Official Report: Monday 28 April 2025

Mr Speaker: Since our previous sitting, Members will be aware of the passing of Pope Francis on Easter Monday. In the time that has followed, we recognise that many in our community have been in mourning. That has been seen in the tributes that have been paid to Pope Francis by Catholics and those of other faiths and none across Northern Ireland and throughout the world. Indeed, during the Easter recess, many Members expressed their personal reflections on Pope Francis. The Assembly has never previously been sitting when a Pope has died in office. It is right and important, however, that the Assembly have the opportunity to express formally its condolences and to reflect the sorrow and thanksgiving that has been expressed in the community. Following contact between the Speaker's Office and party Whips, I therefore wrote to Members last week to inform them that our scheduled business would be delayed in order to enable this sitting to begin with condolences. I thank officials and Whips for giving of their time over the Easter holidays to put those arrangements in place.

I will shortly open the condolences by calling the First Minister and the deputy First Minister, followed by representatives of each of the other parties, to speak for up to five minutes. After that, I will call all other Members who rise in their place to speak for up to three minutes. After all Members who wish to speak have done so, the sitting will be suspended for approximately 30 minutes, after which we will resume our scheduled business. At the conclusion of today's condolences, I will write formally to Archbishop Martin with a copy of the Official Report. The Assembly will now pay its respects. I call the First Minister.

Mrs O'Neill (The First Minister): Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle.

I had the privilege as First Minister of attending the funeral of Pope Francis on Saturday. It was a honour to join world leaders to pay our respects to a man who defined the best of human values. It is therefore with great sadness that I today express my deepest condolences following the passing of His Holiness Pope Francis. I extend my sympathies to his family and to the people of his homeland, Argentina; to His Excellency Archbishop Luis Mariano Montemayor, the apostolic nuncio to Ireland; to Archbishop Eamon Martin, Primate of All Ireland; to Church leaders across this island; to the Jesuit community; and to Catholics everywhere who are mourning the loss of their spiritual leader.

Pope Francis was a man of deep faith, profound humility and immense courage. He led the Catholic Church through a period of great change, challenge and renewal and did so with grace, integrity and a powerful sense of compassion for all people, particularly the poor and marginalised. He was a Pope of firsts: the first Jesuit to be elected to the papacy, the first Pope from the Americas, the first from the southern hemisphere and the first to take the name Francis, inspired by Saint Francis of Assisi, the patron saint of the poor. Those firsts were not only symbolic; they reflected his vision of a Church that should walk alongside those on the margins and speak with honesty and courage to the challenges of our time. He once described himself as a man from the periphery, and, in many ways, that is how he led. He was the voice of the voiceless in a world increasingly defined by inequality, division and conflict. He spoke in defence of the downtrodden and the displaced and was never afraid to challenge those in power.

Here in Ireland, many hold a deep and enduring reverence for the papacy, but, for Pope Francis in particular, there was a special affection. That bond was made all the more evident during his pastoral visit to Ireland in 2018 as part of the World Meeting of Families. Tens of thousands travelled to see him, and, for many, his visit remains a cherished moment of connection and inspiration. During the visit, Pope Francis met the survivors of clerical sexual abuse. He listened to their pain and publicly acknowledged the institutional failure of the Church and the grave errors and repugnant crimes committed within it. His words were both a reckoning and a call to action. He challenged the Church and society to do more: to listen, to protect and to heal. He also spoke passionately in support of the peace process on this island. He expressed his hope that we would overcome every remaining obstacle and give birth to a future of harmony, reconciliation and mutual trust.

Those words continue to resonate today. They serve as a reminder of the work that remains in building a shared, united and peaceful society for all. Throughout his papacy, Pope Francis was a progressive voice on many global and social issues. He spoke with compassion on LGBTQ rights, calling for respect and inclusion. He denounced the rise of political extremism and the dehumanisation of migrants, and, in recent years, he emerged as one of the most vocal moral authorities condemning the ongoing war in Gaza, calling for an immediate ceasefire, the protection of civilians and access to humanitarian aid. He challenged the indifference of the global community and reminded us that peace is not passive but must be pursued with courage and conscience.

Pope Francis will be remembered as a spiritual leader, a unifier and a man of deep moral conviction. He certainly practised what he preached. He lived simply, led humbly and never stopped advocating for the dignity of all people. His legacy is one of compassion, courage and hope, and his loss will be felt profoundly here in Ireland and across the world. Ar dheis Dé go raibh a anam dílis.

Mrs Little-Pengelly (The deputy First Minister): I offer my sincere condolences to all who are in mourning on the passing of Pope Francis.

His journey was remarkable, from humble beginnings as a caretaker to joining the priesthood and then serving as Pope, breaking precedent to be the first Pope to come from Latin America. The many comments and messages over the past days demonstrate the profound respect and admiration that people held for Pope Francis not only here in Northern Ireland but across the rest of the United Kingdom, in Ireland and across the globe. The many public statements made on his passing were notable for their common themes of compassion, of a humble spirit and of caring for and giving to those in need. I have no doubt that Pope Francis would have wished those principles to be his legacy. They are principles that we can all agree with, regardless of our theology, politics, faith or beliefs; principles that each of us should seek to live by in our public service; and principles that are core to my personal faith.

The loss of Pope Francis will continue to be felt deeply by the Church that he led and will be felt most by the many congregations here and across the world. May God give comfort to all who mourn.

Mrs Long: Mr Speaker, thank you for allowing us the opportunity to take some time, at the commencement of today's sitting, to reflect on and pay tribute to His Holiness Pope Francis after his recent passing.

There are few world leaders who can truly be said to transcend national boundaries. However, as the temporal head of the Catholic Church, Pope Francis was such a leader. His influence and the esteem in which he was held extended around the globe. Moreover, the admiration and respect for Pope Francis extended far beyond the bounds of the Catholic Church and its members. It touched not only Christians of other denominations but those of all faiths and none, who connected with his authenticity, his compassion, his consistency in his beliefs and his commitment to live a life that reflected those values.

In all that Pope Francis said and did, he sought to reflect the priorities, the heart and the humility of Jesus: embracing the marginalised; challenging injustice; being a voice for the voiceless; bringing comfort to the grieving and distressed; and showing generosity to the poor and compassion to the oppressed and displaced. He demonstrated those values not only by visiting marginalised communities and advocating for the rights of the poor and vulnerable in life but by ensuring that every part of his burial rite reflected that humility, from the simplicity of his coffin to its positioning at ground level during his requiem mass.

Pope Francis's papacy broke new ground in 2013 when the then Jorge Mario Bergoglio became the first from the Americas and the southern hemisphere ever to serve as Pope. His papacy was characterised by his humility, by his emphasis on God's mercy and compassion and by a commitment to inter-religious dialogue, to which he had always been committed. A vocal critic of economic inequality, consumerism and environmental degradation, he not only championed the poor, the vulnerable, the excluded, the migrants and the refugees but emphasised the need for action on climate change and socio-economic inequality so that we could transform this world and make it fairer.

