly and that we need to be sure that public funding is spent in the right way. I am happy to provide an update once the investigation concludes.

Mr Stewart: Here we have the latest problems arising from a sticking-plaster solution to funding Northern Ireland Water. Minister, what are the potential health and safety consequences should the overspend not be granted? Will the overspend in any way impact on how Westminster acts to claw back up to half a billion pounds' worth of funding?

Ms Kimmins: As I said, the challenge is the fact that there are significant challenges across my Department on many competing priorities, and Members will be fully aware of that. My predecessor was required to take difficult decisions to balance the overall departmental budget while maintaining the essential services that the Department delivers. Opening capital and resource budgets were provided to fund essential services, including allocations to NI Water and other ALBs. It was recognised that, in all cases, those fell short of what had been identified as being needed and that further difficult decisions needed to be taken.

For the Department to provide additional funding to regularise NI Water's budget, I will have to take and redirect money from other essential services. There is a consequence of every action related to this, and I have been mindful of that. That also led me to make the decision, because we cannot continue to operate on such a trajectory. We need to find a way forward so that NI Water and any other ALBs do not find themselves in a position where they are frequently required to overspend on their budget.

Ms Finnegan: I thank the Minister for her statement. When did the Minister become aware of the potential overspend?

Ms Kimmins: As I said earlier, the Department has worked throughout the year with NI Water on its budget allocation. The chair of NI Water wrote to me on 11 March to advise that, in the event of no further resource funding being made available or the overspend not being regularised, the board of NI Water had determined that the appropriate course of action was to issue a directive to the chief executive to overspend by something in the region of £5 million. As I said, it is hugely disappointing that, despite ongoing engagement with the chair on the need to live within budget, the board decided not to take action to do so. We have had numerous engagements on the issue. The overall amount has reduced in recent days, but, unfortunately, given the fact that we are so close to the end of the financial year, I was required to take these steps.

Mr Dunne: I thank the Minister for her statement. What is the expected timescale for completion of the forensic accountants' work? What will be the next steps once you have reviewed their findings?

Ms Kimmins: I thank the Member for his question. In making my decision, when I was considering the steps, the time that the process would take was really important. I want the work to be done not only as thoroughly but as effectively and efficiently as possible. We hope that it will be concluded in about six weeks, with it starting in the next week or so. We are trying to do a short and sharp investigation, but we hope that it will be as thorough as possible. The next steps will depend on the outcome of the investigation. I intend to update Members, particularly those on the Committee, on that.

Mr McReynolds: Minister, yesterday, you told my colleague that the funding model for Northern Ireland Water had been looked at time and again. In a recent response at the Committee, the permanent secretary told me that the reports on the funding model are publicly available, but, in this week's Committee pack, you have confirmed that they are internal documents, and you have provided hyperlinks to Research and Information Service (RaISe) papers from 2014 and 2020. Is your statement not further evidence that the funding model is not working? Will you commit to publishing those internal documents?

Ms Kimmins: The issue was raised at Committee, and, as it was my first appearance, we were not clear what was and was not made public. At that stage, it was my assumption that the documents were public, but we gave a commitment to go back and provide the information, which we have done. The reports that have been provided are in the public domain. That tells me that the others are not, for whatever reason. We can get information about why that is the case and provide it to the Member.

Mr McAleer: I thank the Minister for her statement. Minister, is this the first time that NI Water has indicated a potential overspend?

Ms Kimmins: No. I understand that, in December 2023, when the Assembly was down, and in the absence of local Ministers, NI Water highlighted a potential overspend of over £30 million in its capital budget. NI Water resolved that at the time by slowing down elements of its capital spend to ensure that it remained within budget. In recent years, NI Water's resource pressures have been reduced in-year or addressed through in-year allocations, meaning that it has lived within budget.

Mr Buckley: To appoint forensic accountants to such a significant arm's-length body as NI Water is a serious step, Minister. When did you communicate to NI Water your intention to do so? Without getting into detail on specifics, is the Minister or her Department aware of any potentially fraudulent activity that might have caused the overspend?

Ms Kimmins: NI Water received a letter early this morning, as we were working on the matter right up until late last night. I hope that that indicates how seriously I have been taking the issue and the consideration that has been given to taking these steps. We have had frequent engagement with NI Water throughout the process. As part of that, I have offered to meet NI Water's board to discuss the next steps. I hope that we can do that in the near future.

Members have raised a number of questions on a possible fraud investigation, and responses have been provided. I cannot comment on the detail of the investigation, as we will not know that until we do the investigation. It would not be fair to make any further comment at this point.

Dr Aiken: I thank the Minister for her remarks. Minister, you will be well aware of the Water and Sewerage Services (Northern Ireland) Order 2006 and the consolidated licence of 25 November 2024. As Minister, you have the ultimate legal responsibility for Northern Ireland Water because of its rather strange set-up as a form of Go-co. If you look at Northern Ireland Water's board minutes, you will see that it has been making complaints about potential overspends for a considerable time. If the overspend is for a health and safety issue, where does your legal responsibility lie? If the requirement to overspend is based on a health and safety issue, why are you bringing in forensic accountants rather than finding the money to address it?

Ms Kimmins: Health and safety is paramount in every case. I have said clearly that we have been working with the board. However, if my Department overspends, there is a consequence. We all have difficult work to do to ensure that we live within our budgets.

I do not underestimate the challenges that any ALB has in living within its budget. The point of the investigation is to ensure that everything that is being managed within the budget is done in the most effective and efficient way. A number of factors have led to the overspend, and I have been working with NI Water to identify those and find where savings can be made.

The issue is that the overall Executive Budget is not enough — the Member is fully aware of that — and the allocations that I have received are not enough, so we have to dot our i's and cross our t's to ensure that every penny goes where it needs to go. This is a really good opportunity for NI Water to outline its position clearly so that we can stand over that when allocations are made and say that NI Water cannot continue to reduce.

I hope that the Member is reassured that health and safety is paramount to me and that we are doing these things because we want to ensure that everything is done as effectively and efficiently as possible.

Miss Hargey: I welcome the statement. For how long has NI Water been made aware of the need to live within its budget?

Ms Kimmins: As I said, it has been an ongoing issue, and we have said it on numerous occasions through my engagement, my officials' engagement, my permanent secretary's engagement and my predecessor's engagement with it. It has been an ongoing matter for discussion. Whilst the overspend has significantly reduced through the year, we are, unfortunately, still in this position. It is important that I recognise the seriousness of this and that we take steps to ensure that it does not happen again.

Mr K Buchanan: I thank the Minister for her statement. Minister, have the terms of reference been agreed, and is there a team or individual in your Department responsible for overseeing this?

Ms Kimmins: That is still being finalised. We hope that the investigation will commence in approximately a week, so we are in the finalisation stage. Departmental officials expect to engage on a very regular basis — weekly — with NI Water, and we have made it aware of that. That, hopefully, shows our commitment to concluding the investigation as soon as possible and as thoroughly as possible. The forensic accountant will be completely external to the Department. I hope that they can look at it from a different perspective that will give us a clearer view of the inner workings of how budgets are managed and where we can make changes to resolve the issues.

Ms K Armstrong: Minister, if this were private business, somebody would lose their job. We all know that, as you said, you do not get enough money to fund Northern Ireland Water in the way that it wants. Public-sector budgetary rules constrain Northern Ireland Water's ability to access and utilise funding beyond that provided by the Department. Will you confirm to the House that, at long last, we will have an evaluation of the current model, so that we not have to, as the Audit Office report says, have increasing numbers of people living in homelessness in Northern Ireland, with the barrier to housebuilding being caused by Northern Ireland Water?

Ms Kimmins: We are doing a range of work to address those issues. The Member has outlined in particular the delivery of housing. She will be aware that, last Friday, I launched the developers' contributions consultation. This is another step in our work on numerous issues to address the overall funding issue.

NI Water is classified as a non-departmental public body (NDPB). It receives

50% of its revenue from government subsidy, and borrowing is provided through my Department. Reclassifying NI Water as, for example, a mutualised company would require the removal of NI Water from central government oversight and the introduction of a guaranteed and predictable funding stream that is not subject to direct political control or competing public-sector priorities. Additionally, NI Water would be required to secure debt financing through the private bond market, potentially resulting in huge risks due to the scale of borrowing and servicing of that debt. Evidence from water and sewerage companies operating under mutual and privatised business models in England and Wales has clearly demonstrated that significant operational pressures persist in many of those companies, particularly with sewerage infrastructure, in addition to serious concerns about debt management and the cost of servicing debt.

As the Member will know, I am opposed to the introduction of domestic water charging, as it would impose additional financial burden on people and families in the midst of a cost-of-living crisis.

As I have said, I am continuing with the three-pronged approach that is already in place. Today's announcement will, hopefully, strengthen the work that I am doing with Executive colleagues on future allocations and complement the other work that is happening around the waste water and sustainable drainage Bill and developer contributions.

There is a recognition across the House that we have to do everything in our power to try to resolve the issue. There is a real willingness on my part to do so, but the one thing that I will not commit to do is to put an additional financial burden on domestic customers.

Ms Forsythe: Minister, every month in the Finance Committee, we hear the reported out-turns and the direction towards reaching a balanced budget for this year. As Minister for Infrastructure, it is your responsibility to get us there. The indications were that we were on track for that. For the board of NI Water to instruct NI Water to overspend against budget completely undermines your position as Minister. Have you lost control of your Department and its associated bodies?

Ms Kimmins: My decision today indicates that I have not lost control of my Department. Every ALB is having difficulties, but a number of them that are linked with my Department have lived within their budget and have had to make very difficult decisions in order to do so. As I said earlier, this is my approach to try to tackle that issue, to understand very clearly why NI Water is in this position and, if we can do more, where we can do more, both within the allocated budget and as we move forward as an Executive.

Mr Blair: A critical Audit Office report, waste water issues associated with the Lough Neagh crisis, regular fish kills and other examples of pollution are stark reminders of improvements urgently required in water quality. Can the Minister give us any reassurance that the planned processes outlined in her statement will put water quality front and centre of any new or proposed budget restructures?

Ms Kimmins: That is exactly why we are doing this. I am acutely aware of how important the issue is. Water quality is key. We have to do more to ensure that the money that has been allocated is spent in the right way and that we are using it in the most efficient way to deliver the services that the Member outlined.

Mr Kingston: It is incumbent on all Ministers and MLAs to demonstrate financial prudence and accountability. In her statement, the Minister talked about the additional £11·5 million resource secured in-year for NI Water, yet, in the October monitoring round, I understand that the total for NI Water was £31 million, which included £19·5 million for capital. I seek clarity from the Minister on this: what is the total annual budget for NI Water, whether counted as resource, capital or "other"?

Ms Kimmins: At present, the total budget is £500 million, so just £0·5 billion.

Mr Crawford: Minister, what is the anticipated cost of the forensic investigation?

Ms Kimmins: At this stage, I do not have the estimated cost, but I can come back to the Member when that is available.

Mr Gaston: Minister, the problems with NI Water are long-standing and the investigation is long overdue. Will the scope of the investigation consider how much subcontractors are charging for works, which is well above what it would cost for those works to be carried out internally by NI Water staff? If not, the investigation needs to include that in its terms of reference.

Ms Kimmins: I take on board the Member's comments.

Ms Sheerin: Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire.

Minister, do we have a timeline for when we can expect to see the outcome of the investigation?

Ms Kimmins: The investigation is restricted for six weeks. I hope that we will receive the report shortly after that to ensure that we can move on and deal with the outcome of it as quickly as possible.

Mr Speaker: I do not think that there are any further Members wanting to ask a question. No. Thank you very much. That matter is concluded.

Ms Kimmins (The Minister for Infrastructure): On a point of order, Mr Speaker. During Members' statements, Timothy Gaston raised an issue in relation to my announcement yesterday on Irish language signage for Grand Central station and indicated that an equality screening had not been completed. I want to rectify that. An equality screening had been completed, and the findings were that the signage would have a minor positive impact, which did not require me to move to an equality impact assessment.

Mr Speaker: The Member has made her point of order.

Mr O'Dowd (The Minister of Finance): I beg to introduce the Deaths, Still-Births and Baby Loss Bill [NIA 13/22-27], which is a Bill to amend the law relating to the manner of notification of deaths, still-births and births and the manner of giving particulars relating to them; and to make provision for the issue of certificates recognising the loss of a baby.

Mrs Mason (The Deputy Chairperson of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Assembly Members (Remuneration Board) Bill): I beg to move

Mr Speaker: The Business Committee has agreed that there will be no time limit on the debate.

Mrs Mason: The motion seeks Members' support to extend the Committee Stage of the Assembly Members (Remuneration Board) Bill until 16 May 2025.

As Members are aware, the Ad Hoc Committee was established on 17 February to undertake the Bill's Committee Stage and to report to the Assembly by 1 April 2025. While the Committee has made good progress on its scrutiny of the Bill to date, a short extension is necessary to complete the work and to prepare our report on the Bill. Although it is a short and mostly technical Bill, its provisions are of considerable public interest, given that the Bill deals with matters relating to Members' salaries, pensions and allowances. The Committee has been cognisant of the importance of our work demonstrating to Members and the wider public that we have carried out our scrutiny in a robust, thorough and impartial manner.

Since our first meeting, the Committee has been briefed by Assembly staff from the Research and Information Service (RaISe), the Bill Office and Legal Services to support the Committee's understanding of the Bill's provisions. The Committee has also considered written and oral evidence from the Assembly Commission, as well as evidence from remuneration bodies from other legislatures. In addition, the Committee has considered the views of 74 respondents to our call for evidence. At the time that the motion was tabled, the call for evidence was still open, and we wanted to ensure that, in the event of a large number of responses arriving between the deadline for tabling the motion and the closing date of the call for evidence, the Committee would still have sufficient time to consider fully all responses before the end of Committee Stage. As the call for evidence closed on 19 March and only a small number of late responses were received, I assure the House that we will work to complete the Bill's Committee Stage well within the time frame proposed in the motion.

As we reach the important, final stages of our scrutiny of the Bill, the Committee wants to take some time to form a view based on the evidence that we have received. We also want to consider potential amendments to the Bill and explore options with the Assembly Commission. The outcome of our deliberations will be communicated to the House in the Committee's report, which will be published at the end of the Committee Stage.

I therefore ask the House to support the extension to allow the Committee a limited additional period to finalise our scrutiny of the Bill and to ensure that it has been completed in a rigorous and thorough manner.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: No other Members have indicated that they wish to speak.

Mr Buckley: I beg to move

Madam Principal Deputy 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. All other Members will have five minutes. Please open the debate on the motion, Jonathan.

Mr Buckley: Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.

Today, I move a motion that, I trust, will set Northern Ireland on the path to becoming a global leader in green hydrogen technology, a path that harnesses the potential of hydrogen to transform our energy landscape and create high-quality, sustainable jobs in the industries of the future. Hydrogen has long been hailed as the key to decarbonising our transport sector and improving our energy security, yet, for us to realise that potential, we must take proactive steps to create the right conditions to foster innovation and growth in this critical sector. That is why the Democratic Unionist Party believes that it is essential that we adopt a dedicated hydrogen innovation strategy for Northern Ireland. That strategy must capitalise on our unique advantages and build on the expertise already present in our region.

Northern Ireland is on the cusp of an energy revolution. Our geographical advantages, particularly our abundant renewable electricity from onshore wind, place us in a position to be a global leader in the production of green hydrogen. Onshore wind already provides more than 80% of our renewable energy capacity. However, we need to take the next steps to develop hydrogen production and storage facilities and distribution infrastructure to ensure that we are not left behind in the global race for green hydrogen.

We must do so by working in collaboration with the private sector, academia and government locally and at UK level. Our strategy must consider several key pillars, and I am pleased to share those today. The first is the establishment of a hydrogen unit in the Department for the Economy. That would serve as the focal point for driving forward the hydrogen sector, working closely with industry leaders and academia to ensure that we provide and develop the right technology and infrastructure to support large-scale hydrogen production. Moreover, it would play an important role in monitoring progress and facilitating coordination across various sectors.

Secondly, we must create clear targets in our Programme for Government (PFG) to integrate hydrogen into public-sector energy use. By setting targets to embed hydrogen into public-sector projects, we can provide the necessary momentum to stimulate demand and investment in that space. Thirdly, we must continue our discussions with the UK Government to access funding streams and incentives that would support innovation in our hydrogen sector, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in Northern Ireland. The British Hydrogen Innovation Initiative (HII), as well as UK-wide schemes, such as the Clean Power 2030 action plan and Great British Energy, must include clear provisions to support local businesses in their bid to drive forward hydrogen technologies.

Fourthly, we must assess the necessary gas infrastructure to support hydrogen blending, which is already happening in areas such as Dungannon. Injecting hydrogen into the existing gasworks would allow us to begin integrating hydrogen into our energy mix without the need for a complete overhaul of existing infrastructure.

Mrs Erskine: I thank the Member for giving way. I thank him for mentioning Dungannon: that work has assisted consumers because it has helped with the price of energy in that area, as well as the local businesses that feed into that development.

Mr Buckley: I thank the Member for her intervention. She is absolutely right. I visited the site with her alongside other Members, and it was clear to see the enthusiasm for that revolutionary style of blending, which is happening on our doorstep at Granville. It is a first on the island and will ensure that we harness that potential.

There is much more work to be done not only by the Department for the Economy but by the Department for Infrastructure to ensure that they realise and capitalise on the huge potential of hydrogen for consumers and businesses alike, but they face real challenges in accessing the planning structure in live time. We also have a point to celebrate in Northern Ireland because we have the unique advantage over our counterparts on these islands of having a young, modern gas infrastructure of which they should certainly be envious.

Fifthly, we must make significant progress on developing large-scale hydrogen storage capacity to ensure that there is a consistent and reliable supply of hydrogen throughout the year. With hydrogen storage, we can address the intermittency of renewable energy generation — for example, wind energy — and ensure that we maximise the potential of and for our renewable energy assets.

Sixthly, we must work to ensure that Northern Ireland's energy systems are hydrogen-ready. That involves ensuring that all new gas-fuelled appliances, including boilers and hybrid systems, are designed and installed with the capacity to use hydrogen as a fuel source.

Of course, those pillars of the hydrogen innovation strategy are meaningful only if we have the appropriate partnerships and skilled workforce to support them. That has come up time and time again at the Committee, at which we focus on providing our young people with the appropriate skills for the careers of the future. Northern Ireland already has a vibrant skills base, and the demand for green energy jobs is growing rapidly. However, we need to ensure that our workforce is equipped with the right skills at the right time to take advantage of the opportunities arising from the hydrogen sector. That includes introducing hydrogen-specific apprenticeships and training programmes to allow young people to gain the skills required for high-quality jobs in the sector.

As we move forward, we can take inspiration from the example set by local companies, such as Wrightbus in Ballymena. Last month, Wrightbus unveiled its upgraded hydrogen-powered second generation Streetdeck Hydroliner bus — that is quite a mouthful, but it is quite a feat of engineering — which represents a significant leap forward in green transport technology. The new model is more fuel-efficient, has a greater range and costs less than its predecessor, which was the world's first hydrogen double-decker bus. Wrightbus's innovative approach and commitment to zero-emission public transport vehicles demonstrates what is possible when we embrace new technologies and work collaboratively across sectors. The company is already the fastest-growing bus manufacturer in Europe and expects to create up to 1,000 jobs in its supply chain as production increases. That success story is just one example of how the hydrogen economy can transform our local economy and create high-paying, high-quality jobs.

While I believe in the immense potential of hydrogen, I am cautious about the broader promises of the net zero agenda, which can often overlook the complex challenges that we face and the costly bill that it can place on working-class communities. It is essential, therefore, that we proceed with caution and ensure that we have reliable, long-term alternatives to fossil fuels before we phase them out completely. We cannot afford to abandon fossil fuels prematurely; we do not yet have reliable, long-term and scalable alternatives in place. It is only when we have ensured the success of hydrogen and other clean energy technologies that we can begin to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels in a sustainable and responsible manner. That is why we must continue to drive innovation, secure the right infrastructure and ensure that Northern Ireland has a seat at the table when funding options and policies are discussed at UK level. It is only through that concerted effort that we can secure a future in which Northern Ireland is recognised not only as a regional leader but as a global hub for green hydrogen technology.

In conclusion, I encourage all Members to engage in the proactive discussion that the Northern Ireland economy is engaging in on green hydrogen. I hope that the Minister and her Department can get behind the initiative to ensure that we realise its true potential.