Pope Francis, during his pontificate, also implemented and advocated a wide range of reforms, from making women full members of the dicastery in the Roman Curia to promoting greater inclusivity in the Church, including LGBTQIA people and those who were divorced. Whilst not all his progressive stances were fully embraced, he gave people permission to faithfully explore those issues and offered hope to those who were previously cast aside.

Pope Francis prioritised dialogue with other faiths, promoting mutual understanding and respect. That deeply personal commitment to interfaith dialogue was reflected in the range of meetings that he had with leaders across many different religious backgrounds. It also extended to his pursuit of peace and reconciliation more widely in conflict zones across the world, including, most recently, in Ukraine, Gaza and Palestine, where he was willing to challenge world powers and pressed for justice, peace and reconciliation.

Perhaps the most fitting way in which I can conclude my tribute is to quote the words of His Holiness Pope Francis himself, who reflected one of the fundamental truths of the Christian faith and journey. He said:

May God grant his soul peaceful repose, and may his Holy Spirit comfort all those who mourn his passing.

Mr Nesbitt: Members will be aware that I am not a member of the Catholic Church, but I do not think that that is any barrier to recognising that, for so many in this country, on this island and, indeed, around the world, Pope Francis was both a cherished leader and an inspiration. For the avoidance of doubt, I should not in any way be considered any sort of expert on religion, so I will refrain from commenting on Pope Francis's theology and, rather, focus on the man.

It goes without saying that every Pope is consequential globally, but few, if any, have been as universally appealing as Pope Francis — John Paul II, perhaps, but, to me, Francis was different again because of his values. He first struck me as somebody different and somebody special on his visit to the United States in 2015.

He arrived at the White House in the smallest of small black cars. There was no motorcade. There were no trappings of an international leader, and he eschewed the trappings that are so embraced by just national leaders. At the White House, he met President Obama, who praised his humility, simplicity, gentleness and generosity of spirit. The president told the Pope that he saw a leader whose moral authority came through not just words but deeds. I do not know about you, Mr Speaker, but that is a lesson for me. Pope Francis set the bar very high.

It would be wrong not to touch on historical institutional and clerical abuse. I acknowledge Pope Francis's personal engagement on the issue. He met victims and survivors on his visit to this island in 2018. Father Timothy Bartlett, who had a key role in planning that visit, spoke last week about a flight from the shrine at Knock to the Mass at Phoenix Park, during which Pope Francis asked for some paper to write notes. I can do no better than quote Father Bartlett, who said that that "penitential act" was:

Equally, I note the words of Mags McGuckin, that tireless and fearless campaigner with Survivors and Victims of Institutional Abuse (SAVIA), who clearly focused more on the institution of the Church than on the individual.

It has been said many times in the past week or so that Pope Francis was a disruptor. His life, funeral and burial as the Pope are a clear demonstration of that. As we wait to see what follows, I wish the conclave wisdom when it meets.

Mr O'Toole: Thank you, Mr Speaker, for facilitating today's session. I offer my and my party's most sincere condolences on the passing of Pope Francis, who was a great man and a great leader but, more importantly, a humble man and a humble leader. He was deeply loved, and he will be missed across Ireland and the world by, first and foremost, members of the Catholic Church but also, as is evident today, by members of other faiths and, indeed, those of no faith. Those of us who are religious and those who are not saw in him someone who embodied, even if they are not Christian, the true nature of Christ. In a world where our culture has grown harsher and more hostile, Francis was a man who represented decency, humanity and gentleness. He was a voice for the voiceless at a time when voices of anger and exclusion have grown louder and louder.

The first and most important example that Francis set was one of simplicity and humility. From the moment that he first stepped on to the balcony overlooking St Peter's Basilica, we saw something different from what we were used to seeing from Popes. There were fewer embroidered vestments and fewer crucifixes of gold and silver. There was a white garment, a plain cross and a humble wave to the crowd that he served. Foregoing many of the trappings of papacy, he remained a pastor at heart. His disdain for pomp and grandeur and anything that separated him from ordinary people, whether they were Catholics, Christians, those of other faiths or no faith, was plain to see. He travelled more than any Pope in history. He seemed to take real energy from meeting, engaging, laughing and connecting with people around the world.

It has already been mentioned that Pope Francis made a particular effort to reach out to communities who had previously been excluded from the Church, most notably, perhaps, the LGBT community. His words early in his papacy about gay people, when he said, "Who am I to judge?", set a new tone for the relationship between LGBT people and the Catholic Church. While it is fair to say that there is still a road to travel with those relations, his words were remarkably healing. He was the first Pope to allow priests to grant blessings to gay couples. He denounced discrimination against gay people, and he clarified that transgender men and women could stand as godparents during baptism.

The name that the media gave him upon his election as Pope was "The first Pope of the New World", and that role came to be more significant. It has already been mentioned that he was the first Pope from the southern hemisphere. He turned the Church's eyes away from simply the cathedrals of Europe and North America towards poorer communities in Central America, Africa and Asia. That influence can be seen in the coming conclave to select his successor. That commitment to the Global South, not just in a theological and ecclesiastical sense but in a policy sense, underwrote his commitment to tackling global poverty and climate change. Just as it was those who had been most distant from the Church to whom Francis offered the warmest welcome, it was those of wealth and power for whom he reserved often the sharpest criticism. In his 'Evangelii Gaudium', which was an encyclical written in the first year of his papacy, he outlined what he saw as the commitments and the Church's responsibility in relation to social injustice. He told the faithful that, just as the commandments say, "Thou shalt not kill", Christians must also say, "Thou shalt not" to greed, inequality and exploitation. He practised what he preached. He rooted out inappropriate and immoral investments in the Vatican Bank, and he re-devoted the Church's attention to causes of charity, conservation and economic and social justice around the world.

He was also not afraid to confront the rise of political extremism, even when those expressing that extremism draped themselves in the banner of Christianity. Francis was himself from an immigrant background, coming from an Italian family who had emigrated to Argentina, and he denounced the hypocrisy of those who claim to be Christian but turn away those fleeing war and persecution. In his final years, Francis devoted himself more and more to the cause of peace, and it has been well said already that Francis spoke movingly about peace in Ireland. In his final days, as his health was failing and even as visiting dignitaries were able to get only a few minutes, Pope Francis had a video call with children in Gaza to offer what must have been hope and comfort to those facing the most extreme suffering. His legacy is one of humility, service and the most profound service to Catholics and to people of all faiths and no faith around the world. May his soul rest in peace.

Ms Sugden: Today, like many across Northern Ireland, Ireland and the world, we mark the passing of Pope Francis with sadness and respect. Throughout his life, Pope Francis showed that real leadership is not found in dominance or division but in humility, service and resolute care for those who are often forgotten. His concern for the poor, the displaced and the vulnerable reached beyond politics or political boundaries. He reminded us that, whatever our background, compassion, dignity and truth must always come first. In Northern Ireland, where fear and division have shaped so much of our history, his life offered a different path — one rooted in our shared humanity, not in one that separates us. That message could not be more important today. Too often now, we see fear exploited and mistruth spread. Too often, we see concern for the vulnerable spoken about loudly, yet the real suffering of women, children and the marginalised ignored when it is less convenient to face.

Fear is a real and powerful emotion, and I would never dismiss it. However, when fear is fuelled, when it is turned into suspicion and hatred, and when those who are already struggling are blamed for hardship that they did not cause, we must call it out for what it is. Pope Francis showed that true care for the vulnerable is measured not in warm words but in action, in standing with those who are silenced, in welcoming those who are cast out and in choosing compassion over comfort. His passing also leaves serious challenges for the Catholic Church and its future. The wounds of past abuses remain raw. Trust, once broken, can only be restored through truth, accountability and a deep and lasting commitment to change. That work is essential and urgent, but today, first and foremost, it is time to honour a man who showed what faith in action looks like: quiet, courageous, humble and deeply human. He was not my religious leader, but his great example of humanity is one that I gladly follow.

May Pope Francis rest in peace, and may we, in our communities, politics and daily lives, have the courage to choose kindness over cruelty, truth over easy comfort and hope over fear.

Ms Murphy: I express my deepest condolences at the passing of Pope Francis — a man who led the Catholic Church with extraordinary humility, compassion and courage. From the moment that he was elected in March 2013, Pope Francis made it clear that he would be a voice for the most marginalised and vulnerable. Throughout his papacy, he showed us what it means to walk alongside those who suffer. He championed not only refugees but the poor, the sick, the elderly and the environment that we share. He called on us to build a world that is rooted not in greed or division but in justice, mercy and peace. He taught that every human being, no matter their circumstances or situation, is valued and cherished. He spoke boldly about the need for peace and dialogue across all cultures and religions. In a world that often turns away from the vulnerable, Pope Francis stood firm. He reminded us that true faith is lived out not in comfort but in compassion and not behind closed doors but in our communities.

Today we mourn his loss. We also give thanks for the example that he set — an example of tenderness, humility and empathy. Let us honour his memory by carrying forward his legacy to protect the dignity of every person and to promote peace and dialogue. May Pope Francis rest in peace, and may his spirit and teachings continue to guide and encourage us all.

Miss McIlveen: I rise to mark the passing of Pope Francis — a figure of immense significance to millions across the world. Alongside my party colleagues, I recognise the profound impact that Pope Francis had on the spiritual lives of thousands of people across Northern Ireland. At such a moment as this, we are reminded of the importance of respecting the sincere beliefs of our neighbours, even where deep theological differences remain. On behalf of the Democratic Unionist Party, I extend my condolences to all those mourning today, particularly our Roman Catholic neighbours and colleagues.

Ms Mulholland: It is with great sadness that I rise to mark the passing of Pope Francis — a leader whose compassion and courage changed lives, including my own and that of my family. For many years, I felt very distant from the Church: I struggled with its failings and questioned whether it still had a place in my life. However, through the example set by Pope Francis during his papacy, his humility and his focus on social justice, love and mercy, I found my way back to my faith over the past decade. Now, I attend Mass weekly with my young family. That has become a source of great comfort and grounding for us; it is something that I once thought would never be part of our lives again. For that, I will be forever grateful.

That is not to say that the Church is perfect, or that I believe it to be so: far from it. There are still deep issues of hurt within its structures, with which I and many others struggle, and questions that remain unanswered for many people, but Pope Francis never shied away from acknowledging those hard truths. His leadership taught us that real faith requires honesty, humility and a willingness to listen and to change. Throughout his papacy, Pope Francis called us to face not just the internal challenges of the Church but the wider suffering in our world. He named the pandemic of poverty for what it is — a moral emergency — and he urged all of us, including people of faith and people of none, to place the most vulnerable at the heart of our actions. That is something that we all could live with.

Perhaps what touched me most personally was his unwavering message of inclusion. His leadership opened the door wider for those who had felt pushed to the margins, those who had felt as if they were excluded and those who longed for a Church that was built on compassion rather than judgement. As we mourn his passing, I hope that the Church will continue on the path that Pope Francis so fearlessly set — a path that is grounded in humanity, justice and love. If it does, the seeds that he planted in so many hearts will continue to grow for generations to come.

Mr Butler: Thank you, Mr Speaker, for convening this very important moment in the Assembly. I do not think that there are many in Northern Ireland or across the world who will not remember Pope Francis with deep gratitude.

I will always be thankful for his visit to Dublin in 2018 and the chance that I had to attend the World Meeting of Families. It is a memory that will stay with me.

This is not to be irreverent but, given the complexity of the island that we are from, I will go back to something that happened at that meeting. It was an extraordinary event. Leo Varadkar, the Taoiseach at the time, and the Pope walked from one end of Dublin Castle to the other to take their seats at the front of a packed hall. I have been a person of faith for many years, and I was interested in how the event would go. This is the truth: an incredible beam of light came through a window and right on to Pope Francis. Given the theological background that I come from, that challenged me in a way that made me smile. One of the things that Pope Francis demonstrated was that it is not about religion; it is about faith. We have wrestled with that for too many years in this country. Whether you agree with the theology or not, the example that Pope Francis set was unquestionably good.

He was a different Pope, as was obvious from when he started. Why was he different? He chose to live simply by swapping the grand apostolic palace for a modest guest house; by driving small cars, as Mike Nesbitt mentioned; and even by carrying his own bags. It was clear that he was not about show; he was about service. His heart, as others have outlined today, was always with those on the edges. He made it his mission to reach out to the poor, the migrants and the forgotten. He visited slums, prisons and refugee camps. His vision of a Church for the poor moved the focus away from strict rules towards one of true faith and of mercy. Of course, there was his warmth, whether when kissing babies or — it is an image that really sits with me; I saw it at the weekend and had not seen it before — when a young girl with Down's syndrome made her way up to the altar and, instead of her being shooed away, he took that little girl's hand and gave his message holding her hand.

He was one for taking selfies, and he always spoke from the heart: one might think that he would have made a great MLA. He made the Church feel closer to the people. As was mentioned, for people on this island, particularly those whose lives were irrevocably changed by what the Church did not do to protect them, he sought to make a change. He rightly earned the title "the People's Pope". If he had left a message before he died, I believe that it would have been not to mourn his death but to learn from his example of humility and humanity. Our thoughts are with the people who will miss him: his family, his colleagues and those in the Catholic Church.

Mr McGrath: Like others in the House, I welcome the opportunity to pay tribute to Pope Francis. There is a saying that, when a man becomes Pope, he dies to himself. He takes on a new name, one that will, in many ways, define what his papacy will stand for. Yet, this Pope did not disappear into the role. He brought more of himself to the role, perhaps more than any Pope in modern history. He lived humbly, ate with the poor, visited prisoners and embraced all as a friend and equal. Wherever he went, he carried a message of mercy, kindness and compassion. When he assumed the papacy in 2013, he carried that message to the world, challenging everyone from the loftiest leader to the simplest shepherd to see in every face their brother or sister.