Ms Sheerin: I support the motion and thank those who tabled it. This is an incredibly timely discussion. It is a very important thing for us to make progress on in this place, and we know that the Department has recognised the importance of green energy. A just transition for those investing in green energy is one of the Department's priorities and, indeed, is a priority for the entire Executive, as set out in the Programme for Government.

Never has the need for this been seen more starkly than in recent months, with the arrival of storm Éowyn, one of many recent storms that have wreaked havoc across the country and provided evidence that, with global warming, the need for reducing our reliance on fossil fuels is becoming more and more pertinent. Every winter that we experience tells us that in a real and stark way.

I welcome the motion and hope to see support for it across the House. We want to see investment in the new, innovative strategies, and we want to see newer ways and fresh ways of doing things and capturing the energy that we have. We know that the technology is growing at a rate beyond the comprehension of any of us, and, when you start to read into it, you see that it is an incredibly complicated industry. It requires that support if we are to get away from fossil fuels.

Mr Honeyford: I also support the motion. From the start, we should get one thing clear: the success that we are having in this area is despite the Assembly and not because of decisions that have been made in this mandate or by any previous Minister. That fact is a disgrace. Businesses have been left to get on with it when the Assembly has been collapsed for much of the time, unable to create the conditions in which business can thrive, grow and invest. Unfortunately, when the Assembly has been working, we still have not seen anything close to enough movement to enable and create better conditions for business to thrive.

It also has to be acknowledged from the start that our economy remains a million miles away from that of the South and that of the wider UK. Nonetheless, our business leaders and companies, large and small, should be massively congratulated for the leadership that they have shown to date and for the jobs that they have created. They have simply got on with it, making the best of what can be done within the current framework. It is slightly disappointing that the author — Jonny went into it a little bit — focused on one market and the hydrogen hub in the UK, rather than casting our ambitions and our vision far and wide and looking at being world leaders on this rather than just in one market. As I said yesterday, if there is any chance that we can get past the basic identity politics and work for better conditions for everyone here, that would be welcomed.

Mr Buckley: I thank the Member for giving way. In case there is an attempt to misrepresent, I clarify that my argument was that, to enable us to benefit from green hydrogen, we must tap in to the funding streams that are available, therefore through UK Government funding. Beyond that, the world is our oyster. I am for being a global leader. I mentioned that in my statement, and I am glad that the Member is on board.

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

Mr Honeyford: Cheers. Thank you.

Thanks for clarifying that. The unfortunate bit is that, as we talk about innovation and, effectively, advanced manufacturing, the basic denial from the DUP — it remains in complete denial — about the advantage of dual market access is still stark. Hydrogen and advanced manufacturing are exactly the kinds of industries where we can take advantage of having access to both the UK and the EU markets. The innovation is also for us to help ourselves, but it should be an export. That is where our advantage is, and we should seize it. Our focus should be on taking advantage while this region has a window of opportunity for export to the UK, to Ireland and to Europe. We have an advantage over everyone for the betterment of everyone here.

We need to use that to rebalance our economy across the island and between these islands, creating the conditions that will grow local business, attract investment, create jobs and build wealth. That should be the focus.

When economic figures were released just a few weeks ago, they, yet again, showed a poor economic growth pattern for Northern Ireland. At best, it could be described as resilient, given that the rest of the UK is contracting, but business activity in Northern Ireland is declining, and that is really worrying. We need to focus on trying to move that forward and pushing that dial. Hydrogen, green technologies and advanced manufacturing would be a great place to start focusing outwards to bring investment and growth here. We have all the talent in the world: we have an entrepreneurial base, a highly skilled workforce and, importantly, market access. However, it seems that we focus on ourselves rather than focusing outwards to seize the opportunities and potential.

When we, unfortunately, left the EU, we lost three fundamental freedoms. The only advantage that we have left lies with products. Therefore, we need to manufacture more products to realise that benefit and to export and achieve growth. The motion talks about the need for a strategy for hydrogen and innovation, but we do not seem to have a strategy or vision for export more widely. Neither do we have an advanced manufacturing strategy that would help to grow the region's economy and give us products to export. Alliance has called for that continually, and I will continue to push it.

I have said many times in the Chamber that it is our job to create the platform for others to flourish and the conditions for our economy to grow. My question to the Minister is this: will she move on the issue and bring forward an outward vision for our economy that specifically targets green technologies, innovation and the manufacturing base, increases our exports and helps to develop and advance manufacturing, of which hydrogen is a part, to take advantage of UK and EU market access? We need such a vision to grow our economy; create opportunities; provide highly skilled jobs in our constituencies; and increase the wage base for Northern Ireland so that everybody from every background — from working class to middle class to everybody else — sees an increase in wages that will, ultimately, bring growth to our economy.

Ms D Armstrong: I thank my Economy Committee colleagues for tabling this meaningful motion. Hydrogen energy is an opportunity to transform our energy consumption, pave the way for a low-carbon future and position Northern Ireland at the front of the green economy. Local firms are already working towards Northern Ireland's path to net zero energy action plan, with the aims of low-carbon and affordable energy in mind. Hydrogen is a clean fuel, so it is imperative that we ensure that Northern Ireland is not left behind in hydrogen investment. It provides a gateway not just to our environmental goals but to supporting highly skilled jobs and sustainable economic growth. In Northern Ireland, we can witness that innovation at first hand. We can take pride in companies such as Wrightbus, which was mentioned by Jonathan Buckley. Wrightbus has pioneered the first hydrogen bus, which, as it is adopted further across the world, will, due to zero emissions, improve air quality and offer a case study in how we can better utilise hydrogen not just in our transport networks but in industries across the economy.

In my Fermanagh and South Tyrone constituency, Mannok — a building products firm — has set out an ambitious 2030 sustainability strategy that aims to reduce emissions and make its business more sustainable. Its green hydrogen project targets a 7·4% reduction in emissions, and it foresees that its hydrogen strategy will help to decarbonise 50% of its fleet by 2030. Hydrogen, when used effectively, has the potential to revolutionise our transportation system. It moves away from fossil fuels and unlocks the possibilities for a cleaner, carbon-free transport network. On that point — it was alluded to by David — the former US envoy to Northern Ireland Joe Kennedy took particular interest in the green technologies and hydrogen development that were happening, particularly in the work of Mannok, when he was in Fermanagh. To help to boost that work in our local firms, a dedicated hydrogen innovation strategy would help to develop a new industry; offer hydrogen-specific apprenticeships, leading to skilled jobs; grow export opportunities; cut emissions in transport; and leverage renewable energy potential to sustain our energy security.

There are, no doubt, challenges that we must be aware of. If not managed well, hydrogen energy could be costly. It will require significant investment in infrastructure and more consistent government support. It is essential that the Department for the Economy engage with UK counterparts to ensure that we get the necessary investment to build on this fast-moving green technology. Most importantly, any investment must have the skills base to support it, because, without the necessary foundations in skills, we will miss the opportunity. Therefore, any strategy must encompass a pipeline of apprenticeships to support skills and sustainable jobs in the hydrogen sector.

Northern Ireland can continue to drive such innovation and become a global leader in hydrogen development, but it is essential that funding schemes and incentives for businesses, including SMEs, back up the advances that are already being achieved.

Ms McLaughlin: I thank the Members opposite for tabling the motion. Like many others in the House, I am committed to making the case for green technology for the future. It is critical that we continue to explore how Northern Ireland can best avail itself of the opportunities afforded by the green energy transition. If harnessed properly, the opportunities ahead will help to contribute to economic growth, energy security and climate action. One of those opportunities may indeed lie in green hydrogen technology.

As the motion recognises, it is an area in which Northern Ireland is fast becoming an innovator. My Economy Committee colleagues have mentioned the Mannok cement plant in Fermanagh and Wrightbus in Ballymena, both of which received grants from the UK Government's net zero hydrogen fund. Hopefully, those larger companies can act as a catalyst for local SMEs to become part of the hydrogen supply chain. The ability to develop new technologies and ways of harnessing our ability to adapt to the green transition is possible only if we invest properly. We should take note of the British Government's decision to design a hydrogen storage infrastructure business model by 2025, which is aimed at de-risking private investment in infrastructure projects. Perhaps that is also an opportunity that we can seize.

Green hydrogen production, unlike that of grey or blue hydrogen, does not produce carbon emissions when it is burned. That makes it a viable alternative to fossil fuels, particularly for HGVs and industrial processes. We know, however, that green hydrogen is only one part of the energy transition. Significant challenges remain in the efficiency of green hydrogen. Our progress towards net zero will be charted with a range of renewable sources, each playing their own role. Whilst I agree that we must explore all options that allow us to decarbonise quicker, any hydrogen innovation strategy that is produced must be based on evidence that it works, and any plan must ensure that investment is appropriately targeted and makes proper use of public money.

The green transition offers us an abundance of opportunities. We can drive down energy costs, upskill our workforce and create a more sustainable society for all. I urge the Minister for the Economy to recognise the unique role that we in the north-west can play. Not only does the north-west have the ability to produce an abundance of energy that will assist in the production of hydrogen, but the continued expansion of Magee to at least 10,000 students can help to supply the industry with the skilled workforce that it needs. Those are opportunities for the future, and the north-west must help lead the way.

Ms K Armstrong: Thank you to the DUP for tabling the motion. Hydrogen development in Northern Ireland is emerging as a pivotal element of the region's transition to a low-carbon economy. Such development utilises Northern Ireland's substantial renewable energy capacity, which is predominantly wind, and innovative applications of electrolysis to convert surplus curtailed energy into green hydrogen. That stored hydrogen can later be used to decarbonise transport, heat and industrial processes.

While many Economy Committee members have talked today about the opportunities for export, I would like to bring the issue back to the internal market. Today, in Northern Ireland, we have a Housing Executive supply that is largely dependent on oil. When we talk about blending — I agree that we need to be taking forward hydrogen as a blend with gas — we need to look at what the capacity could be in Northern Ireland to create a different mechanism and a different heating system that will benefit our people. We can certainly sell off our surpluses, but we need to consider how much our people are spending on fuel to heat their homes. Fuel poverty levels in Northern Ireland are appalling, and hydrogen is one of those mechanisms that we could use to help people.

Mr Buckley: I thank the Member for giving way. It is an interesting example that she raises about our domestic ratepayers and, indeed, homeowners. Does the Member agree that there is also a huge opportunity for local businesses to tap into some of that production and that there is a real opportunity, in the forthcoming Bill about the regulator, to look at enabling local businesses that are already on the modern gas network to avail themselves of green hydrogen?

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

Ms K Armstrong: Thank you. Hopefully, I will not need it. I agree with the Member. This has the potential to reduce our dependence on volatile fossil fuel markets for homeowners and businesses. Lower carbon emissions and creating high-skilled jobs — what is not to love? The Alliance Party produced a green new deal paper in April 2021 calling for exactly this. We wanted Northern Ireland to be a world leader in emerging hydrogen technologies, promoting innovative projects that produce hydrogen gas and alternative blends and researching how it could play a part in meeting the challenges with energy storage, home heating and transport, which are two of the largest carbon emitters.

That new deal outlined a vision for a cleaner and more resilient economy, with hydrogen playing a key role. By harnessing our open coastlines and investing in the hydrogen skills base, we can establish Northern Ireland as a hub for low-carbon advanced manufacturing with the UK. As my colleague said, we need to consider our place in the world market. We have the perfect place where we can tap into the European market and the United Kingdom market. We also have the opportunity to attract funding from both.

To drive all this forward, as others have said, we need to have the workforce and we need to prioritise skills development, including dedicated hydrogen apprenticeships. To realise that potential, we need a dedicated hydrogen innovation strategy for Northern Ireland that sets out clear objectives for production, storage and use across sectors such as transport and heavy industry. I ask the Minister for the Economy to develop and consult on that strategy as a matter of urgency. I also ask that, if the Minister is taking forward a consultation on this, she consider that our Education Authority has one of the largest fleets of buses in Northern Ireland. Why is it not on hydrogen already? Our health service pays a fortune for its energy consumption in hospitals. Why can we not move those sectors into hydrogen use as well?

I am interested in the potential for harnessing energy from our waters. My constituency of Strangford has the longest coastline. For anyone who has listened to me — I can bore all day on it — I am passionate about renewable energy and the untapped potential of our local waters. I visited the Queen's University Centre for Advanced Sustainable Energy in Strangford. It has been working on tidal energy, wind turbines and the types of wind turbines that can capture as much energy as possible. Our coastlines have the potential to support our energy requirements as part of a mix, but we are failing to grasp the opportunities that are on the doorsteps of most of our constituencies. We have to engage all the opportunities to actively replace our dependence on fossil fuels.

Hydrogen development in Northern Ireland is a multifaceted strategy that combines the efficient use of renewable energy, technological innovation in electrolysis and storage and forward-looking policy reforms. That integrated approach is essential for reducing reliance on fossil fuels, enhancing energy security and driving economic growth through the creation of new green jobs and sustainable infrastructure.

Dr Aiken: I thank the DUP for tabling the motion. The Ulster Unionist Party will support it.

One of the most interesting things about green hydrogen and the move towards green hydrogen is that it shows a definite transition towards net zero. However, one of the issues that we will face in Northern Ireland is that, in fact, we are not being ambitious enough. One of the main challenges, which I have been talking to the industry about, is that it is being done very much in a piecemeal process. However, I understand that some people in industry are quite happy with not having the dead hand of the Department for the Economy on them, because that means that they can be much more innovative.

We should be looking at how we get the maximum leverage from GB Energy and the National Wealth Fund. More than £8·3 billion is available for investments in renewables, and a sizeable proportion of that is to be ring-fenced for green hydrogen. So far, the only people who seem to be availing themselves of that are in some local governments in the north-west of England.

One issue that has been put to me by members of industry is that, if we were to go ahead and look towards making Northern Ireland the centre for green hydrogen that it should be, we would not have a sufficient market for the green hydrogen that we would produce. However, there is an opportunity. The Minister will be aware, as will be Members who, like me, believe strongly in the protection of the environment, that the Irish Sea should become a zero-emission zone for shipping. One way to do that, as we have seen from the Baltic Sea and parts of the Mediterranean, is to encourage new shipping to be powered by green hydrogen.

Belfast, Larne, Dublin and various other ports are major areas where we could incentivise the shipping industry to shift to being powered by green hydrogen — green hydrogen that is being prepared and produced in Northern Ireland. That answers the question of the North/South dimension, which Mr Honeyford is happy about. More importantly, it also answers the all-islands dimension, which is where most of us should be sitting and looking at how we develop and grow.

Minister, there is opportunity now because there are, I believe, conversations ongoing between the UK Minister and GB Energy, which is looking for large-scale projects. I encourage the Minister and her Department to reach out to the UK Minister and say that we in Northern Ireland are looking to grow that industry at scale. The Minister made clear that she was interested in seeing developments in offshore wind. To attach offshore wind to a deliverable system — to turn it into green hydrogen — would need a significant market. If we do the maths, we can see that Northern Ireland could have a unique opportunity to do that.

What we need is a bit of ambition. The industry has the ambition; let us support it. Let us talk to companies such as Stena Line, P&O Ferries and Irish Ferries. Talk to them about the opportunities when replacing the ships on their routes when the time comes — they are replaced fairly regularly — and moving to green hydrogen. That would create a huge market for green hydrogen that we could be producing and pushing out as well.

This is a great opportunity. It is a good motion. You are not going to get me to say that it is a great motion, but it is a good motion, and we will support it. It is something, Minister, that we should all be getting behind, and you can then talk to Mr Miliband and make it clear to him that Northern Ireland wants its portion of that £8·3 billion fund. What is more, we have something that can deliver for everybody across these islands.

Mr Gaston: I am very aware of where the future growth opportunities are for the Northern Ireland economy. In particular, Ballymena should be designated as the hydrogen hub for Northern Ireland. I say that for two reasons. First, long before hydrogen was identified as the answer to fuelling large vehicles, Wrightbus, in Ballymena, had a team of engineers developing a prototype hydrogen bus. Wrightbus has always been ahead of the curve when it comes to hydrogen technology. The company is known as a global leader in the development of the next generation of clean tech buses in design and manufacture. Since Jo Bamford acquired the company a number of years ago, it has continued to build on the foundations laid by the late Sir William Wright CBE. Mr Bamford has brought further expertise in hydrogen to the business, leaving it well positioned to continue to lead the design and development of hydrogen vehicles on a global scale. Wrightbus employs 2,000 people directly on its Galgorm site, with another 1,500 employed locally throughout its supply chain. The business has plans to continue to scale up its workforce as demand for its buses increases.

The second reason that Ballymena should be made a hydrogen hub is because of the work that the local council has already undertaken. Mid and East Antrim Borough Council has prioritised supporting the development of the hydrogen economy as part of its economic growth strategy. Through teaming up with local industry and academia, it has developed a number of hydrogen economy initiatives that support the sector's development. One such initiative is the hydrogen training academy. Delivered through partnering with further and higher education institutions, including Queen's University Belfast, Belfast Metropolitan College and the Northern Regional College, the training academy will offer courses from level 2 to level 7 across a range of hydrogen subject areas that focus on developing the skills that are required to maximise opportunities in the hydrogen and clean technology sectors.

Additionally, the council has been working on developing an innovation and clean tech centre called i4C as part of the Belfast region city deal. The integrated industrial inspiration and innovation campus will be a £24 million green energy hub that will include an innovation lab, allowing for an engineering team to be based there. It will create a well-equipped workshop that focuses on developing products, services, training and solutions for the clean tech sector across Northern Ireland, particularly the emerging hydrogen economy. In Ballymena, we have already established a partnership-working approach between industry and local government through the manufacturing task force.

Ms McLaughlin: Will the Member take an intervention?

Mr Gaston: Yes. Go ahead.

Ms McLaughlin: Will the Member explain why he could not support yesterday's motion on the green energy transition, or the DUP amendment, which supported a green transition for industry, yet, today, he is effervescent about Ballymena's being a hydrogen hub?

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

Mr Gaston: I thank the Member for her intervention. When we debated the motion yesterday, I explained why I was sceptical. Today, I recognise where the future economic opportunities lie for Northern Ireland, and I will certainly —.

Mr Buckley: I thank the Member for giving way. It is great to hear the Member's excitement about the motion. He has given two clear, compelling reasons for why he believes that Ballymena should be the hub for hydrogen. Perhaps I can suggest a third: is it the fact that the Member represents North Antrim, of which Ballymena is at the heart?

Mr Gaston: I could add that as a third reason, no problem. I am happy to champion my constituency and, indeed, will lobby hard to bring jobs to North Antrim. I am setting out how we have already set the scene for clean hydrogen production. We are not looking for the Executive to reinvent the wheel. The infrastructure between business and local government already exists in Ballymena. I am trying to encourage the Minister, the Executive and MLAs to buy into the idea, because we have been working on it for a number of years. I championed the issue passionately when I was a member of Mid and East Antrim Borough Council. Now that I have come to the Assembly, I will continue to champion it at every opportunity.

I will return to what I was saying on the motion before Sinéad took me off on a tangent. For our economy to take the next step towards having a green energy economy, significant Executive investment is required. After engaging with industry on hydrogen, it has asked me to convey a simple message to the Executive, which is that there is still a lot of interest in creating opportunities for clean hydrogen production. There is, however, no meaningful support from central government to help establish what is effectively a brand-new sector. There is therefore a critical need for a hydrogen strategy to help define the role that hydrogen will play in Northern Ireland. DFE should prioritise such a strategy. I encourage the Minister and her energy team to work closely with the sector to ensure that it can act as a real catalyst for investment.

I trust that the Minister is listening not only to what I have said about Ballymena but, more importantly, to what the industry has said and the message that it has asked me to convey. Northern Ireland has huge hydrogen potential. We already have an established link between business and local government in Ballymena. I trust that we can use that link to roll out clean hydrogen production to the rest of Northern Ireland in the future.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Timothy. The Minister for the Economy will respond to the debate. Minister, you have 15 minutes.

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

I welcome the motion. I thank the signatories to it for tabling it and for the opportunity to discuss the development of green hydrogen. The North is well placed to be a leader in that space. We have world-class renewable energy resources, a strong and innovative manufacturing sector and a skilled workforce.

Developing green hydrogen can reduce our dependence on fossil fuels, strengthen our energy security and support the decarbonisation of power, heat and transport. We have an abundance of wind on this island, and my Department is working towards maximising that potential both onshore and offshore. Indeed, there is an oversupply of renewable energy at times, as Jonathan mentioned in his opening remarks. There is intermittency, and wind energy can be wasted.

We can utilise that excess energy to produce hydrogen, which can be used by industry or stored for days when the wind does not blow and the sun does not shine. Therefore, green hydrogen must be viewed not in isolation but as part of a broader energy strategy. That is why my Department is working on a hydrogen policy that will identify and address the barriers in the production, transport, storage and use of hydrogen. We need an energy system that is affordable, secure and sustainable and that delivers for businesses, workers and households. That requires careful planning, ensuring that hydrogen is deployed where it adds the most value, rather than assuming that it is a one-size-fits-all solution.

We are already seeing significant collaboration on hydrogen projects, from research to infrastructure development. In a first for the island of Ireland, the Energia Group installed a 1 megawatt electrolyser that is co-located with wind turbines at Long Mountain in County Antrim to produce green hydrogen. The Advanced Manufacturing Innovation Centre (AMIC), which is a Queen's University-led consortium, is taking forward a project on hydrogen gas storage tanks. My Department provided £5 million capital to NI Water to spearhead an oxygen and hydrogen demonstrator project. That initiative is designed to showcase the benefits of using oxygen-enriched air in the treatment of waste water and in producing green hydrogen. Invest NI has also facilitated engagement with local businesses and the Hydrogen Innovation Initiative.

My Department has made significant progress on the development of the skills that are necessary for the energy transition. Working with the green skills delivery group, we are finalising a green skills action plan. That aims to ensure that the skills ecosystem effectively meets the evolving needs of the green sector, develops career pathways and promotes opportunities in the sector. Since September 2021, 14 courses supporting 400 individuals to upskill and reskill in areas that include hydrogen energy systems, hydrogen fuel cell technology, hydrogen safety and hydrogen applications have been provided. Delivery is through our six further education colleges, Queen's University and Ulster University, with qualifications ranging from level 2 up to master's degrees. The courses have been the first of their kind offered across these islands.

The motion refers to funding. There are already positive examples of local companies being successful. Mannok and Wrightbus have been successful in obtaining British Government funding through the net zero hydrogen fund, and I had the opportunity to visit Mannok recently to hear about its projects. Catagen has also been funded by the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) in London to help to develop a biohydrogen reactor. B9 Energy has been successful in obtaining £1·2 million in funding from the clean maritime demonstration competition to investigate the feasibility of a green shipping corridor between Larne and the north-west of England.

My Department continues to collaborate with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero in London on issues that include the hydrogen allocation round funding to ensure that such schemes meet the needs of local business. I assure Mr Aiken that we are engaging with officials in DESNZ and GB Energy on the projects.

Mr Buckley: I thank the Minister for giving way and, in particular, for talking about some of the local companies that are doing excellent work in the field. It is important, therefore, that we also look at some of the challenges that they have faced. I think particularly of the gas-blending example in Granville. Many businesses would love to be able to avail themselves of that blended gas on the new gas network, which goes right beside their businesses, but they are unable to do so. Will their utility bills and any subsequent legislation recognise that?

Dr Archibald: I thank the Member for his intervention. I am coming on to talk about the hydrogen policy that we will put out for consultation in the next number of weeks. That will give people an opportunity to feed in some of the barriers and challenges that are being faced and give us the potential to find solutions to those so that we can maximise the potential that we have in the hydrogen economy.

I support the ambition to develop our hydrogen economy. A strategic, evidence-based approach is required to integrate hydrogen into our broader energy system and ensure that the investment benefits our local businesses and communities.

Mr Honeyford mentioned a "vision" for the economy. It is clear that the potential of the hydrogen economy very much aligns with my vision for the economy and the four priorities of my Department, which are to create good jobs, improve productivity, decarbonise the economy and ensure regional balance. Companies across the North, particularly in Fermanagh and Dungannon, have already seized the opportunity.

Mr Honeyford: Thank you for giving way. My point is about the strategy. The South has a manufacturing strategy. The four pillars that you mentioned, including regional balance and achieving net zero, all feed into that. When you look at the South's manufacturing strategy, 85% of the jobs that it generates are naturally located outside Dublin. We are looking for that kind of strategy to give us focus and direction.

Dr Archibald: I thank the Member for his intervention. He will be aware of the seven priority high-productivity sectors in our local economy that we have developed action plans for, which include the sector that deals with low-carbon technologies and the advanced manufacturing sector. We are rolling out our economic vision across all those sectors.

Many of the Members who spoke in the debate talked about the opportunities. We are well placed to take advantage of those opportunities. We have some world-leading companies: Mr Gaston referred to one in Ballymena, but they are located across the North. In these islands, we are leaders in addressing the skills agenda on green hydrogen. My Department is developing a hydrogen policy that will be an important piece of the wider energy strategy and the transition to renewable energy.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: I call Gary Middleton to conclude the debate and make a winding-up speech on the motion. Gary, you have 10 minutes.

Mr Middleton: Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I thank all the Members who spoke for their contributions. The motion has produced a very positive debate, and I thank my colleague Mr Buckley for moving it.

There were quite a number of common themes in each of the contributions. Many Members, including me, want to celebrate the businesses in Northern Ireland that are already innovating and leading the way with hydrogen and are grasping the opportunities that exist from the move towards that type of technology and infrastructure. There was also a clear thread on the focus on skills, the need for apprenticeships and the need to ensure that we have the skills as we progress in the use of hydrogen across Northern Ireland.

A hydrogen strategy is vital to securing and developing Northern Ireland's place as an innovator in this field. We want to see the opportunities being grasped and progression across Northern Ireland to ensure that we have further growth, further job creation and the ability to deliver on a global scale. As has been mentioned by a number of Members, we have a unique ability to produce green hydrogen.

Yesterday, we had a positive debate in the Chamber about green growth. There was general consensus in that debate that green growth needs to be done in a way that is just and fair and protects consumers and businesses. My colleague Mr Buckley mentioned that onshore wind in Northern Ireland provides more than 80% of our renewable capacity. Of course, we need to exploit that further and make use of that energy when our demand is lower, but we also have the potential to become a global centre of excellence for the hydrogen economy. The foundation for that already exists through our local manufacturers of hydrogen-fuelled vehicles, such as Wrightbus, and those companies that produce hydrogen fuel and provide reliable storage facilities for it.

I will move on to summarise some of the contributions. My colleague Mr Buckley opened the debate by talking about the proactive steps that are required to grow the sector. The strategy should be built on what we already have. He spoke passionately about working in collaboration with the UK and the ROI and globally. He went on to outline a number of key pillars that, we believe, a strategy should consider and to highlight the benefits that that would have for consumers and give examples, including the work that is going on at Wrightbus.

Emma Sheerin talked about being supportive of the motion and of the need for investment in this growing sector. She spoke of storm Éowyn, the evidence of global warming and the need to move away from fossil fuels.

Mr Honeyford talked about success having come in spite of the Assembly's being here. I somewhat disagree with that: the Assembly has shown leadership on these issues, not least through my colleagues Minister Dodds and Minister Lyons, as they were at the time, and, indeed, the current Minister's work on the 10X Economy strategy and through partnerships at council level and at Westminster. Mr Honeyford went on to say that business leaders should be congratulated for creating jobs in the sector: I completely agree. He also talked about dual market access.

Diana Armstrong spoke about the importance of not being left behind when it comes to hydrogen. She spoke about what a company in her constituency — Mannok — is doing to utilise hydrogen effectively and about the interest that Joe Kennedy showed when he visited that company's premises.

Sinéad McLaughlin spoke of it being critical that we explore every opportunity for transition to green energy. She spoke of green hydrogen as being just one part of energy transition and of the need to look beyond it. She feels that there is a need for any hydrogen strategy that is produced to be evidence-based: something that we should all agree on.

Kellie Armstrong spoke about the domestic market in Northern Ireland, the capacity of different systems to heat our homes and the potential to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels. Kellie also touched on the prioritisation of skills and apprenticeships.

Dr Steve Aiken spoke about our not being ambitious enough and about the potential to tap into GB Energy and the National Wealth Fund, looking at the Irish Sea as a potential zero-emission zone for shipping. He urged the Minister to speak with her counterparts in the UK Government to try to progress those matters.

Timothy Gaston spoke about Ballymena being in a good place to be the hydrogen hub of Northern Ireland. I should have mentioned that my colleague Ms McLaughlin mentioned the north-west having a role in that as well. I think that we will all want to see our constituency seeing the benefits of hydrogen. Mr Gaston also spoke passionately about Wrightbus being ahead of the curve in Northern Ireland and about a lot of the work that is going on at local government level through Mid and East Antrim Borough Council, including the work that it does through the hydrogen training academy. Some exciting work is going on there.

Finally, the Minister spoke about work going on in the Department and Invest NI and about the need to develop further opportunities. She spoke positively about local businesses.

That is our motion. I think that the debate was positive. I hope that we can now get on and seize plans to further grow that exciting sector.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Gary.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Members should take their ease for a moment.

Mr Tennyson: I beg to move

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): 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. Two amendments have been selected and are published on the Marshalled List, so the Business Committee has agreed that 30 minutes will be added to the total time for the debate. Mr Tennyson, please open the debate on the motion.

Mr Tennyson: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Over the course of my lifetime, Northern Ireland has been on a journey towards becoming a more progressive, inclusive and united place. However, despite the enormous strides forward that we have taken together, young people today still grow up in a community where children are, largely, educated apart; 90% of social housing remains segregated; peace walls divide communities; and paramilitary organisations continue to exert a toxic influence. This is a society where, for too many, community background still dictates where you go to school, what street you live on, the football teams that you can support, the sports that you can play, the services that you access and what your political views should be. Not only is that anathema to the vision of the truly shared future that the people of Northern Ireland signed up to in 1998 but it comes at a huge financial cost.

A 2016 study by the Ulster University Economic Policy Centre (UUEPC) estimated that the cost of division could be up to £833 million a year. More recently, the Executive's Programme for Government placed the annual cost of paramilitary harm alone at £750 million. Those costs manifest themselves in a number of ways: the duplication of services, as seen in our education system and in community and leisure provision and elsewhere; increased policing and justice costs, including for our prisons; and opportunity costs in respect of foregone investment in tourism and other investments.

Whilst assessing those costs is difficult — allow me to be the first in the debate to acknowledge that addressing them is even harder — doing nothing is simply not an option. Rather than squandering hundreds of millions of pounds on division, we ought to be investing in our health service, in housing and in tackling the cost of living. Just imagine the difference that even some of that £800 million could make. It could, for example, fund the first year of the Department of Health's plan to tackle waiting lists or a year of PSNI recruitment. It could make a significant difference to our mental health strategy and Lough Neagh action plan, and it could enhance community-based funding to tackle violence against women and girls. Whilst that is not a comprehensive list of Alliance's ambitions for Northern Ireland and we recognise, of course, that generating savings from reducing division will not happen overnight, it still illustrates the transformational potential of tackling the cost of division and the incredible range of programmes and services that could be funded were we not spending money in that way.

Tolerating the cost of division is morally and economically indefensible at any time but is particularly scandalous at a time when Departments are under enormous financial strain, with departmental bids for the 2025-26 draft Budget far outweighing the funding available for allocation. That is why Alliance is calling on the Department of Finance to commission an independent assessment of the cost of division in 2025 in order to give us a more contemporary understanding of the challenges and bring the 2016 Ulster University report and the 2007 Deloitte study up to date.

That work is pertinent at a time when Professor Holtham has been tasked with assessing relative need and the unique factors that affect Northern Ireland, because, whilst many of the costs associated with division in our society can and should be addressed by Departments, others may be genuinely unavoidable, given our past, and require attention from Treasury.

We also need a mechanism by which to hold Departments to account. Too often, the hard graft of reconciliation and peacebuilding is ignored or, worse, actively frustrated by Ministers. A good example of that is the fact that the Department of Education faces a judicial review in respect of decisions that it took on integrated education. Including a requirement to have due regard to the cost of division within the statutory remit of the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council is one such way of holding Ministers to account on those issues. There will be a key opportunity to do so in this mandate when the Fiscal Council Bill comes before the Assembly. I have to say that it is disappointing that the previous Sinn Féin Finance Minister ruled out any such requirement. It is even more disappointing that the cost of division appears to have been absent from any conversation about public transformation and the Executive's Budget sustainability plan. I would welcome the Minister's views on any progress in that space in his response to the debate.

There is also a role for the Executive Office in developing a shared future framework, which the Assembly has already debated, through which every Executive policy should be viewed. That is why Alliance has continuously argued that peacebuilding should be a core pillar of the Programme for Government.

Of course, since the previous assessment of the cost of division in 2016, we have dealt with two collapses of the Executive and a global pandemic. I think that we would all recognise that progress on tackling some of the issues raised in that report has been slower than any of us would have liked. However, we have a crucial opportunity now, away from collapse and crisis, to move beyond simply managing division as an Executive and towards a future where we finally break down and overcome division once and for all. We have the opportunity to build a future where our children thrive from being educated together; where we fund services, not division; and where everyone, no matter their background, can reach their full potential.

I ask all Members to unite behind the motion and grasp the opportunity to start taking steps towards a more united community. I commend the motion to the Assembly.

Ms Forsythe: I beg to move amendment No 1:

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): You have 10 minutes in which to propose amendment No 1 and five minutes in which to make a winding-up speech. Please open the debate on amendment No 1.

Ms Forsythe: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I welcome the opportunity, in advance of tomorrow's statement, to discuss the pressures on our finances in Northern Ireland.

The DUP supports a shared future. We are committed to investing in and transforming our public services and ensuring that they are accessible by everyone in Northern Ireland. Moreover, we have a manifesto commitment to working together with the other parties to ensure that resources are not wasted, particularly in the current challenging financial climate. However, to infer that the costs of division are the main if not the only cause of higher public spending in Northern Ireland is not only wrong but a huge distraction from areas where tangible savings could be made in the short to medium term. Our amendment seeks to widen that point and add value.

The authors of the motion have put the annual cost of division at £833 million. That figure was pulled from the Ulster University 2016 report, yet what is not mentioned is the fact that even those who published the report accepted that the headline figure, which actually ranged between £400 million and £800 million, took account of a range of factors that led to the additional cost of delivering public services here compared with Great Britain, not just the cost of division. For example, compared with England, Northern Ireland spends 25% more on inpatient care and 33% more on long-stay patients: is that the product of division? The authors of the 2016 report also said that it would be wrong to suggest that the headline figure of £883 million represented achievable savings, so there is a need for honesty at the heart of the debate.

The Alliance Party has been keen to lament the cost of policing parades, bonfires or protests, notwithstanding the fact that only a few per cent of parades in Northern Ireland are deemed to be contentious. However, some of Alliance's policies would drive up those costs rather than remove them. For example, there have been calls for the PSNI to intervene routinely to prevent every act of expression in the public space that might be deemed to be offensive, despite the implications that that would have for public order and operational policing in other areas.

Furthermore, there is a central contradiction in the argument that Alliance has put forward today. On one hand, it says that it wants to see the additional money spent on police and justice in Northern Ireland diverted to other critical public services; on the other hand, it has rejected out of hand the prospect of a group transition process for the paramilitaries who are a key factor in creating those additional costs in the first place. Does the Justice Minister want to see less money going towards fighting terrorism and paramilitarism in Northern Ireland without a viable alternative to tackle the harm that those groups cause? The DUP does not consider additional spending on tackling terrorism and paramilitarism and providing danger money for officers and staff as expendable, yet the Alliance Party's motion frames that as a waste. How, exactly, does the Justice Minister propose to reduce additional policing and justice costs? Is it the case that all that the Alliance Party is offering is warm words and aspiration without a plan?

The motion focuses on the cost of division, but there is no reference to the causes or any mention of the communities affected, which stand to be detrimentally impacted if additional spending on policing and justice is stopped or local amenities deemed by Alliance to represent duplication are closed on a whim. Community engagement is central to applying a bottom-up approach to a shared and inclusive future. Without community buy-in, removing the causes and costs of division simply is not feasible. The DUP believes that we should focus on progress to date and on what we can do to build on the solid foundation that we already have, whether that be revamping the Urban Villages and Building Successful Communities schemes or continuing to invest in the Communities in Transition programme, helping many communities to move on from the presence of paramilitarism. In light of the motion, the Justice Minister needs to clarify whether she agrees.

Promoting economic development and equality of opportunity for all must be the driving force behind removing the costs of division. A Northern Ireland where our young people want to live, work and raise a family irrespective of their background — a truly shared future — will be one in which every community and person in Northern Ireland is better connected and better equipped to succeed.

Interestingly, the motion refers to using funding otherwise caught up in addressing division for "improving education provision". Previous debates and past actions by the motion's authors suggest that they wish only one sector of our education system, the integrated sector, to receive the dividends. That is a cause for more division, not a panacea for it. Notably, the independent review of education and previous studies in Scotland have highlighted the fact that the existence of separate school sectors does not necessarily lead to additional costs and that, where savings can be made, they should not be exaggerated.

Mrs Dodds: I thank the Member for giving way. She makes an important point about schools. In a briefing paper that I have seen, the controlled sector made the point that the 2016 report to which the Member who opened the debate referred addresses the cost of unoccupied places at schools but does not address the fact that schools are funded only for the pupils who are there. Some of the costs of division in the report are imaginary.

Ms Bradshaw: I thank the Member for giving way. There is a bit of duplicity in her positioning and in some of the things that she has said. First, she said that Alliance wants to have police intervention wherever there are paramilitary trappings in communities, for example, yet she has just said that families want to set themselves up and raise children in safe communities. Those two positions do not sit well together for us in the Alliance Party.

Ms Forsythe: I thank both Members for their intervention. Diane Dodds put on the record well the detail of the 2016 report and some of the issues around the citation of it.

Our amendment recognises that there are many inefficiencies across Departments and savings that could be achieved to relieve pressures on public services and increase the scale and pace of the reform and transformation agenda. That includes a range of things, including public procurement, through which, each year, 5,000 contracts are awarded, worth between £2 billion and £4 billion. That spending is recurring with no overarching strategy in place, and it needs to be managed better, with the Northern Ireland Audit Office (NIAO) and the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), on which I sit, questioning its cost-effectiveness. There are also capital projects with reported overspends of £2·5 billion between 2019 and 2023 and rising, including the new maternity hospital at the Royal Victoria Hospital. More focus is needed on ensuring that our major capital projects are delivered on time and within budget.

Unpaid and written-off rates are also an issue. Uncollected revenue of £65 million in rates arrears has been written off by officials in the past five years and over £100 million in arrears. We are not seeing the maximisation of our revenue stream from collecting those. Benefit fraud costs the taxpayer in Northern Ireland £163 million a year. That needs to be reduced, and I am grateful that the Communities Minister, Gordon Lyons, is taking action on it.

Agency staff is another issue. The cost to our health service alone was £179 million in 2023-24. In the Northern Ireland Civil Service (NICS), which has an agency framework, we have seen a rise of £127 million to a total cost of £552 million as of 13 January this year. When it comes to arm's-length bodies (ALBs) and quangos, 120 bodies, with their administration and governance costs, deliver public services in Northern Ireland. There are huge opportunities for efficiency in Northern Ireland, and we want to see them all investigated — not a selected few.

We do not feel that it is appropriate to dictate how the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council conducts its work of independently assessing public spending in Northern Ireland. It would be interesting to learn whether Alliance engaged with the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council before including the proposed statutory duty in today's motion. Our amendment supports placing the Fiscal Council on a statutory footing, as was previously committed to, not introducing specific duties on it.

Our amendment addresses all efficiencies and savings that could be achieved across Departments to relieve pressure on public services and increase the scale and pace of the reform and transformation agenda in Northern Ireland. I commend the amendment to the House.

Mr McGrath: I beg to move amendment No 2:

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): The Assembly should note that the amendments are mutually exclusive, so, if amendment No 1 is made, the Question will not be put on amendment No 2.

Mr McGrath, you will have 10 minutes to propose amendment No 2 and five minutes to make a winding-up speech. All other Members who speak in the debate will have five minutes.

Mr McGrath: The SDLP welcomes the opportunity to debate this important issue, and we commend the Alliance Party for bringing it to the House. It is timely, given the constraints on our public finances, that we look critically at the cost of division in our society and reflect on how, in 2025, the ambition to create a more shared society in 1998 has completely flatlined. It is not as though we have the luxury of being able to finance a divided society, which comes with a price tag, as the motion outlines. The 2016 figure of £833 million, indeed, is undoubtedly much higher in today's money.

As an example of that, a Pivotal report released last week highlighted the fact that 90% of social housing is still segregated, in contrast to the finding that 73% of people say that they want to live in a shared neighbourhood. That needs to be investigated. It tells us that the Government are failing to provide the leadership that is required for the sort of society that, people say, they want: a shared one that celebrates diversity rather than separating it.