Pope Francis changed the style of the Catholic Church, but, perhaps even more profoundly, he changed its tone. He met countless victims and survivors of clerical sex abuse and acknowledged the Church's failures. He apologised without condition and moved decisively away from a culture of silence. In 12 years as Pope, through his witness and his words, Pope Francis helped to bring many people back to the Church, not by changing doctrine but by opening new doors to dialogue, presence and understanding. His was a papacy of mercy, and perhaps there is something in there that we can all learn from.

The Catholic Church is in mourning, and we await the convening of the conclave. However, there is hope and prayer in the hearts of many Catholics that whoever is chosen to succeed Pope Francis will carry forward his mission to make the Church a home for saints and sinners alike — humbler, more accepting and more open.

May the soul of Pope Francis now rest in peace, which he so beautifully espoused and so faithfully witnessed to people throughout his life.

Mr McHugh: On Easter Sunday morning, I watched on television Urbi et Orbi, the customary papal address that is given to the world to celebrate Easter and the Resurrection. Although, owing to his failing health, Pope Francis had delegated the papal address to Archbishop Diego Ravelli, he blessed the thousands of people in St Peter's Square and the tens of thousands worldwide who watched on television. Not only did Pope Francis wish all who were present a happy Easter but he insisted on being taken amongst the people. He was taken through the crowds, waving to and blessing all who were in attendance. Pope Francis was a Pope of the people to his very last breath.

Although the Pope's declining health was obvious, it still came as a shock to many when his death was announced on Easter Monday. During his 12-year tenure, the "people's Pope" was renowned for his humility, his devotion to his faith, his efforts to open doors in the Church to those who were previously ignored or shunned and his efforts to reach out to the marginalised, the dispossessed and the poor. Pope Francis was a Pope of peace. He had taken his message — the Christian message — to many corners of the world, where he met many political leaders, leaders of other faiths and those of no faith. It is ironic that, on the occasion of his funeral, a productive meeting between the American president and Zelenskyy, the leader of Ukraine, took place in pursuit of a ceasefire in the war between Russia and Ukraine. An end to that war was very dear to Pope Francis's heart, as was his desire for an end to the ongoing war in Gaza.

Pope Francis showed his concern for immigrants: an issue that has worldwide implications. He criticised those countries that shunned migrants. The Pope said that people cross borders looking for a better life. Is that not what we all want for our children? Are we not all the same people? In 2018, when Pope Francis visited Ireland, my wife and I attended the papal mass in Phoenix Park, where I heard the Pope's words of encouragement when he asked us not to be indifferent to the less fortunate. That is something that he exemplified throughout his tenure as Pope and even on the day of his funeral, when he ensured that a special place was reserved for marginalised and homeless people amongst all the world leaders and dignitaries who were in attendance.

As we say in Irish, ní bheidh a leithéid arís ann.

We do, however, hope that whoever is appointed to be the next Pope will follow the same direction in which Pope Francis led his Church. Ar dheis Dé go raibh a anam.

Mrs Guy: Thank you, Mr Speaker, for the time that you have given to allow Members the opportunity to pay tribute to the late Pope. It is much appreciated.

The first thing that I want to do, on behalf of myself and my colleague David Honeyford, is to express our sincere condolences to anybody in Lagan Valley and across Northern Ireland who is feeling the impact of that loss and is grieving for the Pope. You have been sincerely in our thoughts. I hope that the way in which Pope Francis's papacy has been remembered and honoured across the world and, indeed, in the Chamber will be a comfort to you.

I was raised and educated in the Catholic faith, but my admiration for Pope Francis is not based on deference. He was someone who embodied and validated for me something that I have said many times, which is that sincere people of faith are the very best people. Those people do not tell you how you should behave but rather show by their lived example their faith and values. Pope Francis offered a kind of leadership that is desperately needed in the world today. He was humble and authentic, showed strength through compassion and was embracing. In the Church that Pope Francis led, everyone was welcome. During his address on World Youth Day in 2023, he said of the Church:

He famously reached out to the LGBT community when he said, "Who am I to judge?".

In a world leaning towards so-called strongman-style leaders who gain power by exploiting and preying on the vulnerable and marginalised, Pope Francis prayed for them. He did more than that: he used the power of the papacy to advocate for them. Human suffering and injustice moved him. In his first pastoral visit outside Rome, he visited migrants fleeing Libya, where he denounced the globalisation of indifference. He advocated for peace, challenged the rise in antisemitism and could not be silent on the cruelty in Gaza and the continued, sustained bombing of people there. He spoke with clarity on the reality of climate change and, in keeping with his devotion to the poor, highlighted the disproportionate impact of climate change on the poorest people in our communities. His expression of faith is one that resonated with me, and he restored confidence in the institution of the Catholic Church for many Catholics.

God bless Pope Francis. Thank you for your service, for yours truly was a heart for service. May he rest in peace.

Mr Durkan: Pope Francis was a man of remarkable humility, compassion and courage. From the moment that the white smoke emerged and he stepped out on to the balcony of St Peter's Basilica, he captured the hearts of millions, not with grandeur but with simplicity. He was a pontiff of the people who walked among the poor, spoke for the marginalised and never shied away from challenging injustice, even within his own Church. He reminded us that faith is not just something that we practise in prayer but something that we must live out in action in how we treat the vulnerable, the neighbour, the stranger and, indeed, the earth itself. His encyclical "Laudato Si'" will stand as a lasting legacy in the fight for climate justice, urging us all to care for our common home.

He was fearless in his calls for peace in Palestine. In Ireland, especially but, as we have seen and heard today, by no means exclusively among the Catholic community in the North, Pope Francis was a source of spiritual strength and guidance. His 2018 visit to our shores rekindled hope, healing and dialogue, a message that we all still definitely need to hear and to give.

Go ndéana Dia trócaire ar a anam uasal.

He leaves behind a world where the conflict continues between darkness and light and all of us, whatever our faith — if we have any faith at all — should strive to carry on his torch of tenderness and compassion. Ar dheis Dé go raibh a anam.

Mr McMurray: Mr Speaker, thank you for affording us the time to mark the occasion.

On hearing the news and reading the associated reflections on the death of Pope Francis, I have been thinking about what I would like to have spoken to him about, had I had the chance. He was an ecumenical pope, meeting those from different denominations, including Eastern Orthodox leaders and Muslim leaders. He even met my mother and father's Presbyterian minister.

I would like to have talked to him about building bridges, not walls. On his name, "Francis", after Francis of Assisi — he was a man who loved Creation — he remarked, "These days, we do not have a good relationship with Creation, do we?". I would like to have talked to him about looking after his creation. On his approach to the LGBTQ+ community — "If a gay person seeks God and has good will, who am I to judge?" — I would like to reflect his approach in being accepting. He spoke about a healing Church: "Throw a rock in the air, and you will hit someone hurting". I would like to talk more about healing the wounds in our society. He spoke on the impact of consumerism on our environment and climate: "We create vast quantities of wants; yet, there are still many in need. We waste vast amounts of food; yet, people still go hungry". I would like to have spoken to him about that. He spoke of the isms of ideologies and how they can become outdated and be a barrier to peace and progress. I would like to have spoken to him about the limitations of ideological isms. He was a voice for strangers in foreign lands. He epitomised what my grandmother often quotes to me: look after strangers, for, amongst them, there may be angels. I should maybe have included that in the ecumenical section, as my granny is the most Presbyterian person whom I know. I would like to have spoken to him about the stranger in foreign lands.