Mr Butler: I thank the Member for giving way. I do not disagree with him, but, when we talk about fiscal appropriation, it is really important to note that we have campaigned collectively to say that Northern Ireland has been funded under need. That has been pretty new terminology for most of us in the past three or four years; in 2016, we were not even talking about that. Could the figure for that not be offset against the overarching figure? Then, we need to talk about actual figures to which the motion pertains.

Mr McGrath: Without going into the detail of the point that has been made, it is imperative to do something rather than nothing. Our constant battle — I will reflect on this a little later — is that, when we say, "Here is a specific response" to something, the rebuttal is, "Yeah, but there are all these other problems over here, so let's not do anything". That goes to the core of the difference between some of the amendments and the motion.

The problem is that, whilst peace was secured here, reconciliation was not.

Although our party's priority when we held power was to build on peace in order to deliver that reconciliation, it has not been the modus operandi of the two parties that have been at the helm over the past two decades.

We therefore cannot be surprised when carve-up politics goes beyond this Building. It has infected communities across the North, keeping people apart, creating fear of the other and, in its worst manifestation, keeping sectarianism well and truly alive. With duplication of our crumbling public services absorbing a significant amount of money, is it not time to look at removing the walls that are costly in monetary terms and to changing our society for the better? Carve-up politics fails to reflect the diversity of our society in 2025. For minorities and marginalised groups, that separation can make Northern Ireland feel exclusionary rather than inclusive, thus limiting access to opportunities and equal treatment.

The SDLP welcomed the inclusion of "Peace" as an underpinning commitment in the Programme for Government and believes that it should act as the basis for reducing duplication and, critically, delivering reconciliation. Although we know that the Executive may say a lot of the right things, the same cannot be said when it comes to delivery. Events last year in the Minister of Education's Department, where despicable politicking from Sinn Féin and the DUP on Derry City and Strabane District Council and on Belfast City Council saw them try to reduce a bid from a charity that supports children with special needs by 97% by way of a carve-up, tells us that those two parties prioritise their own needs over everything else. That is why the SDLP tabled an amendment that places a statutory duty on the Executive to cooperate on the delivery of public services, which, we believe, will help reduce the cost of division.

Division is at the heart of our political structures. The ugly scaffolding of the Good Friday Agreement persists. Although it secured peace, it has not evolved to deliver reconciliation. Our Departments are carved up. They are shared out rather than shared. That often leads to inefficiencies in spending and to an inability to deliver an outcome that extends beyond the boundaries of one's own Department. We regularly see that manifested in frustrating circular debates that may identify the problem but that then go nowhere in their attempts to find a solution. We see that in our Budget, which is allocated for political expediency rather than be based on a recognition that, in order to fix the biggest problems that we face as a society, we may need to pool resources and change how we do things.

By introducing a duty to cooperate across Departments, we could remove some of the barriers that prevent more cross-departmental working. Given that so many of the issues that affect people across society are logjammed as a result, the SDLP believes that it is imperative that we find ways in which to help support delivery. That is something that the big parties can get behind. Although I will not be behind the door in calling out carve-up politics, which is one of the biggest blights on our Government, I do have some sympathy, because the system in which they are operating is clunky and sometimes works against them as a result of the siloed structures.

On an individual level, each and every one of us has come to the Assembly to do our best to represent our constituents: the people who elected us. We are all frustrated at just how bad things have got for those living in chronic pain as a result of lengthy waiting lists, for those living in emergency accommodation as a result of a lack of homes and for working families struggling with the cost of childcare. We see you and hear you, but that is not enough.

If we want to do something about such issues, we need more than words. I therefore call on Members to support the SDLP amendment, which would place a duty on Departments to work together, thus helping them deliver on the ambition that the Executive have outlined in their Programme for Government. Far be it from the Opposition to help the Executive to deliver their agenda, but this is what constructive opposition is about. It is about offering solutions and saying, "We will support you if you deliver those aims, and we can work together to help people in our communities". That would reduce duplication of services and funding and free up much-needed money for the biggest challenges that people across our society are facing right now.

As I mentioned, there are two amendments, and one is mutually exclusive to the other. The point that I would make about the SDLP amendment is this: let us start to find focus and the issues that we can challenge and do something about. If we constantly take a step back and say, "No, but there are all these big problems. Here is a whole list of them", and if all we ever do is look at those lists, we will never change anything. Therefore, let us not dismiss it when there are opportunities in and suggestions for single-item things that we can do that will help. We are 27 years on from the Good Friday Agreement. We should be working much more collectively with a much more joined-up approach and delivering for people, saving that money up and allowing it to be put right back into the public services, which so desperately need it.

Mr Kearney: I welcome the fact that the motion places a focus on the cost of sectarian division. It is, however, unfortunate that its scope has been defined in one-dimensional terms. We need to be honest. The reality is that sectarianism cannot be properly assessed without reference to the partition and division of the island and the associated economic and financial costs and repercussions.

In the North, the costs of division are, indeed, evidenced in separate education systems, segregated housing, social disadvantage and the disproportionate diversion of police resources in response to incidents of sectarianism and racial hate crime. The financial cost of community divisions in the region are a structural by-product of partition. The creation of two states on this island has led to a duplication of public services and systems. The existence of two economies and divergent tax systems has created obvious impediments to the global marketing of our island. That is why so many economists and commentators have concluded that Irish unity will generate significant economic net benefits and an overall increase in GDP. Economic productivity and shared prosperity will be maximised by promoting the benefits of an integrated island economy with a highly skilled workforce, one tourism product and harmonised health, education and third-level education systems.

Of course, we must be united in our efforts to end community division. However, the motion has further weakened its focus by ignoring the adverse reality of the North's dependence on the British Exchequer, which refuses our power-sharing Executive access to the very financial resources that are required to deliver sustainable public services.

That brings me to my final point. Any strategy, political or otherwise, to effectively address the cost of division in this region cannot ignore the elephant in the room, which is the legacy and effect of successive British Governments' economic and political policy towards the North. Previous Tory, and now Labour, austerity policies continue to deny our power-sharing Executive the fiscal and financial capacity that they need to repurpose the delivery of public services. I agree that we need a strategic discussion on and plan for fully eradicating the root causes of division and the ongoing sectarian fault lines in our society, but I strongly submit that that needs to be set within a framework that looks beyond the limits of partition, addresses the process of planning and preparing for constitutional change and the achievement of an inclusive, tolerant national democracy.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): The Business Committee has arranged to meet at 1.00 pm. I propose, therefore, by leave of the Assembly, to suspend the sitting until 2.00 pm. The debate will continue after Question Time, when the first Member to be called will be Steve Aiken.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Question 2 has been withdrawn. Robbie Butler is not in his place, so I will move to question 3.

Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs): Under the Windsor Framework (Implementation) Regulations 2024, the import of live animals into Northern Ireland is under the direction and control of the DEFRA Secretary of State.

Mr Gaston: Why then, on 15 January, did the Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs tell the House of Commons:

The rest of the UK is protected by a ban that covers all of Germany, so why should farmers in Northern Ireland not receive the same level of protection?

Mr Muir: I cannot be held responsible for what another Minister says in another place, but I can be held responsible for the actions that I am taking in Northern Ireland, namely engaging on this with the industry, with UK Ministers and with my counterparts in the South. Control zones have been established in Hungary and Slovakia, and the effectiveness of that approach was confirmed in the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) report on foot-and-mouth disease that was published on 6 May 2021, which concluded that the disease control zones would:

Mr Tennyson: The Minister mentioned engagements with the UK Government. Will he give us an update on any engagements that he has had in respect of a sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) veterinary agreement?

Mr Muir: Thank you, Eóin. That is an important issue. I have had significant engagement with the UK Government on the potential for an SPS veterinary agreement. That significant engagement has included speaking with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, the DEFRA Secretary of State, DEFRA Ministers and Nick Thomas-Symonds from the Cabinet Office. I have been consistent in my messaging to those Ministers that the SPS veterinary agreement should be ambitious and comprehensive and benefit Northern Ireland. Frankly, it cannot come soon enough.

I raised concerns last week with the UK Government about their pursual of gene editing and how that could end up excluding Northern Ireland from an SPS veterinary agreement and therefore increase friction in trade between GB and NI rather than reduce it. I look forward to meeting Daniel Zeichner from DEFRA — hopefully this week — so that we can have a comprehensive and ambitious SPS veterinary agreement that can benefit Northern Ireland, result in the removal of the Northern Ireland retail movement scheme, further other schemes and contribute to growth across the UK economy.

Mr Buckley: Minister Muir has been a leading cheerleader for the Northern Ireland protocol, which binds Northern Ireland to the EU single market and customs area, so I suspect that he fully understands its consequences. When the Minister mentions the exclusion of Northern Ireland, does he know whether the protocol that he endorsed will force Northern Ireland to be subject to US tariffs on the EU, or will we, with the rest of the UK, enjoy a relationship that is tariff-free?

Mr Muir: I believe in the full, faithful and timely implementation of the Windsor framework, because I believe in upholding our legal obligations. That is important, and it is part of the ministerial code. Let us be clear: Brexit, as has been proven by the Office for Budget Responsibility, has been a really bad idea for the UK economy. The most vulnerable people are feeling the consequences of that. I will continue to work with the UK Government to alleviate some of the consequences of Brexit. I know that some people look to President Trump in the United States with a sense of glee —.

Mr Buckley: Certainly not you anyway.

Mr Muir: I will answer the question, Mr Buckley.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Mr Buckley, no shouting from a sedentary position, please. Go ahead.

Mr Muir: Thank you, Principal Deputy Speaker. It is a bit of a trend for Mr Buckley to shout down other people in the Chamber. I am seeking to answer questions on the issue. I look to build relationships with people whom you can trust, and, frankly, Mr Buckley's party has a history of building relationships with people whom you cannot trust.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: I call — [Interruption.]

Excuse me. I call Patsy McGlone for a supplementary question.

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

Minister, I will pursue your theme, but, to preface this question, I do not expect you to have the full details today. Will you quantify the additional cost of Brexit to your Department and the wider economy associated with it?

Mr Muir: I am aware of the Office for Budget Responsibility's projections and forecasts for the impact of Brexit on the UK economy. Frankly, the UK economy has flatlined as a result of Brexit.

Mr Gaston: That is because of the protocol, not Brexit.

Mr Muir: I will continue to answer the question. The impact on my Department is that a substantial number of staff are implementing the Windsor framework. It is important that we do that; we should be able to understand the implications of not upholding international agreements. I will write to the Member with a bit more information. There is a slight complication in that some parts of my Department are under the direction and control of the Secretary of State when it comes to the implementation of the Windsor framework. That is the result of a request from the DUP.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Before I call the next Member to ask a question, I remind Members of the importance of good decorum in the Chamber. I understand that it is a political Chamber, but you need to knock some of the behaviour on the head.

Mr Muir: The Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA) provides support to councils through the operation of the fly-tipping protocol. Under the protocol, NIEA assists councils by dealing with incidents of illegal waste dumping above 20 cubic metres, which is about the size of a bin lorry, and incidents involving hazardous waste that councils do not have the facilities to manage. Currently, nine of the 11 district councils have signed up to the protocol. I have asked officials to engage with the two remaining district councils to encourage them to sign up. Officials from NIEA regularly contribute to several council groups that discuss proactive enforcement, including the government waste working group and the Northern Ireland environmental quality forum.

In January 2025, officials from the NIEA environmental crime unit (ECU) provided training to council staff at a conference on the new legislative powers available to councils to assist them in enforcement on illegal waste dumping. The event allowed the ECU to provide clarity on the work that the unit undertakes and guidance on the use of the joint legislative environmental powers. It also encouraged councils to take forward their own prosecutions.

Mr Brooks: Minister, the question is borne out of the frustration of my constituents in Millmount, who routinely face fly-tipping in their area. Many of them, like me, point to the abject failure of Lisburn and Castlereagh City Council to provide adequate recycling facilities to the significant population of Dundonald. You, as a former Ards and North Down councillor —

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Question, please.

Mr Brooks: — will be aware of the effect that that has on other areas. Are there any powers that the Department can bring to bear to push councils to provide appropriate local recycling services or to make it easier for councillors to collaborate in that area?

Mr Muir: I respect the autonomy of district councils. There are good opportunities to collaborate in those areas, which is why my officials engage with councils on those issues. We want to reach the ambition of the recycling targets that are set out in the climate change legislation. That requires us to work together, which we continue to do. I respect the operations of district councils, but we all need to do more collectively to encourage recycling and to reduce fly-tipping.

Ms Finnegan: What engagement has the Minister had with his counterparts in the South to strengthen cross-border cooperation in tackling illegal dumping?

Mr Muir: That is a key issue, which is why I continue to seek a meeting with my ministerial counterpart in the South, who took up office in January. It is important that we engage on the issue. We need to take an all-Ireland approach to dealing with the issue of waste crime and fly-tipping. I am very keen to have that engagement with him.

Mr Blair: Will the Minister give us any information on what new legislative powers have become available to councils to assist enforcement against illegal dumping?

Mr Muir: A range of new enforcement powers became available to councils on 2 January 2023 under the Waste and Contaminated Land (Amendment) Act 2011. Those powers relate to articles in the Waste and Contaminated Land (Northern Ireland) Order 1997, including article 4 concerning a prohibition on unauthorised or harmful deposit, treatment or disposal of waste; article 5 regarding a duty of care as respects waste; and article 28 on powers to require the removal of waste unlawfully deposited. Under article 28 of the Waste and Contaminated Land Order 1997, a council may direct those responsible for the deposited waste to remove it. If they fail to do so, the council may intervene and remove the waste and seek cost recovery from those responsible. Under articles 4 and 5, councils may prosecute those involved in fly-tipping activity.

Mr Stewart: Minister, it appears that fly-tipping is, regrettably, on the rise. You will be aware that many councils are changing their policies on who can access recycling facilities, including stopping some businesses from coming in. Are you concerned that the impact of that will be greater illegal dumping, particularly in rural areas?

Mr Muir: The primary focus of household recycling centres is households, and, obviously, it is for councils to take their own actions in how they manage their operations. We have to work collectively on the issue of fly-tipping, and, currently, nine of the 11 councils are signed up to the protocol. Armagh City, Banbridge and Craigavon Borough Council and Mid and East Antrim Borough Council are the two outliers that have not signed up. I have asked my officials to engage with the remaining two councils with a view to getting them signed up.

Ms Hunter: Illegal dumping is a severe issue, particularly in my rural constituency around the Drumsurn area. Minister, are the fines for those found guilty of illegal dumping adequate, or would you like to see them increased?

Mr Muir: We have significant legislative provisions in place. If there are representations from district councils to ask us to reconsider those, I am happy to do so. The main thing is to send a message to the public that people should not do that. It is an individual responsibility. District councils and NIEA are having to go in and pick up the tab for people who are fly-tipping, and that is wrong.

Mr Muir: I recognise the crucial importance of science and research in helping to achieve my Department’s strategic goals and objectives by ensuring that policy is evidence-based and delivers tangible actions. I personally believe in that. We need to get back to making decisions that are based on science and evidence and away from populism. Also, science is key in developing innovations to address the strategic challenges that we face on issues such as climate change and the nutrient pollution in areas such as Lough Neagh. I want policymakers to have access to the best available data, evidence and knowledge, which will benefit every citizen in Northern Ireland.

As set out in my Department’s business and corporate plans, championing and investing in science, including social sciences, innovation and knowledge transfer is a means of addressing policy challenges and unlocking new economic opportunities. My Department invests significantly in science services each year, and its science strategy framework guides how that investment can be optimised. DAERA’s science system has three goals: get the best science, get the best value from science and make the best use of science. Under the guidance of my Chief Scientific Adviser, a series of project-led science transformation initiatives is being embedded across multidisciplinary teams in the DAERA family.

Mr McMurray: Thank you, Minister. How are science and evidence helping to inform actions to tackle the blue-green algae in Lough Neagh?

Mr Muir: The Chief Scientific Adviser's office is working with senior science representatives from the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI), DAERA's environment, fisheries and marine group, the Northern Ireland Environment Agency, Northern Ireland Water, Queen's University and Ulster University to help to oversee a joined-up programme of scientific work for the lough and take forward work on science-related actions in the Lough Neagh action plan. That includes the development of a Lough Neagh science platform and the development and validation of models to apportion nutrient loadings from agriculture and non-agriculture sources, river catchment and sub-catchment levels.

Turning to the resultant recovery times of the lough itself, I have highlighted before the fact Lough Neagh has suffered from decades of pollution from nutrients from agriculture, waste water, septic tanks and industrial processes. Modelling work undertaken by AFBI and Ulster University scientists indicates that it may take as long as 40 years for the lough to return to a "good" classification. However, it is important that timescales for full recovery do not deter the implementation of actions set out in the action plan, which includes the science platform.

Ms Murphy: Minister, what steps are you taking to enhance cross-border collaboration on science and research, particularly in areas such as climate, animal health and sustainable farming?

Mr Muir: That is a really important question. We have quite a lot of good cross-border cooperation as part of the co-centres, which are absolutely key. One key area on which I want us to do a lot more cross-border cooperation is that of TB. That is a significant issue for farmers in Northern Ireland and for my Department, and I can see the mental anguish on the faces of a lot of farmers when they are suffering a herd breakdown as a result of TB. Therefore, significant engagement has taken place between officials, North and South. I met my previous counterpart, Charlie McConalogue, last year, and I hope to have a meeting with Martin Heydon. We talked about it briefly recently. A lot of our meetings to date, unfortunately, have been around issues such as avian influenza and foot-and-mouth disease. We are looking to redouble those efforts and to cooperate a lot more on the issue. These are common challenges: where we can work together, I am up for it.

Ms D Armstrong: I want to turn back to science and research. What initiatives has DAERA taken to increase the number of women and girls pursuing a career in science and research?

Mr Muir: That is a wider issue that would probably be led primarily by the Department for the Economy, but we are conscious of our commitments around it. I am proud to have Katrina Godfrey in the role of permanent secretary as a champion of those issues. It is something that I am keen to do. The College of Agriculture, Food and Rural Enterprise (CAFRE) student intake that is coming through has a good gender balance. We can do more, and Katrina is doing excellent work in that regard.

Mr Muir: There are five slaughterhouses in Northern Ireland producing meat that may be marketed as halal. All halal slaughter in Northern Ireland uses pre-slaughter stun.

Mr Beattie: I thank the Minister for his answer. This is a consumer and ethical question, because many consumers would not be happy if they were consuming meat that was slaughtered through halal practices, yet, in Northern Ireland, there is no legal requirement to specifically label meat as halal or even kosher. Will the Minister look into that with a view to changing it?

Mr Muir: I would need to check the law on that and the UK-wide position under the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020. I will write to the Member on the issue.

Mr Muir: The impacts of climate change are indiscriminate and affect us globally. Therefore, I fully recognise the necessity and importance of working with my counterparts in the rest of the UK and Ireland to address the climate crisis and to achieve our shared net zero goals.

At a UK level, I engage with my counterparts in the UK Government, the Welsh Government and the Scottish Government on matters relating to climate change through a number of inter-ministerial groups (IMGs), including the net zero, energy and climate change inter-ministerial group and the environment, food and rural affairs inter-ministerial group. Those discussions allow for knowledge transfer and identification of opportunities for collaboration.

I was pleased to be able to host and chair recently the first in-person meeting of the net zero, energy and climate change inter-ministerial group in Belfast — I thank Belfast Harbour estate for hosting us — on 6 March. The next meeting is planned for early May. I have also been fortunate to have had the opportunity for additional engagement on matters relating to climate change with my Welsh and Scottish counterparts through our joint membership of the Under2 Coalition. Separate to those IMG structures, I engage with my counterparts from across the UK on ensuring that, collectively, we fulfil our responsibilities under the UK-wide Climate Change Act 2008. That includes the emissions trading scheme.

Through the British-Irish Council (BIC) and the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC), I also have ongoing engagement with my counterparts from across the UK and Ireland that, among other areas of shared interest, includes discussions on how we can address climate change together. I want to build on those issues and am in the process of arranging a meeting with my ministerial counterpart in the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications (DECC), following his appointment in January. I hope that that meeting will take place shortly.

Mr Donnelly: I thank the Minister for that answer. What is the Minister's assessment of the recent Climate Change Committee (CCC) advice on the fourth carbon budget?

Mr Muir: Thank you very much, Danny. The Climate Change Committee published its fourth carbon budget advice on 19 March. I welcome that. It advises us on our pathway to net zero and states that there will be a net saving during the fourth carbon budget period, which is 2038 to 2042.

I encourage anyone who has not read it to read it. There are strong benefits, particularly regarding the decarbonisation of electricity. We must grasp the opportunity. If we do not, there is a risk that we will lose pace and not be able to create the good green jobs that we want to create in Northern Ireland and deliver prosperity for our people.

Miss McIlveen: There is a challenging budget and an ever-growing pressure to meet targets set by an Assembly that was desperate to push through ill-considered legislation in 2022. We now hear that the office of a climate change commissioner will cost in the region of £1 million per year. Does the Minister consider that to be value for money?

Mr Muir: Investing in dealing with climate change is important. I was at an exhibition this morning by Trócaire, which showed the consequences of climate change for the most vulnerable in society. Those who have contributed least to climate change feel the consequences of it most. There is a moral obligation to look beyond Northern Ireland when dealing with climate change, and it is important that we do that.

I understand that we have to invest in decarbonising our economy. Many businesses are doing that. I meet them daily, and they are on that journey. Some people need to understand that, if we want our economy to grow sustainably, we need to be on the road to net zero. I am committed to doing that. What some people seem to forget — rather conveniently, frankly — is that it was my predecessor, the DUP Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, who introduced that legislation, and the Assembly voted unanimously for it. What I am doing is implementing the will of the Assembly as expressed in 2022.

Mr McAleer: Minister, from your engagements with your counterparts in Westminster, do you have any update on the provision of a just transition fund?

Mr Muir: As part of the process for the Budget that was announced at the end of October, I made representations for a just transition fund for agriculture. I was not successful in that, so I made a bid to the Finance Minister locally, and, in the draft Budget, there is funding set aside for a just transition fund for agriculture. I continue that work. We are making representations through the Minister of Finance to the UK Government about future financial years and the support that we can give. I have also made representations to the Prime Minister and the Minister in the Department for Energy, Security and Net Zero or DESNZ — sorry, another acronym — in London about the need for us to have a green new deal in Northern Ireland. I will continue to make those representations, because they are about investing for the future and delivering benefits for people in Northern Ireland.

Mr Muir: I have approved a policy proposal that will not only ban third-party sales of pups and kittens in Northern Ireland but facilitate greater transparency and accountability. The proposal would place legal requirements on anyone who wishes to sell or transfer the ownership of a pup or kitten. This will enable purchasers to identify where their pup or kitten has come from and reinforce positive animal welfare measures. My officials held a workshop with councils on 20 February to discuss the proposal and hear their views. Their feedback is being reviewed, and work is progressing towards launching a public consultation soon.

Ms Egan: Thank you, Minister. What lessons can be learned from the implementation of Lucy's law in other parts of the UK?

Mr Muir: There were not many benefits from the fact that the Assembly was collapsed for two years, but one benefit is that we can learn from what other areas learned as a result of progressing legislation. One of those areas of legislation was Lucy's law. The introduction of Lucy's law in England aimed to tackle the root causes of animal welfare issues, such as unethical breeding practices, by setting specific criteria for the sale of pets and ensuring that only licensed breeders could sell puppies or kittens. Indeed, the legislation has really helped increase awareness around buying a puppy and responsible dog breeders.

Stopping the most unscrupulous breeders is always a challenge, as they continue to operate in the shadows and prey on unsuspecting dog lovers. Therefore, robust legislation is merely one tool. Making Lucy's law work in Northern Ireland will require education so that people do not get duped and know how to spot the telltale signs of rogue breeders. We need our citizens to be brave and report suspicious activity to the relevant statutory organisations so that investigations can be launched. Finally, we need robust enforcement mechanisms so that action can be taken.

Mr Muir: The National Trust, with local communities and partners, is undertaking the Divis — A View to the Future project for both people and nature. It is intended to deliver accessible urban upland green spaces where people and place thrive together in a healthy, nature-rich and wild landscape. The project is being funded by my Department's environment fund, the National Lottery Heritage Fund, the Garfield Weston Foundation and the National Trust.

To date, the project has been gathering scientific information to inform the development of habitat restoration plans. It is anticipated that a peatland restoration plan will be released and work commenced in autumn 2025. New pond areas are due to be created by March 2026. Improved visitor facilities and enhanced access to the hills are a key part of the project. This will include the establishment of a 1·5-kilometre Glencairn route connecting Ballygomartin to the existing path network on Divis and Black Mountain. Planning permission was granted for the project in February, and works are due to commence on-site from summer 2025.

The project provides a great example of connecting communities and people to nature and providing outdoor recreation opportunities that will help enhance the mental health and well-being of citizens. It also delivers important space for nature.

Miss McAllister: I thank the Minister for his answer. Not far from Divis and Black Mountain is Ligoniel dam. Minister, will you commit to meet me on-site to explore the ways in which we can promote nature recovery and what the community is doing there already?

Mr Muir: Thank you, Nuala. I would be delighted to do that. I have been to see the work that the National Trust is taking forward, and I would be delighted to take up your kind invite for a visit. Hopefully, we can do that in the time ahead.

Mr Muir: The environmental crime unit within the regulation and enforcement division of the Northern Ireland Environment Agency continues to investigate and prosecute the most serious and persistent environmental crime in Northern Ireland with a particular focus on waste criminality. The environmental crime unit focuses its resources on the cases that present the most significant risk to the environment and public health and utilises powers contained in the Waste and Contaminated Land (Northern Ireland) Order 1997 to pursue prosecutions. Such prosecutions are often coupled with confiscation proceedings under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, which are aimed at ensuring that those convicted of the crimes are deprived of their assets and asserting the "polluter pays" principle.

The environmental crime unit continues to adopt a multi-agency approach through operational cooperation with other government agencies. By working with partner agencies, the environmental crime unit takes a comprehensive approach to tackling illegal waste criminality through its effective inter-agency collaboration.

Ms Bradshaw: Thank you, Minister. Will the Minister outline any work that is ongoing to review the fines and penalties for environmental crimes?

Mr Muir: That is an important area. A robust, fair, proportionate and targeted enforcement regime is essential to act as a deterrent and champion the principle of "the polluter pays", and I am committed to delivering it. Key to it will be an independent review, including a consultation on the environmental crime sentencing framework around fines and penalties. I have made strengthening environmental governance a priority and, working with the Department of Justice, we will carry out a review of penalties and fines for environmental crimes and identify improvements that can be made to ensure a more streamlined and effective penalty regime. I want to ensure that our penalty regime is effective in the protections it offers for our environment and can drive compliance with new farm sustainability standards.

In the meantime, I have allocated resources from my departmental budget to the Northern Ireland Environment Agency to strengthen regulation on enforcement, particularly for water quality. An enforcement liaison group has been established in the Department. The group will provide expertise and input into the preparation for the consultation on the enforcement of fixed penalty notices that is being led by the fisheries Bill team. Officials intend to launch the consultation and review in May 2025.

Mr K Buchanan: We see a lot of waste along our roadsides — crisps packets, food waste, cartons etc. What can the Minister do, along with councils, to address the issue? It is getting worse year after year, and we see no resolution.

Mr Muir: One of the key actions that we can take is public messaging, which is why Keep Northern Ireland Beautiful has a key role in this as well. We want to get a clear message to the public that you should not litter, because it creates an unsightly mess across Northern Ireland, creates environmental damage and we have to put in resources to clean it up. Collectively, that is the message that we want to give. I find the relationship that we have with Keep Northern Ireland Beautiful very worthwhile and helpful.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Minister, you have two minutes to respond.

Mr Muir: My Department currently has sufficient resources to ensure that the movement of animals under licence complies with the conditions of the licence for which my Department has responsibility.

Ms D Armstrong: I thank the Minister for his response. Does the Minister agree that, if we are to maintain Northern Ireland's biosecurity, more monitoring should be conducted at our borders?

Mr Muir: I will do whatever I can. Because of the Windsor Framework (Implementation) Regulations 2024, some of those areas sit under the direction and control of the Secretary of State. I met Baroness Hayman last week, and I will continue with that relationship. One of the challenges that I have is around the border control points and who has direction and control over those.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: David Honeyford for a quick supplementary.

Mr Honeyford: Will the Minister outline the importance of ensuring animal traceability?

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Quickly, Minister.

Mr Muir: It is absolutely vital because it is the basis on which our agri-food industry trades.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: That ends the period for listed questions. We now move on to 15 minutes of topical questions.

Mr Muir: Go raibh maith agat an athuair.

It is an important area for me.

I raised the issue with the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs last week, and his response was that the money had run out. That is one of the issues that has arisen as a result of Brexit, because, when we were in the EU, we got our funding in seven-year tranches through the common agricultural policy (CAP). We are now in a situation in which each part of the UK has to decide its own farming support measures.

I was glad to secure in the draft Budget support for agriculture, agrienvironment, fisheries and rural development in Northern Ireland as a ring-fenced fund in the next financial year and in future financial years. I was the only devolved Minister able to get that. Included in that funding will be the Farming with Nature support package, which we are taking forward at pace. It is a key priority for me, and we want to be able to deliver that support to farmers. England is doing what it is doing, but we will do what we can to support farmers in Northern Ireland.

Mr McGlone: Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire an athuair.

What research has his Department done on the potential implications for markets from here?

Mr Muir: As a result of our leaving the European Union, each part of the UK is developing its own policies, and there is an issue with potential divergence. I want to ensure that Northern Ireland has a competitive advantage. Something that we have in our favour is our operation of the Windsor framework. We have advantages in Northern Ireland that other parts of the UK were keen to have but do not, so it is important that we grasp them. Now that we have certainty over the full, faithful and timely implementation of the Windsor framework, we can sell that to businesses. We also want to develop policies that support farmers in Northern Ireland, and I continue to roll out measures. The suckler cow scheme is coming in next month. There is also Farming with Nature. I will put my heart and soul into supporting agri-food in Northern Ireland and into giving us a competitive edge.

If they read the 'Irish Farmers Journal', which I do every Wednesday evening, Members will know that there is a distinct difference between the South of Ireland and the North because of contrasting fiscal positions. The UK economy is in the doldrums. Ministers from the UK Government talk to me about deficits, whereas Ministers from the South talk to me about surpluses. There is a big lesson to be learned from that. Brexit — [Interruption.]

Brexit was a bad idea.

Mr Muir: I am aware of the concerns. The Department ran a pilot initiative to raise awareness of sheep scab. I am keen to see whether we can explore running that initiative again, and I will be engaging with officials on the importance of raising awareness of the issue.

Dr Aiken: Thank you very much indeed, Minister. A lot of people in the farming community, particularly those in the sheep farming community, are on low incomes and have real concerns about getting access to the right treatments. Will your Department give them any support to deal with sheep scab, which is prevalent in the Antrim area, particularly in the Antrim Hills?

Mr Muir: I am happy to take representations. I was looking to introduce a sheep support scheme, but, as a result of resource constraints in my Department, we had to put it on the back burner. We are trying to roll out Farming with Nature as a result of representations from Patsy, and people want us to proceed with that support package. Once we get that done, we will roll out a sheep support scheme. If there are particular concerns in the Member's constituency, I am happy to consider them and to engage with him.

Mr Muir: Thank you, Maolíosa. My heart goes out to the family. When I heard about that accident in recent days, given the consequences, it reminded me of the dangers of being a farmer in Northern Ireland. I send my thoughts and prayers to the family and friends of Mr Logue and to the community circle that supports people at such times.

We work collaboratively on such issues with not just the Health and Safety Executive but the Department for the Economy. Conor Murphy and I launched a plan last year. We will have a joint presence at the Balmoral show, which is coming up very soon. It is important that we all do that work together. The Ulster Farmers' Union was part of that plan, because thinking about what more we can do to prevent deaths on farms is a collective issue.

Mr McHugh: Go raibh maith agat, a Aire.

Minister, what action is your Department taking to strengthen farm safety measures and prevent further tragedies, particularly given the risk that is associated with farm machinery?

Mr Muir: That is set out in the farm safety plan that the Department launched last year. It is really important, and I will send you a copy. There is stuff in the plan that concerns what you are asking about, but there is also the wider issue of messaging, in which we can all share. Collectively, we all have a role to play in that. I will send you the plan so that you will have a bit more information.

Mr Muir: The Climate Change Committee has issued advice on our fourth carbon budget and, most recently, on the UK-wide road to net zero. One of the key elements of that advice is on the benefits of decarbonisation of our energy systems, particularly electricity. There is a cost to doing that, but there are significant long-term benefits, including lifting people out of fuel poverty; reducing the cost of energy for not just households but businesses; and removing the ongoing uncertainty about the risks of energy insecurity, thereby allowing us to have a bit more security of supply. That is why we should follow the road to net zero. That is why the rest of the world is doing it and why we in Northern Ireland should take cognisance of the CCC's advice on the issue.

Mr Donnelly: Thanks to the Minister for that answer. Further to that advice from the CCC, how is his Department supporting low-carbon farming?

Mr Muir: That is obviously a theme in Question Time today. I am delighted to see that interest in Farming with Nature, environmental farming schemes and the support that we can give. My Department will launch the Farming with Nature transition scheme very soon, which will continue the roll-out of the package. As Minister, I want to be able to scale up our support for Farming with Nature. I am keen to do that. Whilst England may take its own decisions, we in Northern Ireland are clear that we want to support farmers to have Farming with Nature as an enterprise on the farm. We are really keen to roll that out. We need to do that with pace. We have lost a bit of pace as a result of the collapse of these institutions. I am very determined to do it, and we will do it through a process of co-design.

Mr Muir: Thank you, Connie. Cairn Wood is one of the many forest areas that suffered significant damage during the recent storm, resulting in restrictions on pedestrian and vehicle access for public safety reasons. That caused access to be restricted to the forest track, walking trails and car park at Cairn Wood. Ards and North Down Borough Council manages the car park and recreational facilities at Cairn Wood under licence arrangements with Forest Service. Forest Service and the council are involved in tree clearance works to enable the safe reopening of the facilities in Cairn Wood as soon as possible. I understand that tree clearance and path works are well advanced. However, a number of larger trees and upturned tree root plates remain to be dealt with. Forest Service and the council will continue to address those issues over the next few days. It is hoped that full access will be reinstated for the beginning of April.

Ms Egan: Thank you, Minister. Will you commit to continuing to work with Ards and North Down Borough Council to ensure that Cairn Wood is open for everyone in our community?

Mr Muir: Yes, I will continue to work with the council. My Department will do that. One lesson that has to be learnt from the storm concerns the real impact that it has had on our forestry estate and what we can do in response. Forest Service plans to plant native trees predominantly in areas where a previous forest crop has been clear-felled. Native woodland planting on those sites follows the approved design plan for the forest and areas that include riparian zones that are adjacent to existing native woodland or in woodland corridors, providing connectivity for native fauna. Forest Service management regimes also allow for the natural regeneration of locally seeded native trees in areas where there is a seed source and the ground conditions allow for that type of forest establishment.

Mr Muir: As I outlined previously, the sustainable agriculture programme is a key part of that. We have secured ring-fenced funding in the draft Budget to allow us to roll out the sustainable agriculture programme, which offers something for every farmer in Northern Ireland, particularly dairy farmers. At the end of last year, I was delighted to attend the winter fair and engage with the industry on the issue. I know the challenges, particularly with TB, so I have asked the stakeholder group to bring back a delivery plan by the end of the month, and I will announce the way forward next month. I am committed to helping the industry, and I am very conscious of the market conditions, which, in the round, seem favourable, and the challenges with TB.

Mr Crawford: Minister, what engagement has your Department had with the banks and lenders to ensure that dairy farmers who face financial pressures can access flexible credit arrangements?

Mr Muir: I met the banks at the end of last year to discuss how they can support agriculture in Northern Ireland. That has turned into an ongoing engagement, not just with the four main banks but with HSBC and others, so that, collectively, we can support farmers in Northern Ireland.

Mr Muir: I was delighted to launch the new corporate plan, which takes us up to the end of the mandate. The corporate plan was published on 13 March, and it is built around my eight key priorities and underpinned by 10 pledges. The corporate plan makes it clear that many of our goals are inextricably linked to delivering sustainability and the three missions in the Programme for Government.

What the Department does next links directly and indirectly to the priorities in the Programme for Government, particularly those on building a globally competitive and sustainable economy and protecting Lough Neagh and the environment. Progress in all those areas will require us to work collaboratively across my Department and with external partners and stakeholders. Many of the pledges need commitment, and, of course, challenges lie ahead, particularly in relation to budgets, but I am determined to deliver a positive difference for the people of Northern Ireland.

The plan includes a new vision: the delivery of a net zero and nature-positive future to support sustainable agriculture and thriving rural communities.

Mrs Guy: Minister, thank you for that answer. Do you have the budget that you need to deliver on your corporate plan?

Mr Muir: I have set out a clear vision and 10 key pledges in the corporate plan. One of my concerns is about my Department's budgetary position. The Fiscal Council's report on the draft Budget for the next financial year laid bare the reality for my Department in tables 4.2 and 4.8: it has suffered the biggest cut of any Department. As a result, the interventions associated with Lough Neagh and the plan to implement a number of environmental measures and tackle waste crime are underfunded. There are also challenges for my Department's work on TB.

There are significant budgetary challenges, but the Minister for Finance is a very good person, who has worked constructively with me on those issues. We have had constructive discussions about the Budget allocation, and we will continue to do so to make the budget for my Department work and deliver for the citizens of Northern Ireland.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Nice try, Minister. [Laughter.]

Mr Muir: Thank you very much, Gary. That is an important issue. We plan to consult on the remediation strategy for the Mobuoy site this spring, and it is key to do so. I am aware that phase 2 of the A6 dual carriageway project will encroach on the Mobuoy site. I declare an interest as my stepfather was a quality manager for phase 1 of that project. Northern Ireland Environment Agency officials continue to work closely with DFI Roads colleagues to ensure that an integrated and coordinated approach is taken. We look forward to launching that consultation soon.

Mr Middleton: I thank the Minister for his response. Indeed, I welcome the action that has been taken; it is long overdue. Minister, will you outline the time frames for what will happen once the consultation has been completed? How long will the consultation take? What will be the next steps?

Mr Muir: We will do the consultation, evaluate the responses and consider the way forward. I am very conscious that a potentially significant cost is associated with the remediation. That will be a resource cost, so I will work with the Finance Minister on that because he is a decent kind of guy. That will allow us to progress in that area. I want to collectively consider the issue: I am conscious that it has been waiting for quite a while, so I want to move on it.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Minister. Your timing was perfect. That ends questions for oral answer to the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs.

Mr Clarke: On a point of order, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. Last week, I inadvertently missed my opportunity to ask a question at Question Time due to other business in the Assembly. I apologise to you, to the Speaker's Office and to Members for not being in attendance.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: That is much appreciated, Mr Clarke.

Mr Butler: On a point of order, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I apologise for not being in my place today —.

Some Members: Oh.

Mr Butler: According to my clock, however, I was in the Chamber at 1.59 pm. May I ask for confirmation of the timing of Question Time? I know that the Speaker has the ability to call it, but, according to Standing Order 20, it starts at 2.00 pm, and I believe that I was in the Chamber at 2.00 pm. Thank you.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: I watched the clock turn to 2.00 pm precisely. I waited a few seconds to see whether you would come into the Chamber, and you did not. Your party colleagues were here first. I appreciate that it is difficult at lunchtime, as you can get trailed all over the place, but, as a former Whip, you know that Question Time starts at 2.00 pm. Your apology is accepted.

Is there another point of order?

Mr Muir: On a point of order, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. Every time I come to Question Time, it starts on time, and I am prepared for it. One thing that is becoming quite regular, however, and has occurred at a number of Question Times is that when I respond to Mr Buckley, he seeks to shout me down. I would like to get a ruling on the appropriateness of that behaviour.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: I will pass that on to the Speaker. You will, however, have heard me ask for good decorum from everyone, Minister. I am sure that you are fit enough for Jonathan Buckley or anyone else. [Laughter.]

Everybody should take their ease for a few moments.

No 1:

No 2:

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): The next Member to speak, as I said before Question Time, is Steve Aiken.

Dr Aiken: Thank you very much indeed, Mr Deputy Speaker. I will return to the debate. For information, we will support the DUP amendment to the motion.

The last Member to speak in the debate before Question Time was Declan Kearney. I think that you will give me latitude, Deputy Speaker, because of the amount of time that Declan Kearney seemed to spend talking about the answer somehow being a united Ireland and about all the problems in Northern Ireland somehow being created by the British Government or being down to some sort of problem with the British Government. I will point something out clearly, for the record: the costs of decades of violence created on this island, North and South, by the Provisional IRA have done more than anything else to create the sectarian divisions that exist and have added significantly to the cost of virtually everything that we do. I put that on the record so that people realise that, when we talk about how we tackle the problems of sectarianism and a divided society, it is not a glorified conversation about creating the mechanisms for a united Ireland or whatever; it is about trying to make Northern Ireland work. That is the one thing that we should look to.