I will not get the chance to speak to Pope Francis, but, if his theological legacy is one of encouraging us to speak to one another with more grace, that is something that I can subscribe to.

Ms Hunter: Thank you, Mr Speaker, for the opportunity to contribute a tribute to Pope Francis. I put on record my sadness and that of my constituents and those across the island following the passing of His Holiness Pope Francis. In my opinion, the late Pope Francis embodied everything that the world needs right now: the importance of seeking to understand each other, the importance of tolerance and the need to walk in each other's shoes and respect different religions and different cultures. Many, including me, feel strongly that Pope Francis breathed life into the Catholic Church. Pope Francis devoted his life to Christ and chose the name of Francis due to his love of St Francis of Assisi, the patron saint of animals, who is known for his commitment to helping and uplifting the poor. As a practising Catholic, I greatly admire his commitment to building a Church that is based on inclusion and respect, focusing on bringing young people closer to Christ and acting as a progressive Pope who was welcoming of all.

Lastly, having been raised in a place such as this — a place shaped by conflict — I greatly admired Pope Francis's commitment and courage with regard to peacebuilding in the Middle East, recognising that one murdered Israeli or one murdered Palestinian was too many. His commitment to speaking with and praying for persecuted Christians across the globe speaks to the type of man that he was. I hope that his final wish — one that he spoke of until his final days — for peace in the Middle East soon becomes a reality. May he rest in peace.

Miss McAllister: I express my condolences on the death of Pope Francis. I have often spoken out about not being a person of faith. I was raised in a Catholic household and went to a Catholic school. Growing up, there was always a picture of Pope John Paul on the wall — now Pope Francis. Many of the grandchildren in my family just assumed that Pope Francis was another family member until they recently saw him on the news. That is what it is like for many households across the world. Particularly in Northern Ireland, it is not unusual to see a portrait of the Pope in your parents' living room, because they feel so closely connected to their faith. It is therefore not difficult for me to recognise and respect the significance not only of Pope Francis but of the position and the office itself.

I speak today on behalf of those who mourn silently, as those in the Catholic Church often do. They mourn through prayer, whether at Mass, at home or in prayer groups. I think of people like my mother, who, like many others across Northern Ireland, travelled to Dublin in 2018 to witness the Pope and had the privilege of travelling to Vatican City. My mother, despite not being able to stand for very long or walk very far, was very determined and waited for many hours just to catch a brief glimpse and get blessed by the Pope. I respect and recognise the importance of the office and the person, but Pope Francis had an impact on all of us who hold the issue of morality so dear, whether we have faith or not. We often talk about change coming from within our communities, but change that comes from leadership is quite significant, in that it acknowledges, recognises and apologises for past mistakes. That was not beyond Pope Francis. My only desire and hope, as a person who is outside the Catholic Church, is that, for the next papacy, the conclave can select someone who will carry on his legacy.

Mr McGlone: Thank you, Mr Speaker, for giving us the opportunity and time to pay our respects to the late Pope Francis. On the passing of the Holy Father, Ireland bows its head not only in mourning but in deep gratitude for a life poured out in service. He was a man of towering faith. However, his greatness lay not in power but in the tireless labour of love in his defence of the dignity of every soul. He spoke to a world aching for truth, and, in the storm of change, he stood steady as a voice for the unborn, the poor and the forgotten. In lands torn by violence and greed, he became a pilgrim of peace, especially for Gaza and Ukraine.

He was, perhaps, a vehicle for that reconciliation even in death, as Presidents Trump and Zelenskyy met at his funeral. He also spoke on economic injustice, environmental injustice, racism, migration and indigenous rights. He said that war was a defeat for humanity.

Ireland, which itself is no stranger to sorrow, saw in him a mirror of our struggles. He was a man who knew suffering yet never despaired, and he met hardship not with anger but with deep wells of mercy. He called on us, young and old, to rise up and live not for ourselves alone but for a kingdom not built by hands. He championed the sacredness of life, the power of forgiveness and the need for justice rooted in love.

For his steadfast voice, his compassion without borders and his faith that dipped candles in our darkest nights, Ireland gives thanks. He has finished the race. He has kept the faith. May his work bear fruit in every heart he so lovingly tendered. Go ndéana Dia trócaire ar a anam.

Mr McNulty: I express my sadness and sympathies on the passing of Pope Francis. I offer my condolences to all those who mourn his loss. Today, we gather to honour the life and extraordinary legacy of Pope Francis, a man who demonstrated the quiet power of humility and compassion. He reminded us through word and deed that a society is judged not by the wealth or eminence of its most powerful but by the dignity afforded to its most vulnerable, downtrodden and bereft.

Francis demonstrated courageous leadership on the biggest issues of our time, such as protecting our environment. He spoke out against poverty and inequality, offering support to refugees and asylum seekers, showing genuine compassion to the LGBT community and condemning the Israeli violence and destruction committed against the Palestinian people. As a world leader, he acknowledged and defended the dignity of every human being, and, in doing so, he brought his Church back to the people.

So many words have been offered here and elsewhere to acknowledge and celebrate the legacy of the late Pope Francis. Ultimately, however, the real tribute to Francis will not come from online posts or speeches in Chambers such as this; his true legacy will be found in the millions of lives that he touched across the globe, in how he sought to tear down the structures of injustice and in the acts of kindness that he inspired across the world in people of all faiths and none. May his memory guide us forwards towards a future marked by compassion, humility, solidarity, love and peace. I measc na naomh go raibh sé.

Mr Speaker: Thank you, Members.

Mr Speaker: Stephen Dunne has been given leave to make a statement on Rory McIlroy's career Grand Slam that fulfils the criteria set out in Standing Order 24. If other Members wish to be called, they should indicate that by rising in their place and continuing to do so. All Members who are called will have up to three minutes to speak on the subject. I remind Members that interventions are not permitted and I will not take any points of order until the item of business is finished.

Mr Dunne: I am delighted to have secured the Matter of the Day to celebrate one of Northern Ireland's greatest ever sporting stars: Mr Rory McIlroy from Holywood. Rory has now achieved the incredible feat of completing golf's Grand Slam of major championship success, the pinnacle of the sport of golf. Just over two weeks ago, when he putted his final shot at the Masters in Augusta to win the illustrious green jacket, Rory became only the sixth person in history to complete golf's Grand Slam of major trophies, having secured victories in the Masters, the US Open, the Open Championship and the PGA Championship. It was a truly incredible achievement that we in Northern Ireland can all be proud of. Rory put his name alongside those of golfing icons such as Tiger Woods and the great Jack Nicklaus. It is a truly phenomenal achievement that will certainly go down in the history books. From the fairways of Holywood Golf Club to the grand stages of Augusta, St Andrews, Pebble Beach and many of the other most decorated golf courses in the world, Rory's journey has been nothing short of inspirational. I have no doubt that there will be much more major success in the not-too-distant future.