Many solutions have been advocated over time, and there are some very practical things that we could be doing. The Ulster Unionist Party, virtually since it came into existence, has wanted one single education system for all our children. We should have one single education system for all our children, because that will allow us to make significant savings. It has been indicated previously that close on half a billion pounds a year could be realised if we went to that position, so we should be looking at that.

We will also have to look at how we do government in Northern Ireland. We have to ask some very obvious questions. Do we have too many Departments? Are too many Departments competing for limited resources and doing too many things? Do we have a peace industry that seems to create more roles and jobs than it does solutions to the problems that it is supposed to be solving? Would that money be better going into policing?

At what stage do we get to the realisation that our continuing to pander to paramilitarism across Northern Ireland adds to the cost? We are creating a situation that is more like a Mafia world. We keep on paying them, and guess what? They keep on coming back for more money. We need to stop that. It is time that all paramilitarism was gone, and the sooner, the better.

We will also have to look at using our resources more effectively. We have to look closely at how we can do better with the moneys that we have. Can we do things better on a North/South basis? There are opportunities to do that. Can we do things better on an east-west basis? Yes, we very definitely can. We need to see how we can do that as well. Can we get the right support across all our nations of the United Kingdom? Are we taking the best benefit that we can from sources such as the National Wealth Fund? Earlier today, we had a debate about green hydrogen. Are we making the best possible case to the rest of our nation? Are we making our nation work for all of us?

I am a unionist. I make no bones about it: I think that Northern Ireland is best as part of the United Kingdom. It was made clear in the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement that it would remain so until people decide otherwise. I do not think that people will ever decide otherwise, because it works, even though it is imperfect. I declare an interest as a former chief executive of the British Irish Chamber of Commerce and former CEO of a university trust in Dublin. I can say that the costs of division in the Irish Republic are massive — in the realms of billions of euros. Anybody who thinks that there is some kind of panacea south of the border is living in dreamland.

We must work out how Northern Ireland works best for all of us. We can do that by making some moves now. The easiest and quickest thing that we can do is to start working towards one education system for all our children: not an integrated education system but an education system for everyone. On that point, I take my rest.

Miss McAllister: I want to focus mainly on some of the areas to which we can direct tackling the cost of division. First, however, before I go into that detail, I want to set out that the Alliance Party does not believe that the cost of division is the only reason why Northern Ireland's finances are in such a bad state. It is, however, one of the reasons, and we must tackle it.

As a member of the Health Committee, I am used to receiving responses to almost any question that I pose to the Health Minister that set out the difficult financial situation that faces the Department of Health, just as, I am sure, many other Members do with other Departments. We are, however, often challenged in the Committee and in the Chamber to come up with solutions. Today, therefore, I stand here as an Alliance Party MLA to put forward one such solution. We recognise that this is a long-term process and cannot simply be done tomorrow. One of the first steps will be to assess where we are currently, which is why we tabled the motion as a first step. We hope that the Finance Minister can get behind us on the issue. We need to ensure that all our data is correct and that data on problems that are arising now are compared with data from 2016, because I do not believe that the situation has got any better.

The 'Money Well Spent' paper that Alliance published today spells out the priority areas in which, should action be taken, we could see improved funding of almost £1 billion, based on the cost of division. I will expand on two areas that relate to Health. First, we highlight the opportunity to:

Last December, the Department confirmed that investment of £135 million per year for five years would be needed to eliminate hospital waiting lists. Reducing wastage through addressing the cost of division could free up enough to allocate that £135 million in the first year and kick-start the work that is needed to tackle the waiting list backlog. That is significant.

The benefits do not end there. Analysis that was carried out in England by the Institute for Public Policy Research in 2023 suggests that tackling elective care waiting lists could generate billions of pounds in economic output through people returning to work or increasing their hours, with billions more being saved as a result of reduced demand for health and social care services. Although that type of economic modelling has not been conducted in Northern Ireland, there is no reason to believe that slashing our hospital waiting lists would not make a similar contribution to the labour market and Health budget here.

In the paper, we also highlight the opportunity for savings to:

The Minister of Health has said that that issue is a priority. Our plan puts the cost at £61·72 million. Conservative estimates suggest that poor mental health has an economic cost of £3·4 billion every year, mostly due to lost productivity but also due to the increased demand that it causes elsewhere in the health service. Every penny and every million spent on mental health matters. That is a way in which we can tackle that situation.

The priorities that are highlighted and costed in our paper are not an exhaustive list, but there is a reason that we included both those issues. We recognise their significance to the community in Northern Ireland, not only as a post-conflict society but as a society that has been held to ransom by multiple Government collapses and stagnant progress on those key issues.

Health is the number-one priority for our constituents, and I understand that there are financial implications for the Minister, like all Ministers in the Executive. However, we need to tackle the cost of division so that we can stop just talking about waste and prove that we are doing something about it. That takes political leadership. It takes leadership to make decisions on issues that are difficult but that can be solved. Whether it is leadership on health transformation in our communities or in decisions on peace walls or services in our local areas, we need to ensure that we do not scantily reward people across Northern Ireland but that we deliver the best for all our community. I ask all parties this question: if we do not tackle the cost of division, who exactly does that benefit?

Mrs Guy: I am pleased to speak on the motion, which, for me, is less about the cost of division and more about the opportunities in a united community. Nowhere better illustrates the possibilities than our education system. The challenges in education are huge, and we could spend the circa £800 million that the motion references in a heartbeat, but here are just three of the big-ticket items for which we could use that money.

The first is a comprehensive early years and childcare strategy that is capable of tackling educational inequalities through early interventions and the expansion of the NI childcare subsidy scheme to include more families. Previously, the Minister cited an unsubstantiated figure of around £400 million for that, but, to give some context, the allocation for childcare in 2025-26 is just £50 million. The Minister's recently published SEN reform agenda and delivery plan is costed at £570 million, but £27 million has been allocated to it. To address our school estate, £100 million of capital investment on top of the current capital budget is needed. Those are ridiculous figures that are made all the more ridiculous when they are set in the context of an education system that has, in a nutshell, too many sectors, too much bureaucracy, too many schools and declining pupil numbers.

I make the following point crystal clear: in Northern Ireland, we have fabulous schools staffed by incredible and dedicated individuals. It is the system in which those schools operate that must evolve and change, if it is to meet the needs of our children and young people. The evidence is clear: our education system is on a collision course with a financial and demographic reality that it must reorientate to address.

Last October, the Education Committee received a written briefing from officials that forecast a funding gap of over £1 billion by 2027-28. Data published this month by the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA) suggests that there will be more pensioners than schoolchildren in Northern Ireland by 2030. Imagine our entire education system as an old building: beautiful and full of character, tradition and memories that have been formed over many years but structurally unsound. When an engineer says that the building is not fit for purpose, a responsible owner listens. It really matters when that building — that system — is spending your money. Is it acceptable at all to decide to redecorate rather than invest in structural improvements? No, it is not, but the current keyholder of our education system is doing just that. He is launching new report after new report with which we could literally paper the walls, creating more, not less, bureaucracy and actively stifling the expansion of integrated education while asking for more public money without showing any appetite to transform our education system. That is an abdication of responsibility that does not serve our learners. The pertinent question, which I do not have time to address today, is this: who does the situation serve?

The independent review of education offered us solutions that are intended to be implemented as a holistic approach, not as an à la carte menu: reconfigure the network of schools, simplify management and prioritise investment. The independent review of education also did modelling that suggested the potential to create 177 new or reconfigured jointly managed community schools and sixth forms with expanded numbers of learners from different communities attending the same school and learning together. That last point, learning together, is absolutely relevant to a discussion about the cost of division in relation to education. With the troubled past that we have, the cost to us as a society of keeping our kids apart through the school system rather than moving towards an integrated model is, frankly, really sad. Despite the Integrated Education Act having been passed three years ago with clear duties to encourage, facilitate and support integrated education, today it is still very much a grassroots movement.

The Committee recently had a really positive and myth-busting session on integrated education. Integrated education was described not as a sector but as a bridge between the system that we have now and a sustainable system capable not only of delivering great education but of building reconciliation. Integrated education, as stated expressly in the Act, is about more than religious mixing between Protestants and Catholics. It is about open, inclusive learning environments that embrace, through governance structures and a deliberate ethos, those from different backgrounds, be they cultural, faith, socio-economic or SEN. It is not about erasing or disparaging the ethos of other schools but about mindfully and deliberately finding ways to include and respect them in a sustainable school model. It offers an opportunity for us, and we should take it.

Mr Gaston: I find the motion deeply ironic. While the Alliance Party likes to portray itself as the champion of a shared society in meaningless motions such as this, when it comes to legislation and policy, it supports things that fan the flames of division. As I pointed out last week, polling illustrates that there is no greater indication of division than Irish language street signage. Some 88% of unionists are less likely to move to a road that has Irish language street signs. That might not worry the Alliance Party, but the party should take note that the same was true of 26% of its voters. In Belfast, however, Alliance supports a policy of imposing Irish street signs in areas where just 15% of residents want them.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Mr Gaston, please refer to the terms of the motion or at least to the amendments.

Mr Gaston: Yes, indeed. We are talking about division in Northern Ireland and how decisions taken by political parties impact on that.

No thought has been given to the fact that such a policy in Belfast of wanting or allowing for street signage when only 15% of people want it —.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Mr Gaston, there is no mention of those matters in the motion or the amendments. Will you return to the motion and the amendments?

Mr Gaston: Indeed, I am doing that.

Miss McAllister: Will the Member give way?

Mr Gaston: I will. Go ahead.

Miss McAllister: As a former Belfast city councillor and someone who sat around the table when that decision was made, I point out that you are factually incorrect.

Mr Gaston: It is OK for the Member to say that, but she has not said where I am factually incorrect. Indeed, my understanding —

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): You have an extra minute.

Miss McAllister: Will the Member give way?

Mr Gaston: Go ahead.

Miss McAllister: You could look at decisions by Alliance Party Belfast city councillors when the issue came up and the majority of people or even just 50% voted in favour of or against it. Look at your facts.

Mr Gaston: Well, Mr Deputy Speaker —

Mr Kingston: Will the Member give way?

Mr Gaston: Yes. Go ahead, Mr Kingston.

Mr Kingston: Through the Member, I ask the Alliance Party this: if it is saying that it is voting against Irish street signs where a majority of residents oppose them, does that not mean that the policy that they supported at the time needs to be changed? If they accept that they will not support it where a majority of residents indicate that they do not support it —

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Members, resume your seats. I have asked; I do not want to instruct. There is no mention of those matters in the motion or the amendments. Please return to the terms referenced in the motion and the amendments.

Mr Gaston: In dealing directly with the motion, I note that it talks about the cost of division in Northern Ireland. That is a symptom of division. It has created in Belfast a lot of anxiety, distress and annoyance in the unionist community, so it is relevant to the debate today. To impose Irish street signs when only 15% of those who live on the street want that is to embed division. Mr Deputy Speaker, that is something that you cannot rule out of order in regard to the motion.

The Alliance Party tabled the motion. I will close with this: in Bunyan's 'The Pilgrim's Progress', we encounter a character named Mr Talkative, who likes to talk about religion but whose religion has no practical impact on how he conducts himself. In much the same way, the Alliance Party likes to talk about ending the social impact of division while acting as Sinn Féin's little helper in entrenching division in its approach to the Irish language. The Alliance Party needs to open its eyes to the fact that its decisions are embedding division in my community and the community in Belfast with its approach to Irish street signs.

Mr Honeyford: Will the Member give way?

Mr Gaston: I am happy to give way.

Mr Honeyford: I appreciate that the Member struggles with any form of reconciliation and that he nitpicks and niggles at everything that is negative and at the wounds and hurts of the past, but surely the Member's party can see some benefit in sharing this society and working to build a better community that everybody can benefit from, rather than picking at wounds and hurts.

Mr Gaston: I certainly disagree with the Member that I am nitpicking. I am here to speak up for a large section of the unionist community who feel downtrodden by the Alliance Party, its policy and its decisions, when its members portray themselves as the great champions of a shared society but, in reality, that is not the case.

We see in Belfast a prime example of the Alliance Party showing its true colours. Before its Members bring a motion to the House, they need to look at their glass house, essentially, and how their decisions entrench division. If you want to move beyond that, Mr Honeyford, certainly, let us do that, but the decisions and actions that your party takes in the Chamber and chambers across Northern Ireland — [Interruption.]

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Order.

Mr Gaston: — certainly entrench division

Mr Honeyford: Will the Member give way?

Mr Gaston: I am happy to give way.

Mr Honeyford: You have 45 seconds left. Give me 45 seconds of positivity on how you will reconcile this community, this place, this land, this region, Northern Ireland, whatever you call it. What are you going to do?

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): You have 30 seconds.

Mr Gaston: In 30 seconds: this place will never work because of mandatory coalition. If you move towards voluntary coalition and have a Government of the willing —. We have a lead party here that does not want Northern Ireland to work. If we want to move towards a society that works, the Alliance Party should look at getting those in government to agree a Programme for Government that will work and deliver for the people of Northern Ireland. This place is a toy town. This place will never work.

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

I call the Minister of Finance to respond to the debate. You have up to 15 minutes.

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

I welcome the opportunity to participate in today's debate on tackling the financial and societal impacts of division. The 2016 Ulster University Economic Policy Centre study, which Members have been discussing today, suggested a broad range in the possible cost of division of between £403 million and £833 million. The report, however, outlined the significant complexity of the cost of delivering services here: costs that cannot be solely attributed to having a divided society. For example, delivering services in such a small region means that we do not benefit from economies of scale. I add that that is particularly the case when working on an all-island basis. We should be looking for opportunities to build on island-wide service delivery, particularly in border regions, in order to maximise efficiencies and service provision. The Ulster University report also found that the costs of public service provision:

The one exception is the cost of policing. The report also stated:

realised by the Executive. It continues:

We agree that we need to deal with division and its root causes. It is also important to recognise that we have come a long way as a society but there is much more to be done in order to continue to reduce division. As a result, policing and justice costs are particularly high. They are significantly higher than those elsewhere on these islands. The process of reconciliation is key to reducing them.

The recently launched Programme for Government sets out an ambitious agenda for change. It will take all Departments working in partnership to address what matters most, including the division in our society. I am all too aware that any means for the Executive to release and divert funding to other areas of pressing need will be welcomed.

We have ambition to reduce division. I argue that we need to build relationships not just in the North but across these islands and perhaps in the Chamber as well. We need to manage the change that is coming and work to bring about a more welcoming and inclusive society. Our ambition should be to have a society that is at peace with itself and promotes respect, which would have the added effect of bringing us financial benefits.

More critically, in a fast-changing world that is less stable and more uncertain, it is our duty as politicians to provide hope, opportunity and leadership. The Executive Office leads on some of the reconciliation measures. Nonetheless, it is incumbent on all of us to try to heal the divisions in our society and to promote reconciliation, thereby reducing the cost of sustaining division.

The Programme for Government outlines the vital need to lay the foundations for longer-term improvements in our society. It sets out three long-term missions — "People", "Planet" and "Prosperity" — which are underpinned by a cross-cutting commitment, "Peace", providing us with a driving ambition for the future and a lens through which to prioritise and ensure that we deliver improved well-being, long-term sustainability and a thriving economy. That is the Executive's cross-departmental plan to tackle the pressing issues to make this a better place in which to live and work and to tackle the big issues facing our society.

The reform and transformation of public services is also a Programme for Government priority, with a commitment to establish a new delivery unit at the heart of government. I am pleased to have made significant progress on transformation already by announcing the first tranche of £120 million of funding across healthcare, special educational needs, justice and infrastructure earlier this month. While the total funding available of £235 million will in no way tackle the magnitude of the issues in hand, it will be significant in helping develop and implement a model of delivery to stimulate the wider transformation of public services. Transformation will take time. More needs to be done, and this is a step on the journey.

Members are aware that the interim fiscal framework provides new funding arrangements based on a new needs factor of 124%. It is essential that we are funded at least to that level of need in order to enable the Executive to deliver sustainable public services. My Department is working to develop an evidence base to demonstrate the need for a higher level of funding to inform the upcoming spending review in 2026-27. I am pleased that Gerry Holtham, a renowned expert in the field of public finances, has agreed to take forward that work, which is now well under way.

I note that the Members who tabled the motion call on me to include an assessment of the cost of division as a statutory duty of the independent Fiscal Council.

It is not my intention, nor would it be appropriate, to undermine the council's independence. Including the specific requirement to assess the cost of division in the statutory remit of Fiscal Council is not the way forward. Indeed, I met the Fiscal Council last week, and the chair, Sir Robert Chote, cautioned against that. Rather, I will seek the Executive's agreement to introduce legislation that broadly aligns with the council's current terms of reference, which are to assess and report on the current and future state of our public services.

Mr Tennyson: I thank the Minister for giving way. Whilst I understand the difficulty in asking the Fiscal Council to undertake a full assessment, does the Minister see any merit in asking academics, for example, to undertake an assessment and then asking the Fiscal Council to have due regard to Departments' approach to tackling the cost of division? I understand that we do not want to be too prescriptive, but surely there are some innovative solutions to ensure that the issue is addressed.

Mr O'Dowd: The motion calls on the Fiscal Council to be instructed to do a task. That, in itself, is a mistake. The important element of the Fiscal Council is that it is independent. While certain demands or calls on the Fiscal Council may be noteworthy or admirable, it is a mistake for the Assembly or the Executive to interfere in the council's role. We should allow the Fiscal Council to carry out its work and the Executive to implement their Programme for Government and ensure that we all, as political leaders, work together to reduce division in our society and, therefore, the cost of division.

I am happy to give way one more time.

Mr Tennyson: I thank the Minister. He is always willing to take part in debate, and I appreciate that engagement. The Minister often asks that Members come to the Chamber with solutions. We have suggested a solution, as we see it. If the Minister does not agree with that approach, what is his suggested approach to ensure that the cost of division is tackled through our Budget cycles and process?

Mr O'Dowd: I do not criticise the Members for bringing forward the motion. I disagree with them, which is different, about instructing the Fiscal Council to carry out a specific element of work. The Programme for Government, the Executive and the Assembly have roles to play in political leadership, which is the way to reduce the cost of division. We are a great place for putting ourselves down. We have made great progress over the past decade and a half, and I have no doubt that we will continue to do that, but we cannot be complacent about it.

I will give way one more time.

Dr Aiken: Thank you very much, Minister. My question is about the Fiscal Council. I fully endorse the view that it has to remain independent. However, one way to make it independent and to move faster is to bring its statutory status to the fore quickly. Can the Minister expedite that, please? That is where we need to be.

Mr O'Dowd: The draft legislation is being worked on as we speak, and I hope to have the Bill before the Assembly in the near future and certainly before the end of this period of the Assembly. I am working my way through that, and it is important that the council be put on a statutory footing.

Moving on, I also note the suggestion from the Members who put forward the motion for:

Given what I said at the outset about the complexity of attributing cost in the context of a divided society and the broad range of estimates that are in the latest analysis, I do not see the value in updating that highly uncertain assessment. Rather than continuing to reassess the issue, we need to get on with working together to deliver on our Programme for Government commitments, creating positive change for workers, families and communities, which will allow us to create the conditions that will help move our society forward in the years ahead.

I thank Members for participating in an interesting, if at times predictable, debate from some. Thank you.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): I call Mark Durkan to make a winding-up speech on amendment No 2. You have up to five minutes.

Mr Durkan: I thank the Alliance Party for tabling the motion. We compliment it, and I believe that our amendment complements it also.

We have heard and shared our deep concerns today about the high cost of division in Northern Ireland. It is a cost that, as we have heard today and see every day, places an unsustainable burden on our public services, economy and communities. The separation that has existed in our society for decades has manifested itself not only in social terms but in financial terms. We face a situation in which public resources are being duplicated, policing and justice costs are escalating and economic opportunities are left untapped.

The motion refers to the Ulster University Economic Policy Centre estimate that the cost of division in 2016 was up to £833 million per year. That figure can only have gone up since, and it is a figure that we cannot afford to ignore. That is money that could be better spent on essential services that are vital for the well-being of all citizens here. Those resources could have been used to tackle waiting lists, build much-needed social homes, improve education and even increase the number of police officers to keep our communities safe.

Eóin Tennyson referred to paramilitary harm and its cost to society. It is worth pointing out that those paramilitaries are happy enough to work across the divide that they have done so much to create and sustain. However, it is not just paramilitaries who profit from division. There are parties in here who do so as well. The big parties in here profit politically from division and are always happy to turn on the tribal taps, particularly, though not exclusively, when there is an election coming. Recently, we heard and saw from Paul Givan attempts to reduce scrutiny of his Department's spend to a sectarian slanging match. That is just not on. The DUP needs to lead, not be led by the even more divisive dinosaurs in the TUV. Far from the shared future that we were promised, we are seeing the shared-out future that David Cameron warned of. He did not get much right, but he was spot on there.