Rory was born and raised in Holywood, County Down, and his natural talent was evident from the earliest stage, but talent alone does not build champions such as this: it is matched by discipline, resilience and a fierce and determined drive to succeed. Rory embodied all those qualities, nurtured by his hard-working and loving parents, Gerry and Rosie, his coaches and his many friends, who always believed that the boy from Holywood would one day conquer the golfing world. Conquer it he very much did. There has been immense pride across Holywood, North Down, Northern Ireland and beyond since Rory's remarkable success at the Masters. That was certainly evident on the streets of Holywood in the days following his great success. I was privileged to join in those scenes around Holywood town, where there was such an atmosphere and a buzz about the success of Holywood's most famous son.

Rory's success is about much more than trophies; it is about representing Northern Ireland on the world stage and inspiring generations of young people in every corner of our country, in towns and cities where young boys and girls now believe that no dream is beyond their reach. We have so many excellent golf clubs in every corner of Northern Ireland, including the eight in my North Down constituency, all of which have felt the effect of Rory's success, with golfers of all ages getting clubs or picking them up again, with the many health benefits that that brings.

Mr Speaker: Time is up.

Mr Dunne: In Rory McIlroy, we see the best of Northern Ireland: determination, brilliance and generosity of spirit. We celebrate —

Mr Speaker: The Member's time is up.

Mr Dunne: — not just a golfer but a role model. Congratulations, Rory McIlroy.

Miss Brogan: Watching Rory McIlroy win the Masters was an emotional roller coaster and a real inspiration for young sports stars on our island, showing that, if you have a dream, you can achieve it. Rory, the first person from our island to win the prestigious green jacket, has shown throughout his career what can be achieved through hard work, grit, dedication and determination. His story is one of an immensely positive and inspiring journey that proves that, no matter how many setbacks you have in life, you can get there in the end. Rory's achievement was a huge moment in global sporting history — completing a career Grand Slam placed him amongst the greatest ever golf players — that has filled everyone at home with great pride and will undoubtedly inspire future generations to chase their dreams.

I also want to recognise Conor Bradley from County Tyrone and Caoimhin Kelleher from County Cork, the two Liverpool stars who won the English Premier League yesterday. Conor Bradley made history as the first player from County Tyrone to win the English Premier League.

Sport has the power to unify and can motivate our young people to excel in life. In a few months' time, we will welcome some of the most iconic names in world sport, along with hundreds of thousands of fans from every corner of the globe, to Portrush for the Open. It presents us with an incredible opportunity to showcase the best of our people and island on the global stage, and I am certainly looking forward to it.

Ms Egan: I thank my North Down colleague for introducing the Matter of the Day.

I rise to recognise the immense sporting achievements of Rory McIlroy, a Holywood man with big dreams and big determination. Two weeks ago, Rory showed not just us but the entire world a masterclass in sportsmanship not just by winning the Masters but by joining the small group of people — now totalling six — who have completed a golfing career Grand Slam.

If you are from North Down or interested in golf more widely, you will be familiar with Rory's story. From humble beginnings, his aspirations started at Holywood Golf Club, where he became the youngest ever member and dreamed of becoming a professional golfer. At age 3, he was able to hit a 40-yard drive, and he practised at home by hitting balls into the family's washing machine — something he demonstrated to us all in his now-famous appearance on local broadcaster Gerry Kelly's show in 1999.

Rory's parents, Rosie and Gerry, worked endlessly to ensure that his talent could be nurtured and supported from a young age. They worked to ensure that their child had the best chance of success. Rory's resilience, talent and determination have set a sterling example for everyone across these islands. He is a fantastic ambassador for Northern Ireland, and everyone across our communities is immensely proud of his achievements.

I finish with Rory's words to his daughter Poppy following his historic win:

Congratulations from us all, Rory.

Mr Chambers: It was obvious from a very early age that Rory McIlroy had a special talent for the game of golf. As my colleague mentioned, from the moment he appeared on 'The Kelly Show', when he was about nine years of age, and chipped a succession of golf balls across the studio into a washing machine, you recognised that that young boy not only had a special talent but had the confidence and the determination to achieve his dreams.

During a TV interview, when he was about 10 years old, he was asked about his golfing goals. He replied with total confidence that he wanted to win all the master titles. When he went to Sullivan Upper School, education became secondary to his wish to hone his skills on the golf course. It would have been easy for the headmaster and the management of the school to insist that he apply himself to his academic work, but, as has been reported, the headmaster found a creative way to relieve him of some of that work and allow him the latitude to improve his skills on the golf course.

In 2011, when he won his first major — the US Open — North Down Borough Council, of which I was a member at the time, was keen to recognise the massive achievement of the young Holywood resident. Two or three suggestions were made, and there was a call for a permanent memorial in Holywood. There were calls for signage to be changed in the town, and a civic reception was granted for him. At that time, Rory was busy and in big demand. He was travelling all over the world. There was not a day when he was not playing golf somewhere, and a lot of those things had to be put on ice; indeed, the invitation to a civic reception stands to this day. At the time, when the council talked about a permanent memorial, I said that it was a bit premature because the young man would probably win a lot more things in the future. I said that we should hold fire on thinking about what sort of permanent memorial should be erected in Holywood, be that a statue, a plaque on a wall or whatever.

As others have said, Rory is a superb sportsperson and ambassador for Northern Ireland and his sport. His advice to all young people that they should follow their dreams is really good advice. As I told the council in 2011, do not be too quick to put up a memorial, because that young man is going to achieve an awful lot more in his lifetime, and I am just as keen to say that today as I was then. Rory will go on to achieve an awful lot more in his sporting life. I look forward to seeing that.

Mr McNulty: Rory McIlroy, one of the few Irishmen who, as a sportsman, unite the House, is a world-class competitor. He has demonstrated that, if you have a dream and pursue it with passion and a relentless determination to improve every day, you can achieve anything. As a young boy, he told the world that his goal was to win the Grand Slam. What incredible confidence for a young man of that age to have said so. It is incredibly positive and powerful that he has gone on to do it.

In 2007, he turned professional: boom. In 2009, he had his first European Tour win at the Dubai Desert Classic: boom. In 2010, he got his first PGA Tour victory at the Wells Fargo Championship: boom. In 2010, he made his Ryder Cup debut: boom. In 2011, he got his first major championship win at the US Open: boom. In 2016, he won his first FedExCup title: boom. In 2018, he won his first Players Championship title: boom. In 2025, he has become the first European and the first Irishman to win the Grand Slam in golf: boom.

For him to have such achievements is incredible. It is wonderfully positive and powerful that a man from just a few miles from here has done that. It is worth recognising that he is also a huge contributor to charity. Now that the shackles are off, we are all so excited to see where he goes from here. It is so exciting for Rory McIlroy, for his family, for the North, for Ireland and for Europe. Well done, Rory.

Mrs Little-Pengelly: It is an absolute honour to get the opportunity to stand in this place and extend my huge congratulations to Rory on a magnificent victory. Indeed, completing the career Grand Slam is an incredible and remarkable thing. I am glad that we have had the opportunity to come here to say a huge well done to Rory.

I recognise those from North Down who are claiming Rory — rightfully so — but it is important to say that people from not only North Down but the entirety of Northern Ireland are incredibly proud of Rory and what he has achieved. As he said himself, his is a testimony of resilience and of getting back up even in the tough times and coming back in order to do an incredible thing.

Rory is such an ambassador for this place. When I was over in DC for St Patrick's Day, a number of people mentioned Rory and golf. It is incredible for Northern Ireland to have that to differentiate us in a very crowded market in which we are trying to get noticed for inward investment and to promote our tourism and everything that is wonderful about this place. Golf is a really good way to do that.

Very recently, I was a member of Holywood Golf Club. I do not have any time any more, so, alas, I have given it up. However, Holywood Golf Club is a fantastic golf club. My husband is still a member there. I put on record the brilliance of Holywood Golf Club and how proud of Rory everyone in that club is. They know more than anyone the incredible hard work that his parents put in to support Rory's achievements from a young age. However, what he has achieved is very much down to his hard work. What an incredible set-up for the Open, which will come to Northern Ireland this summer. There is no better way to promote the wonderful golf operations here, our golf courses and our tourism offering and to set us up for, hopefully, a fantastic Open in Portrush this summer. I also recognise Rory's incredible charitable work.

I am not going to start to name all our incredible sporting stars, but, my goodness, Northern Ireland packs an incredible sporting punch on the international stage. I have no doubt that, per head of population, we are world-leading across so many different fields.

On the back of a very successful Olympics, I have no doubt that yet more sporting success will be coming, not just for Rory but for all our incredible sports stars in so many different fields. A huge well done to Rory: we are all incredibly proud of you.

Some Members: Hear, hear.

Mr O'Toole: I will briefly reflect on Rory McIlroy's extraordinary achievement, not that I could follow my colleague from Newry and Armagh's vivid contribution and, indeed, the contribution of the deputy First Minister, who talked about her golf game. I am sure that she could demonstrate her drive at Royal Portrush this year in a way that would be good for inward investment.

Rory McIlroy's achievement is extraordinary and historic. It is important to pause and reflect on the scale of achievement that winning the career Grand Slam is. I am one of those people who has tried to play golf, usually with limited success. It is a sport that I, like lots of people, have endeavoured to succeed at, but it is extraordinarily difficult to play at any level, let alone to do so and achieve what Rory McIlroy has achieved. The career Grand Slam is something that only a handful of people have achieved. Only one other person from outside the United States, Gary Player, has won the career Grand Slam. Rory McIlroy is not just the first Irishman or the first person from these islands to win the career Grand Slam but the first European to do so. It is an astonishing achievement, and he has done it by the age of 35.

What is so important, memorable and, frankly, inspiring about Rory's achievement is that he did it after coming back from repeated knocks. We all know that Rory won a series of majors very early in his professional career: he won the US Open, the British Open and the PGA Championship in quick succession. He then had more than a decade in which he did not win a major, which frustrated lots of golf fans, particularly those from this part of the world. For the average punter who plays at Holywood Golf Club, Downpatrick golf club, Belvoir Park Golf Club or Ormeau Golf Club — wherever the course is — golf has a particular ability to get inside the head. Whether you are world number one or someone who is playing in the monthly medal at your local club, doing what you need to do on the golf course requires reserves of resilience. Rory McIlroy came back from repeated setbacks, including some fairly traumatic ones, such as that at Augusta in 2011. He showed resilience, courage, determination and focus to become the first Irishman to win the Green Jacket and the first European to win the career Grand Slam: an extraordinary achievement.

He is an extraordinary ambassador for this place — Northern Ireland and the island of Ireland — and we all owe him a debt of gratitude. We are all so proud of him and look forward to his, hopefully, lifting the Claret Jug this July at Royal Portrush. I should not have said that, because, in doing so, I have probably scuppered his chances, but we are delighted for and hugely proud of Rory McIlroy.

Mr Martin: We are here to congratulate Rory on his recent win and, as the leader of the Opposition just pointed out, on his becoming one of only six people to have achieved a modern career Grand Slam. That is an incredible achievement. He is from my constituency, so, as the DFM mentioned, I am going to take ownership of him.

I will make some personal comments. Golf is an incredibly tough and unforgiving sport. I am a golfer, having played since I was very small. My grandfather taught me how to play golf. He was a Brethren preacher, and my mother tells a story of how in her entire life she never heard her father, John, say a naughty word, apart from when he was on Clandeboye golf course. It is a really tough sport, and Rory has done exceptionally well. He is an inspiration for young golfers from Northern Ireland. We are congratulating him on achieving a career Grand Slam, but how he conducts himself off the fairway is a credit to him and his parents. If Rory is watching this, I say this to him: if you are ever in Holywood and are up for a game, I am available. We do have other courses in North Down. Holywood has been talked about a lot, but the courses at Clandeboye, Bangor and Donaghadee are all available. Twenty-five years ago, I played off 22, so if he thinks that I am a threat or that I might beat him, he should know that it is highly unlikely.

What Rory has achieved for this country and golf and the inspiration that he is to young people and golfers is absolutely astounding. We look forward to Portrush, later this year, and — I do not want to scupper his chances — Rory, hopefully, adding more silverware to his already significant collection.

Mr Speaker: Thank you, Members, for those tributes to a remarkable sportsman and ambassador for Northern Ireland.

Mr Speaker: Jonathan Buckley has been given leave to make a statement on the UK Supreme Court ruling on the legal definition of a woman, which fulfils the criteria set out in Standing Order 24. The normal rules apply.

Mr Buckley: On 16 April, the UK Supreme Court made a unanimous landmark ruling that, under the Equality Act 2010, the legal definition of a woman is based on biological sex. It represented a moment of truth, clarity and common sense. How ridiculous have things become that it took the UK Supreme Court to rule on the definition of a woman, something that the vast majority of people already knew the answer to? It is sad but true to say that common sense on gender realities had been kidnapped and then hijacked by a small yet extreme ideological minority, aided and abetted by parties such as Alliance, Sinn Féin and the SDLP, which pressurised businesses, civil Administrations and the wider public into accepting a version of reality — their version — that denied all common sense. Women who dared to speak out about their concerns were branded bigots, hounded out of their jobs and silenced in the public discourse. For years, women have fought for legal protections based on the material reality of their sex, only to be insulted in the House by Members in complete denial of reality.

Recently, I asked the First Minister, Michelle O'Neill, whether she agreed that biological men should not be in women's safe spaces, in particular, women's changing rooms and women's sport. She could not answer. The Alliance Party offered full-throated support, and together they degrade women, and what for? To promote a warped and dangerous ideology that allowed men to invade women's changing rooms and to steal women's sports titles and that pushed the NHS to prescribe dangerous gender drugs to vulnerable young girls. Is that your vision of progressive politics?

The fight for justice by ordinary, everyday women was not fictional. It was rooted in the lived experiences of women who demanded to be seen, heard and safeguarded. Members, let this be a turning point: a moment when the nation reaffirms its commitment to truth, clarity and common sense. It is not bigotry to recognise difference.