Declan Kearney spoke, and I agree with much of what he said about the impact of UK austerity on our ability to deliver services. We do need a bigger pie, but this is about how we cut that pie rather than having it carved up by a couple while services survive on the crumbs.

John Hume was not just our leader; he was a leader. He often said that the most important thing for any politician is to build a society in which people can live together with their differences respected. If we are to honour his memory and vision, we must recognise the undeniable truth that division comes at a heavy cost. That is not a cost that we can continue to bear without jeopardising the very future of our society. We must take action. It is time to demand an updated assessment of the true cost of division, one that reflects not only the financial impact but those huge societal consequences.

The Assembly has called on the Minister of Finance to ensure that the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council is given a statutory duty to assess the cost of division. I heard him bat that back. I do not believe that asking the Fiscal Council to carry out a piece of work compromises its independence. We are not trying to dictate the findings of that work, and I wonder what people or parties have to hide. We must go even further. We have to act in a coordinated manner across the entire Executive to tackle these challenges. Therefore, we also call on the First Minister and deputy First Minister to introduce a statutory duty on all Departments to cooperate with each other. We cannot afford to waste resources on the unnecessary duplication of services and functions. We need to improve collaboration, reduce waste and ensure that every penny of the Executive's Budget works to serve the needs of our people.

We cannot keep putting our heads in the sand. We are standing at a critical juncture. Let us come together and make the right choices for the sake of future generations. Let us tackle the impacts of division and ensure that our resources are spent in a way that builds a stronger, more united Northern Ireland — or North or Six Counties — whatever our different constitutional views are and whatever the future looks like on this island. The SDLP believes that that future looks brighter and better in a new united Ireland —

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

Mr Durkan: — in terms of people and public resources. We need to make this place work for people and families here and now.

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

I call Brian Kingston to make a winding-up speech on amendment No 1. You have up to five minutes.

Mr Kingston: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I rise to make a winding-up speech in support of the DUP amendment that was proposed by Diane Forsythe. As Diane said, the DUP is committed to supporting a shared future for all in Northern Ireland and to tackling division. However, that needs to be done with communities and not be imposed from afar by people who have no involvement on the ground. Diane pointed out that the wording in the Alliance Party's motion misrepresents the Ulster University report from 2016: the extra cost of public services in Northern Ireland, then calculated to be between £400 million and £800 million, was due to a range of factors not just community divisions. Diane pointed out that we should aim to make efficiency savings where possible across public services, and she gave some examples. It is important to ensure the accessibility of public services, particularly for vulnerable people in our most economically disadvantaged areas. The Fiscal Council has an important role to play, and it should be placed on a statutory footing.

Eóin Tennyson proposed the motion and acknowledged that addressing division is harder than talking about it. I was disappointing that, more than once, he spoke about segregated schools. That is lazy and disrespectful language from the Alliance Party. I hope that it will move away from such divisive labelling. Many of our grammar schools and controlled schools are as varied in their enrolment as many schools in the so-called integrated sector. The vast majority are involved in shared education initiatives and local area learning communities.

Colin McGrath made a cheerful contribution. He said that it was not for the Opposition to help to deliver the Executive's agenda in the Programme for Government, but I hope that they will find some things that they can support on behalf of the people of Northern Ireland. He complained about some examples from Belfast City Council, but he did not mention SDLP councillors voting through the provision of Irish street signs even where a majority of residents are against them, or their voting against the armed forces covenant in support of our armed forces veterans.

Declan Kearney bemoaned the principle of consent, which Sinn Féin signed up to in the Belfast Agreement, but he highlighted the annual subsidy to Northern Ireland from Westminster of over £18 billion. Steve Aiken, in replying to Declan Kearney, said that terrorism and killings during the Troubles were an enduring cause of division. He also spoke about the need for efficiency in public services, including in education. He said that we should be working for economic cooperation for our benefit on a UK-wide basis and a North/South basis, and he promoted a single education system.

Nuala McAllister acknowledged that division was one of the causes of extra cost in Northern Ireland and highlighted the need for more support for mental health services. Michelle Guy said that the school system is in need of reform. Timothy Gaston spoke about the divisive impact of the imposition of Irish language street signs and the resultant damage being done to community relations, particularly in mixed areas and mixed streets of Belfast.

The Finance Minister said that the cost of policing and justice is notably higher in Northern Ireland than elsewhere, but, in many other respects, our costs are similar to those in rural areas of the mainland. He said that we need to reduce division by building relations across these islands as well as in Northern Ireland, and that the transformation of our public services is the best way in which to reduce costs. He also spoke about the important role of the Fiscal Council.

I did not note anything productive in what Mark Durkan said.

I commend our amendment to the House.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): I call Paula Bradshaw to conclude the debate on the motion and make a winding-up speech. You have up to 10 minutes.

Ms Bradshaw: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I thank all the contributors to the debate. We found a lot of common ground, albeit most of the contributors spoke through the filter of their political party. Remarkably, Timothy Gaston agreed with Declan Kearney about this place's not being workable, but we in the Alliance Party believe that it is. We want to see public services delivered for everyone, regardless of their ethnicity, religion, culture or socio-economic background.

There is an old maxim in communication: it is only once you are fed up with presenting a message that the listeners begin to act on it. This is far from the first time that the Alliance Party has led a debate in the Chamber on the cost of division. Over 10 years ago, Deloitte was already putting the cost of division purely in terms of cost to our budget for public services at around £800 million per year.

It is also worth emphasising that the figure presented here from Ulster University Economic Policy Centre would, accounting for relevant inflation, now equate to something in the region of £1·1 billion every year.

I will pick up on Steve Aiken's point around making Northern Ireland work. He talked about the need for one single education system for all our children, the need for departmental reform and, most notably, the issue of the peace industry and the pandering of some to paramilitarism. I could not agree more with any of that, but we have to look at how we channel the common ground in the Chamber on how we address public service delivery.

The cost to our society is borne in three ways. First, and perhaps most obviously, it is borne through the fundamental duplication of services provided to a divided community. We can take teacher training as an obvious example. Secondly, there are the additional costs that come from administering and policing a divided society. Those costs are as much societal as financial. Thirdly, there are the economic opportunities that are lost through, for example, an ongoing insecurity about travelling to certain parts of Northern Ireland for work. Mark Durkan raised that point.

I take exception to the contributions from both the DUP Members who were called to speak. They said that the Alliance Party wants to talk down to communities and tell them what will happen to them. I spent 19 years working in the community and voluntary sector, and that is not the approach that I have ever adopted. I know that it is not the approach that any of my Alliance Party colleagues have adopted. In our communities, we are opposed to the carve-up whereby you get one and we get one. We want to create communities and neighbourhoods where there is not the demarcation of paramilitary trappings, where people can raise their children without fear of intimidation and where businesses can thrive without the threat of having to pay protection money to the local boyos.

My colleague Michelle Guy raised the issue of lost opportunity when she talked about the duplication of sectors in the education system. We heard from the DUP how a lot of schools are involved in shared schools initiatives. If our schools were properly integrated, there would not be a need for shared initiatives, and we would see our children being brought up together and finding common ground across different characteristics.

Mr Mathison: Will the Member give way?

Ms Bradshaw: Go ahead, please.

Mr Mathison: Does the Member agree that, in the past decade, around £1 billion has been spent on shared education projects and that, while those may be positive experiences for those pupils, that money could be better spent on delivering an excellent education system?

Ms Bradshaw: Definitely. Thank you.

I want to pick up on Declan Kearney's points on racism and sectarianism. We in the Alliance Party certainly see those as two sides of the same coin. He went on to talk about the need for Irish unity and creating an integrated economy. We in the Alliance Party are up for any discussions about how we can have North/South and east-west cooperation, and the Ulster Unionist Party Member for South Antrim raised that. We are up for any way in which we can deliver public services that create the best output for the people whom we serve without duplicating on expenditure.

Mr Tennyson: I thank the Member for giving way. It is telling that, when we are debating the cost of division, some parties decided to go into their individual trenches. Does the Member agree that, irrespective of whether there is constitutional change on this island, we will still live in a divided society unless we all work together to break down that community division?

Ms Bradshaw: Yes. Thank you for that. That was a useful intervention.

Naturally, the figure presented as being the cost of division could not realistically be saved overnight. Nevertheless, it is interesting to look at what we could be spending our money on had we addressed the cost of division when we first raised it for public debate around two decades ago. My colleague Nuala McAllister covered a number of points in relation to the health service and some on policing. We in the Alliance Party frequently call for the reform of how we address the water crisis in Northern Ireland.

I want to pick up on some of the comments from Diane Forsythe on our party's position on these sorts of policies. I have never said anything negative about cultural expression from any side of the community, apart from what I have said about paramilitary trappings. In fact, when I worked in the Village area of the Donegall Road, I organised jubilee events and Twelfth of July events etc because that is what that community wanted to have delivered. I find it insulting that the DUP likes to try to tar us as being sectarian and intolerant. We are not. We want to see the celebration of different cultures across this island, be that nationalist, unionist or any ethnicity. We want to see investment in our communities, but in a way that involves those communities and not just the community gatekeepers.

We have heard, in the debate, challenges to the costs quoted. That is fair enough, but that is why we make the explicit call in our motion for the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council to include an assessment of the cost of division in its reporting. I acknowledge the Finance Minister's concerns around the independence of the Fiscal Council. He said that it had to get on with the work of looking at the current state of our public finances. That is the whole point of our motion. Our public finances are tied up with delivering public services — in many instances, through duplication — so there has to be a workaround. I appreciate that the Fiscal Council is independent, but we need to face the reality of where our public finances are going.

It is endlessly frustrating to see a lack of action across the Departments here in addressing the cost of division. In the Assembly, we are good at demanding things of others but poor at taking our own decisive actions. I keep going back to the fact that the cost of paramilitarism, for example, runs into hundreds of millions of pounds every year, plus much more considering the long-term trauma that it causes to young people and their communities.

I am conscious of time, Mr Deputy Speaker. We have to change. It is uncomfortable — it means challenging routine and taking on vested interests — but that is what we are here to do. There is no excuse for further foot-dragging. I appreciated the language used by Colin McGrath — he is not in the Chamber any more — when he talked about our "carve-up politics". We have to move on from that, 27 years on from the Good Friday Agreement. What we have proposed in our motion is the least that we should do to address and tackle division to enable us to reallocate the vast cost associated with it to the greater good of society as a whole. I urge support of the motion.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): 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.

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

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): In conjunction with the Business Committee, the Speaker has given leave to Doug Beattie to raise the topic of concerns about the road infrastructure leading to Craigavon Area Hospital. Doug, you will have up to 15 minutes.

Mr Beattie: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I will certainly not take 15 minutes. I hope that this can be a debate in which we interact with one another about a particular issue at Craigavon Area Hospital. I start by thanking the Minister for Infrastructure for coming along to be part of the debate. My aim is to highlight genuine infrastructure issues and concerns near the hospital.

As we all know, Craigavon Area Hospital is a major site in our acute hospital network, serving more than 241,000 people. Since it was built in 1972, there have been major changes and developments — I am talking mostly about housing developments and changes to the schooling system — and the road network has not kept up with those. Now we have real concern that the road infrastructure around the hospital is not fit for purpose and could inhibit accessibility to the hospital in an emergency.

At certain times of the day in that neck of the woods, with traffic coming from all directions to the roundabout at Craigavon Area Hospital, there is gridlock, and I am fearful that, at times, ambulances are not able to get through. It really is an emergency, and it compromises our ability to get people to the hospital quickly. I will lay out a few issues, and I am sure that my fellow MLAs from Upper Bann and those who are not from Upper Bann may be able to add more.

The road leading from the Rushmere Shopping Centre in Craigavon towards the hospital, which is Mandeville Road, goes from a dual carriageway to a single carriageway just as it enters a major housing area at the Kernan roundabout. It is difficult for me to paint a picture of it, but we are talking about a busy dual carriageway that hits a roundabout at Kernan no more than, I would say, 600 metres from the roundabout at the hospital, when it suddenly turns into a single carriageway. That, invariably, creates a serious bottleneck. I know that it creates a serious bottleneck, because I happen to live in that neck of the woods and I cannot get out in the mornings because of the traffic. There is no way of changing that single carriageway into a dual carriageway. We just have to deal with the gridlock, which is set to get worse, because more housing developments are going up in the area.

I can stand here with others, and we can say, "We need housing". Of course we need housing, and we are in support of housing, social housing and creating space for people, but we need to make sure that the infrastructure can match the housing that is going up. With housing being built, however, there are more cars, more children going to school and, invariably, more gridlock around the hospital.

We have Portadown Integrated Nursery and Primary School being moved from Seagoe Road on to Mandeville Road. There are issues with that move, I have to say, but they are not infrastructure issues. They are with the Department of Education, because that move has been delayed and we do not now know when it will take place. We thought that it was going to take place in this or the next financial year. That is not likely to be the case, but the plan is still for the school to move on to Mandeville Road, which will create more traffic going into the school. Indeed, an issue was raised by a DUP colleague at the council, I think, about a flooding risk that comes from the school on to Kernan playing fields.

We have six schools in the vicinity of Craigavon Area Hospital. Those are Southern Regional College; Craigavon Senior High School; Bocombra Primary School; Seagoe Primary School; Portadown Integrated Nursery and Primary School; and Killicomaine Junior High School. Therefore, a huge flow of traffic already heads into what is quite a small road network around the hospital, creating a high volume of traffic at key times of the day, with high levels of traffic coming in from Mandeville Road, Seagoe Road, Lurgan Road, Killycomain Road and Kernan Road.

For the Minister, those are probably just the names of roads that mean nothing. It means, however, that every single access road heading to the hospital is gridlocked at some time of the day. Normally, that is first thing in the morning as kids are heading to school, but there are problems later in the day and during hospital visiting hours.

There was meant to be a traffic alleviation scheme. The original design would have seen a road junction joining the Bracken and Lisnisky Crescent estates, leading down to the A27, while making the rear entry to the hospital accessible. I think that the Minister knows that those plans are sitting on a shelf in her Department awaiting funding, but they have been stalled.

Mrs Dodds: I thank the Member for giving way and for building up a really good picture of the road network around Craigavon Area Hospital. It is indeed a fairly congested and very busy place. Do you agree that, before there are any moves to open up roads that would impact on private developments, residents should be consulted and there should be a fairly major exercise to reassure residents that their roads will not be used as rat runs to the hospital?

Mr Beattie: I thank the Member for that really important point. I will try to explain the problem as best I can. I think that the residents that you are talking about include those of Bracken and Lisnisky Crescent. The plan was always for a road to go through those two estates, heading down to the A27 and into the back of the hospital. That was always going to be the case. However, we are so far down the road now that, in the minds of people who have moved into the area, that would be an impingement for which they were not prepared. We will get what could have been avoidable objections from an awful lot of people, so we will have to go into a series of consultations with people. You are absolutely right.

If you look at the other side, at the wonderful road that has now been reopened that goes from the Kernan roundabout and heads past the Kernan cemetery, you see that it is being used as a rat run in the way that you mentioned. The speed of the traffic going down that road now is pretty bad. The problem is, of course, that the roundabout stops you getting onto that road. I agree with the Member that there has to be consultation at every level.

We all know about Lisnisky Lane, which goes up the back of Craigavon Area Hospital. It was resurfaced a number of years ago. The resurfacing was only temporary because the Department was going to put in that new infrastructure, which has now been delayed well beyond what we thought it would be. That temporary resurfacing on Lisnisky Lane is starting to crumble and degrade. Lisnisky Lane is no longer fit to cope with the level of traffic that is using it.

Craigavon has the largest active travel network, from Newry canal to Lough Neagh and Lurgan, yet the number of cars in the area is increasing due to the number of people who are coming to use the hospital and the change in the hospital network. That is becoming a genuine issue, not just for the people who live there, of whom I am one, although that is not why I brought the topic to the Chamber. It is a huge issue for anybody who has to go to the hospital, possibly in an emergency; anyone who has to transit from Lurgan to Portadown and use that road, because it cannot be avoided, to go to the Southern Regional College (SRC) campus; and pupils of Craigavon Senior High School who now have to go to the Portadown campus because the Lurgan campus was closed, which has increased the traffic further.

I apologise because it is difficult to explain the challenges. I invite the Minister — it is a genuine invitation — to come down and look at the network around the hospital. That might help her Department to free up the funds to get the traffic alleviation scheme in place so that the rear entrance to Craigavon Area Hospital can be used. I say that with the full understanding that we need to engage with the residents, because the residents of that area have changed. There are people who have bought houses there without knowing about the original proposals. We may have to revisit that.

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, Minister and all the Members who have turned up to talk about an important issue for many people in that area.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Before I call Jonathan Buckley, I advise all Members who wish to speak that they will have approximately seven minutes.

Mr Buckley: First, I thank my constituency colleague Doug Beattie for securing the Adjournment debate. It is a very important debate about a strategic asset located at the heart of our constituency, particularly for those from Portadown who live daily with the traffic implications around the hospital.

This is significant. We are truly grateful to have a hub hospital such as Craigavon Area Hospital on our doorstep. It does tremendous work. It has a 450-bed capacity and serves an estimated 240,000 people across Northern Ireland. People from constituencies as far as Newry and Armagh, Fermanagh and South Tyrone, South Down, Lagan Valley and further afield access that hospital daily.

The issues with the road infrastructure will not be easily fixed. Mr Beattie attempted to take us through the myriad roundabouts in Craigavon and the country lanes. It will not be easy to have a sustainable solution in the short term. I am particularly concerned about the Lisnisky Lane/Lisnisky Road issue. I have grown up knowing that development in its current state, and, in my lifetime, there has been no through road. I stress to the Minister that opening the road to enhance access to the hospital would be viewed by the residents as creating a rat run, as has happened in other areas. That is not in the interests of those residents.

Residents who live on the fringes of Craigavon Area Hospital have told horrific stories about patients who have escaped from mental health facilities and of brutal murders that have happened. We have to live in a world where we respect those who live in the vicinity. To respect those who live in the vicinity, we must take regard of their views on what opening up that stretch of road would look like. I agree with my colleague Diane Dodds and, indeed, Doug Beattie that the residents must be front and centre of any consideration. By my reckoning and from what I have heard of the feedback, the residents have said a firm no to opening up the road.

I want to talk about the wider issue. Doug is absolutely right: there is a huge issue that stretches way beyond the particular issue at Lisnisky. The road infrastructure is not in good shape. I have mentioned the number of people who transit the country to Craigavon Area Hospital. The recent statistics from the Minister's Department show that, this winter, the potholes on the road network between Lurgan and Craigavon Area Hospital were worse than anywhere else. There are already issues with the road network: it is tired. Mr Beattie mentioned that the temporary resurfacing of Lisnisky Lane has already opened up with potholes that, once again, have caused concern for the local residents.

If we are going to fix the problem in the longer term, we must look at the traffic flow patterns, particularly at the edges of the larger roundabouts and how that impacts on the traffic flow and timely access to emergency care.

Mr Beattie: Will the Member give way?

Mr Buckley: Yes.

Mr Beattie: The Member has raised an important point. One of the main roads that could help to bypass the problem is the Northway. The Northway leads onto the M12 and then the M1; it is a major access point. Yet, if there is a car accident on the road, the whole network pretty much falls apart from Portadown to Craigavon and further afield.

Mr Buckley: The Member has raised a good point. What emergency planning has the Department carried out in conjunction with the Department of Health on access to a key hospital such as Craigavon Area Hospital?

I hope that I have expressed the concerns about the Lisnisky Lane/Lisnisky Road issue clearly to the Minister. I feel that we have. On the wider issue, Mr Beattie hit on an interesting point: one of the key concerns is to do with the Northway, which is a huge trunk road that leads to many local services on the Northway or towards the hospital. There is a major concern about a more regular occurrence, and that is the failure of the traffic lights, which happens time and time again. You would be surprised, although I am sure that Members have got caught up in it, at the significant disruption that signal failure causes, particularly on the Northway, with traffic backing up towards the centre of Craigavon and on to the schools that Mr Beattie mentioned or to the hospital. That needs to be looked at.

Traffic flow is an important issue that the Department could, perhaps, address. That may alleviate some of the congestion, rather than our opening up a debate about a particular road that would be used largely by those who work on the Craigavon Area Hospital site but cause huge inconvenience to residents. If we can improve traffic flow, we could address the issue that the chief executive has raised of timely access to emergency care.

I thank the Minister and the Member who secured the Adjournment debate.

Mr Tennyson: I add my thanks to Mr Beattie for securing this important debate. I will not speak at length, because, in what is a rare event in the Chamber, I think that we are all singing off the same hymn sheet on many of these issues, which marks a nice change.

Like MLA colleagues, I have engaged for some time with the trust, the developer and residents on the secondary entrance to Craigavon Area Hospital that has been proposed as a mechanism to improve the road infrastructure around one of the busiest hospitals in Northern Ireland. As has been said, anybody who accesses Craigavon Area Hospital or lives nearby and commutes in the area will know about the daily build-up of traffic for anyone trying to access the main roundabout at the front of the hospital. That causes concern about access, particularly for emergency vehicles. Helpfully, Mr Beattie set out the wider context of some of the evolution that has happened in the area since the plans were tabled for changes to local education provision, including Craigavon Senior High School and the relocation of Portadown Integrated Nursery and Primary School. I welcome those plans, but there are issues with them that need to be worked through.

Craigavon is one of the fastest-growing residential areas in Northern Ireland. That is a real strength of the area and its community, but it comes with challenges for local infrastructure and services. I will add to that another layer of change: the often-touted redevelopment of Craigavon Area Hospital. I do not want to delve too much into that, because we have a notice of motion on it that will come before the Assembly in a number of weeks. It is another factor that we have to consider when it comes to any changes to access. We also, of course, have to consider the Health Minister's commitment to the transformation of our health service. Craigavon is an important asset as part of the wider network of hospitals, so we could see change coming to Craigavon Area Hospital, which may be in the form of additional services or whatever else that might be. We need to plan for that and account for it when we assess any alleviation scheme.

I recognise that the proposed purpose of the secondary entrance is to alleviate pressure from the main road with the new roundabout at the end of the Lisnisky Crescent development and a new staff entrance being created. From my engagement with the trust, I know that it is very supportive of that secondary entrance. To date, the expectation has been that that entrance would be progressed as part of phase 1 of the long-awaited hospital redevelopment. With that being uncertain, I am curious where we are with regard to any steps forward. In response to, I think, a question for written answer from Mr Beattie, the Department recently confirmed that the project was effectively "shelf ready" but that it was waiting for confirmation from the Southern Health and Social Care Trust and the developer that funds were in place for it to proceed. That may be the factual position, but, given the constraints on the trust's budget, it causes me concern that they are effectively being told that the ball is in their court and we are not seeing huge leadership. Where there are numerous bodies and statutory agencies involved, we often see issues fall between two stools. I am keen to hear from the Minister about how she intends to address that issue of cooperation and collaboration between the various agencies.

Consulting residents is critical. If you speak to residents on the existing Lisnisky Lane, a lot of them will tell you that they bought properties in the area on the promise that traffic would be rerouted through the Lisnisky Crescent link. Equally, if you speak to residents in Lisnisky Crescent, you will find that some bought their property at the outset but felt that it was not communicated clearly to them that the changes were going to happen. Other families who moved in were, due to the passage of time, simply not aware that the plans existed. That has created real tension, even among some residents who have different views on some of the issues.

There are two things that we need to do: look carefully at the proposed alleviation scheme and understand whether, given the current context of all the changes that have happened, that is still the right scheme.

I do not want us to be in a position where we develop new access and then suddenly, with the redevelopment of the hospital, it has to be torn up and done again, with all the disruption that that would cause for local residents. We also need to ensure that someone takes responsibility for engaging proactively with the local residents. I do not mean simply having a box-ticking exercise around a planning application; there needs to be meaningful engagement with the community so that it understands what the plans are and how any issues are going to be resolved. With the estate around Lisnisky Crescent operating as it has done for such a long time, families have got used to that being a dead end. Kids are often out playing on what will be the new main road. I can understand families' concerns, now that they are part of a settled community with the current roads infrastructure.

Mr Buckley: I thank the Member for giving way. He has made an important point, but it is not just there. The wider Bocombra area has become a wonderful location for young families that have moved into it. Their concern stretches further in that the opening of an access point to the hospital through Lisnisky Lane would, essentially, draw further traffic on to those roads, perhaps making it the sort of rat run that other areas have experienced.

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

Mr Tennyson: Thank you, Deputy Speaker.

It is a potential risk. There has to be a solution. Some form of alleviation scheme will have to be put in place. However, we need assurances that it is going to be the right one, that it will work and that it will not have unintended consequences, given the changes that have happened in the local area.

Even if many families moved in on the understanding that a main arterial route was going to go through the middle of their housing development, now that they have lived there for so long with the current situation, it is going to be very difficult, particularly for younger children, to adapt to that. It needs to be thought through really carefully, because there are potential unintended consequences.

Mr Beattie: Will the Member give way?

Mr Tennyson: I will, indeed, yes.

Mr Beattie: This is why it is a really important discussion. What Mr Buckley said, and what you are saying, is that, in many ways, because the traffic is so bad, we are displacing it elsewhere. If you go on to the Bluestone Road first thing in the morning, for example, you will see motorists shooting along that road and heading past Bocombra Primary School. Traffic is already being displaced because of that central problem. How do you fix that, given that people are so settled in the way that you have described? It is right that we speak to them, but we need to do something to ensure that, at least, ambulances and other emergency services vehicles can get to the hospital.

Mr Tennyson: I absolutely agree with the Member. Adjusting the infrastructure is one thing, but adjusting behaviours after the community has become so settled with a certain infrastructure layout is a much harder task. I do not envy the Minister and her colleagues when it comes to achieving that behavioural change.

I want to make two final points. One is that we need to consider closely how active travel can contribute to easing congestion in the central Craigavon area. We are lucky that we have one of the best active travel networks of any area in Northern Ireland. There are real opportunities, but we need to do further work to maintain the Black Paths network. There has been progress on the maintenance of that network, but we would all agree that there are still patches of the Black Paths that are in need of urgent attention. We could do much more to engage with schools and young people at an early age to encourage walk-to-school schemes and suchlike where that infrastructure exists. That, of course, will involve changing behaviours over a long period. I recognise, therefore, that it is not an immediate solution, but it is important that we engage with that network in Craigavon — it is a real asset to us — and realise the opportunities that it presents.

Finally, I want to raise the issue of the planned redevelopment of Craigavon Area Hospital, which we will pick up in later debates on the hospital. We are now almost 10 years on from the initial promise to redevelop Craigavon Area Hospital. Whilst I understand the constraints on capital budgets, it needs to be a priority. I look forward to engaging with the Health Minister on that issue as well.

Ms Finnegan: We are all aware of the importance of the high-quality healthcare that is provided in hospitals such as Craigavon Area Hospital and ar fud na hÉireann.

Despite the challenges that clearly exist in the North’s health system, health workers continue to provide vital services every day. Sin ráite, tá rochtain ar na seirbhísí sin iontach tábhachtach fosta.

Often, our rural communities, including border communities in south Armagh that I represent, have greater challenges in accessing services, including hospital services. Access to Craigavon Area Hospital, as well as to Daisy Hill Hospital, is vital for the health and well-being of people in the community.

Roads infrastructure plays an important role in accessing Craigavon Area Hospital, given our reliance on car travel. It is also important for the vital role that the Ambulance Service plays in getting people who are in need of urgent care to hospital. I am aware that the previous Minister for Infrastructure, my Sinn Féin colleague John O'Dowd, confirmed that the Department for Infrastructure was leading on the proposal to facilitate a secondary access route to Craigavon Area Hospital by creating a new roundabout and that that proposal was shelf-ready. It is important that the Southern Health and Social Care Trust, as the main funder, confirm the finance necessary to allow the project to progress.

Molaim an tAire Bonneagair reatha, Liz Kimmins, nó, mo dhála féin, is Comhalta de chuid Shinn Féin ón Iúr agus Ard Mhacha í, agus molaim fosta an t-iar-Aire Bonneagair

for prioritising investment in road infrastructure in the areas surrounding Craigavon Area Hospital. Even in a very challenging financial situation, the previous Infrastructure Minister, John O'Dowd, prioritised investment in road maintenance, road projects and active travel schemes. During his first year in office, Minister O'Dowd invested £150 million in road resurfacing and road maintenance. That showed a strong commitment to improving and maintaining the road network, and I am sure that Minister Kimmins will be committed to that as well.

I welcome the fact that Minister Kimmins recognises the vital role of road infrastructure in making public services — for example, those provided in hospitals such as Craigavon Area Hospital and Daisy Hill Hospital — accessible to everyone in the community.

Mr McNulty: It is brilliant to see that the Infrastructure Minister has joined us for the debate. I know that, as a Newry and Armagh Minister, she will be aware of the state of the road network, especially in rural south Armagh. For example, driving on the road between Newtown and Armagh is like driving on the far side of the moon because of the size of the craters and potholes. I hope that the Minister can give that some attention and make it a priority for repair.

Craigavon Area Hospital is one of the key healthcare facilities in the North of Ireland. It provides vital life-saving, life-enhancing and life-changing services to a large catchment area with a population of a quarter of a million people. However, the challenges posed by the transport infrastructure between the hospital and the neighbouring regions, such as south Armagh and Newry, are significant and demand our immediate attention. For many people in Newry and south Armagh, accessing Craigavon Area Hospital is essential. Whether it is for emergency care, specialist treatment or routine appointments, the hospital plays a pivotal role in serving thousands upon thousands of people. However, the connectivity between those areas and the hospital is not as efficient as it should be.

The road network, including the dangerous A1, is often congested, especially during peak hours. The delay impacts not only on daily commuters but, more critically, on patients who require urgent medical attention. As we know, time is often of the essence in healthcare. Any transit delays can be massively detrimental to a patient's well-being. Try getting quickly to Craigavon Area Hospital from Cullaville, Newtownhamilton, Silver Bridge, Dorsy, Forkhill, Crossmaglen, Drumintee, Camlough, Lislea, Belleeks, Cullyhanna, Meigh, Bessbrook, Keady, Granemore, Tassagh, Mullaghbawn, Jonesborough, Killeavy or the greater Newry area, and you will have a problem.

Add to that the reality of the lack of public transport options for those who do not have access to a car. Public transport between those areas and into Craigavon is not only limited but very unreliable. Bus services often do not run at times that allow people to attend appointments or visit loved ones at the hospital, creating barriers to access, particularly for elderly and vulnerable members of our community. Additionally, for patients who require regular visits for treatments such as dialysis or chemotherapy, the current transport options are simply inadequate.

Improving the infrastructure in the region is not just about making travel more convenient; it is about improving health outcomes. By enhancing the transport links between Craigavon, south Armagh and Newry, we can reduce delays, improve access to healthcare and ensure that no one is left behind due to logistical barriers. It could include investing in the upgrading of key roads, expanding public transport services and exploring new modes of transport, such as shuttle buses or patient transport services that are tailored to hospital visits.

We have heard much about the need to transform the health service, and we have seen the steady shift of services from Daisy Hill Hospital to Craigavon Area Hospital, but a key consideration that seems to be have been overlooked is the fact that the healthcare infrastructure of the region is only as strong as the connectivity that supports it. We need to ensure that the people of south Armagh and Newry and surrounding areas can access Craigavon Area Hospital without unnecessary delay or hardship. By addressing those infrastructure challenges —

Mr Beattie: Will the Member give way?

Mr McNulty: — we can make a real difference in the lives of countless individuals who depend on that vital service.

Of course.

Mr Beattie: Sorry: were you finished, or did you give way?

Mr McNulty: Yes.

Mr Beattie: You gave way; I thought that you had finished. You painted a really good picture of what it is like beyond the immediate area of Craigavon Area Hospital. You raised some really good points, but here is a fundamental one: even if you have shuttle buses to put people on that are well timed and easy to access, they still could not get to the hospital quickly because they would be caught up in the same immediate gridlock in and around the hospital.

Mr McNulty: I have the solution to that.

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

Mr McNulty: Make Daisy Hill a hub hospital. [Laughter.]

Allow it to serve its natural hinterland of Newry, south Down and south Armagh, and, on a cross-border basis, north Louth and Monaghan; that is the solution.

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

Ms Kimmins (The Minister for Infrastructure): Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

I thank Mr Beattie for securing this important debate on concerns about the road infrastructure leading to Craigavon Area Hospital. The issue is important to me, as a Newry and Armagh MLA and a former member of the Health Committee. I listened intently to Members as they commented and raised issues, and I have heard their concerns, particularly about the inner road network in Craigavon. The area is similar to others in the North, but, having been at the hospital in a personal capacity and for meetings and other things, I am aware of the surrounding road network. I am not familiar with all the names, but, in my mind, I can see it. It has been useful to get a real insight into it, and I thank Mr Beattie and other Members for Upper Bann for the information that they gave.

It goes without saying that investment in new roads and in maintaining roads is critical to ensuring the safe movement of people and goods, allowing the growth of our economy and ensuring good health outcomes. I stress that the North can have whatever quality of road network that it wants; it just needs to be funded. Without such funding, roads will continue to deteriorate and pose a safety risk and will impede safe movement. My Department, like other Departments, has operated in a difficult financial environment for a number of years due to the chronic underfunding that we are all aware of, with the austerity of successive British Governments. That creates significant challenges to our ability to maintain the road network in a safe condition.

Mr Buckley: I thank the Minister for giving way. We know that the roads are in a terrible condition and that funding is much needed, regardless of where you are in Northern Ireland, but I give her this scenario: statistics show that the area between Lurgan and Craigavon Area Hospital is in the worst state that it has ever been in on record. Is the repair of trunk roads to a hospital ever given priority over the repair of other roads?

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

Ms Kimmins: I thank the Member for raising that point. Given that it is a significant route, my assessment is that it would be prioritised, but I can get further information from officials on the specific area. The topic of the debate is broad, so I do not have the specifics here, but I am happy to come back to him on that later.

I am well aware of the frustration and, at times, inconvenience that is caused. People and communities in the area rely on the road network to do business, go to work and school, connect with one another and, more important to this debate, access critical health services. Officials have worked hard to maintain the road network; they have nonetheless been forced to concentrate on only the highest-priority road repairs. We have all seen the continued deterioration in infrastructure over the past 10 years as a result, as the Member outlined, with a large number of potholes, some of which beggar belief, and other defects developing across the road network. The weather has also played a critical part, particularly in recent times.

The estimated value of the difference — this encapsulates the scope of the shortfall in funding — between what was needed to maintain the network and what was available to spend between 2014 and 2024 is approximately £1 billion. That clearly identifies where the challenges lie and makes apparent the difference in quality that should be expected when such a significant shortfall in maintenance spending occurs.

It is also important to say that, at this time, my Department is considering a new road maintenance strategy. I hope to be able to provide the Assembly with more information about that in the time ahead, because we have to look at whether we can do things differently.

The Executive agreed the 2024-25 Budget, and best use has been made of that funding, by my predecessor and, in the short number of weeks that I have been in post, by me, to target road resurfacing. In this financial year, £104 million has been allocated to capital structural maintenance, which includes resurfacing. That figure includes £12·5 million of the £19 million that my colleague the former Minister for Infrastructure secured for essential road maintenance and street-lighting work from the October 2024 monitoring round.

Regrettably, the resource funding position is equally challenging. It will mean having to continue with a limited service for road maintenance that targets the highest-priority defects in order to protect public safety until such a time as we have increased funding or find a better way forward. I continue to work with Executive colleagues to ensure that the appropriate investment is made to improve the quality of our road network and to contribute to the delivery of priorities in the agreed Programme for Government.

Local traffic congestion has been the key theme of the debate. I am aware that traffic can build up in some parts of the Craigavon area, including the Northway, as Members mentioned, and the A27 Lurgan Road, at peak times in particular. That is consistent with traffic patterns and conditions across many of our towns and cities. It is important to recognise, however, the potential impact that the congestion may be having on access to Craigavon Area Hospital.

My Department's transport strategy and its suite of transport plans will set priorities for the future development of our road and rail network up until 2035. Mr Tennyson's comments about some of the plans that were in place previously and whether we will have to start over will feed into setting those priorities, because the strategy is working to address the challenges that we currently face. There are a growing number of cars on the roads, so, yes, it is about congestion, but we must also consider the climate emergency and transport safety, which are key priorities.

A number of Members talked about active travel. As Members will know, I am keen to promote and encourage the use of sustainable transport modes such as walking, cycling and public transport as an alternative to the private car. Officials are reviewing submissions received as part of the public consultation stage of my Department's draft active travel delivery plan. The consultation concluded on 28 February. I thank everyone who took the time to respond to it. The consultation will lead to my finalising the delivery plan.

Mr Beattie: Will the Minister give way?

Ms Kimmins: I will indeed.

Mr Beattie: The Minister makes a really good point. We call them the Black Paths. The Minister will know where we are talking about. If people were to use the Black Paths a lot more, by walking, cycling or whatever, the Minister is absolutely right to say that that would alleviate an awful lot of the problems. One of the real issues, however, is that the Black Paths are not maintained to the level at which they need to be maintained. At night-time and at other peak times, people are therefore scared to use them.

Ms Kimmins: I thank the Member for his intervention, because it leads me on to the next few points that I was going to make.

Officials continue to take forward active travel projects in local areas, including Craigavon. There is a proposal to upgrade and improve the links to Craigavon Area Hospital on Mandeville Road from Parkmore towards the hospital. Earlier in the year, work was undertaken to upgrade the existing segregated cycle tracks and footpaths along the Black Paths between the underpass at South Lake leisure centre and Drumgor youth centre. As the Member said, doing that will hopefully help improve active travel connections to local schools and other amenities and, importantly, improve the connections for residents in the surrounding area. Associated with that work is the awarding of the contract to build the replacement footbridge at Moylinn in Craigavon, which will connect the local community. The Black Paths also form part of the national cycle network, providing access to the local leisure centre and shopping facilities. It is my intention that further projects will be delivered in the Craigavon area that encourage and enable safe, active and sustainable travel choices.

A number of Members raised the issue of having a secondary access route to Craigavon Area Hospital. As some pointed out, in partnership with the Southern Health and Social Care Trust and a local developer, officials have explored the potential of a new secondary access route to the hospital coming from Lisnisky Lane. I take on board the concerns that have been raised, which form an important part of any planning or development process. To date, the Department has taken the lead and engaged with the health trust and with the adjacent housing developer and landowners to develop a solution, and planning approval was received. As has been pointed out, the major benefactor of that access route would be the health trust. Therefore, it was agreed that the health trust and the Department would be responsible for a lot of the funding and would be required to make it available. Officials continue to engage with the trust on that. At this stage, we are unable to commit to taking forward the project until funding is secured. However, I take on board the concerns that have been raised in relation to residents. When funding looks more likely, we will, hopefully, be able to engage in consultations.

I will quickly recap on some of the other points that were made. My colleagues in Newry and Armagh raised connectivity for people coming from Newry, south Armagh and, indeed, South Down, who, for various reasons, may have to go to Craigavon Area Hospital instead of Daisy Hill. That is a point that we have consistently raised. We recognise that, on the whole, our hospital network is changing with the transformation of health services, but we have to ensure that hospitals are easily accessible to all. That is an issue that I am acutely aware of. I hope that any future transport plans are made in tandem with the transformation work of the Health Minister and his Department.

Mr Buckley: I thank the Minister for giving way. Minister, you outlined how difficult it will be for anything to happen in the immediate future, but, as I said in my contribution, there are perhaps some things that we can do to increase traffic flow in the short term. Will you task your officials with looking into the frequency of traffic light outages in and around the Seagoe, Kernan and Northway areas? There are huge impacts and knock-on effects when the lights are down, and it particularly affects the traffic that accesses the hospital.

Ms Kimmins: I thank the Member for coming back to that point. I intended to come back to you on it, because I know that you raised traffic light failure. I will ask officials to look into it, specifically for the routes that you mentioned.

I thank Doug Beattie for bringing the matter to the House, and I thank the Members who contributed. It has been a very important and useful debate. I reiterate that the value of our infrastructure cannot be overstated. We see that more and more every day. Long-term underinvestment in our roads is impacting on their integrity not only where the quality of road surfaces is concerned but in how we connect with our communities. I am keen to see that addressed as much as possible in my tenure. It is not what I, the public or my Department want to see. We want to see it improved. I continue to work vigorously alongside Executive colleagues to secure the investment that is needed to maintain and improve the quality of our road network for the people of the North and, indeed, further afield.

I also take this opportunity to remind everyone that we all have personal responsibility when driving on our roads. My predecessor made the very important point, which has been brought back to me by many members of the public, that, when we are in the traffic, we are the traffic, so I ask that we do something to change the situation and help to address some of the issues that have been outlined today.

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