Mr Speaker: The Member's time is up.

Mr Buckley: It is certainly not cruelty to recognise accuracy.

Ms Ní Chuilín: The issue that is the subject of this Matter of the Day, in my opinion, needs to be approached with compassion, understanding and dignity. We are all aware of the British Supreme Court ruling on 16 April, which applies to England, Scotland and Wales. Sinn Féin is committed to having an inclusive society based on equal rights and opportunities for all our citizens in all our diversities. It is important that we have effective equality protections that work to protect everyone in our society as we carefully examine the details of the British Supreme Court ruling in that context. It is really important, in the first instance, to await guidance from the Equality Commission in light of its consideration of whether there are any implications here of the British Supreme Court ruling.

I appeal to all Members who speak on this issue, should it be in the Chamber, in the media or outside, to remember that we are talking about human beings. We are talking about our brothers, our sisters, our cherished family members and cherished friends. Regardless of how they define themselves, they deserve the same love, equality, respect and compassion that we claim to strive for on behalf of every citizen. That should be the watchword, regardless of how people define themselves or whom they love.

Miss McAllister: First, I want to say that we do not want people to be afraid for their future. We do not want people to wake up and be concerned about how the ruling will impact on their lives. That is, however, already happening. These decisions affect people's lives. The ruling cannot be seen in isolation or in a vacuum; instead, it was made in the context of extreme anti-trans rhetoric, which is on the increase in public discourse, including within and outside this House. We have seen those divisive culture wars, filled with misinformation, result in real-world consequences, with hate crimes against the trans community rising in recent years across the globe.

The Supreme Court ruling must not be used to fuel division or hostility. The Supreme Court itself emphasised that it should not be seen as a victory for one group at the expense of another. As politicians, we have a responsibility to ensure that no group feels further marginalised or vulnerable because of the decision. Despite what some media reporting suggests, this debate is not about political hypotheticals but about real people who now feel uncertain as they go about their day-to-day lives — people who are living in fear.

We in Alliance are committed to advancing equality and human rights for all, including women, girls and the LGBTQIA+ community. We will continue to stand up for those rights and for the dignity and well-being of trans and non-binary people. Despite what some may say, the Supreme Court ruling has not provided clarity on its real-world implications. The quick guidance that was issued by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) in England and Wales did not provide clarity; instead, it raises real-world circumstances that could be abused. Any response in Northern Ireland should be carefully considered. It is now time, however, for positive engagement in good faith. I want to assure every member of the trans community that I respect you, that Alliance respects you, and that we will do what we can to ensure that you do not live in fear.

Mr Beattie: Women who want their own spaces, sports, groups, refuges, hospital wards or toilets should never be viewed as controversial. It is not controversial for a woman to ask for private care from somebody of the same sex — meaning biological sex — or, if they fall foul of the law, to have an intimate search conducted by someone of the same biological sex and with only a person of the same sex present. Indeed, women police and prison officers should not be forced to conduct intimate searches of a biological male purely because that individual has a gender recognition certificate. This is about privacy, safety and dignity, but, above all, it is about women's rights.

The Supreme Court ruling was clear as far as the Equality Act 2010 is concerned. Sex means natal sex or sex at birth, and a gender recognition certificate does not change that. The trans community remains a protected group under the Gender Recognition Act 2004 and equality legislation in Northern Ireland, so those in that community have their protections. The Supreme Court ruling was not about them. Of course, it has an effect, but the ruling was about women's rights. Although the Equality Act 2010 does not apply to Northern Ireland, the Supreme Court does, and its findings have an effect here. The Equality Commission said:

We now need clear, detailed guidance from the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland. I will quote the Equality and Human Rights Commission's interim guidance, because I got lambasted for using these terms in a previous debate:

The statement gives the same guidance for schools. It goes on to state:

We are in a difficult place now, and what we need is for the Equality Commission to speak to our Executive and for Ministers to lay out what we are going to do. We need cool heads, but, at the end of the day, this is about women's rights.

Mr Speaker: The Member's time is up.

Mr Beattie: Let us focus on women's rights.

Some Members: Hear, hear.

Mr O'Toole: The Supreme Court's judgement has come after much controversy and debate on the subject, which has become tragically toxic and toxically divided. It has placed in toxic and false opposition the hard-fought rights of women, and, indeed, the continued fight for women's safety from violence, which is a subject that we have debated in the Chamber, against the rights of trans people to be acknowledged as human beings who are worthy of basic dignity, courtesy, respect and accommodation. Those two sets of rights do not have to be in competition with or opposition to one another.

I acknowledge that the court judgement has been made and that there will be consequences on the other side of the Irish Sea. Public bodies here will scrutinise and examine that judgement. I say that first, but I also say this: the judgement does not render invisible or meaningless the lives and experiences of trans people. Trans people are real people. The Member opposite is shaking his head. It is really important —.

Mr Buckley: This is about women.

Mr O'Toole: Frankly, we need to move on from the idea of dehumanising and demeaning trans people as if they do not exist and their experience is somehow to be dismissed and trivialised. I and my party have always said that such subjects need to be talked about sensitively. Where there are specific and legitimate questions, whether they are on single-sex spaces or sports, we can have a serious debate, but I will not debate trans people's existence and their right to basic respect and dignity. Some of what we have heard today from the opposite Benches has, again, drifted into stigmatising and humiliating those people. It is somewhat ironic to hear Mr Buckley and others in his party portray themselves as great feminists and fighters for women's rights. Women in this society had to fight for a long time to secure access to basic rights, bodily autonomy and, specifically, court judgements.

Mr Buckley: You do not respect all life.

Mr O'Toole: OK, but there are trans people who will be anxious about what this judgement means for them, and to those people I say this: I acknowledge that this is a difficult time. You have rights, which will be protected. I and others in my party will continue to acknowledge you as human beings who are deserving of basic courtesy, rights and respect. That has to be at the forefront of everything that we do.

By the way, no one has ever denied biological sex. Trans people have to confront the reality of biological sex in their lives, because that is how they transition, so that is an absurd canard thrown up by Members opposite. Where there are issues and questions about single-sex spaces, I hope that, in future —

Mr Speaker: The Member's time is up.

Mr O'Toole: — we can debate them in a more level-headed, humane and serious way than we have today.

Mr Speaker: This item of business will continue after Question Time, when the next Member to speak will be Peter Martin. We have about eight seconds before 2.00 pm.

Mr Speaker: Stewart Dickson is not in his place.

Mrs O'Neill (The First Minister): The online environment is becoming increasingly unsafe for women and girls. Online abuse normalises harmful behaviour and can have long-lasting impacts. The ending violence against women and girls strategic framework recognises the need to address online harm. We are continuing to work with partners to address all forms of violence, abuse and harm experienced online. Ofcom has responsibilities for addressing harms to women and girls online, and junior Ministers recently met Ofcom officials to discuss their work and their ongoing plans to help protect everyone online, including women and girls.

A number of social action initiatives have sought to harness the power of social media to change attitudes and to tackle violence against women and girls. That includes the Power to Change campaign, which we jointly launched with the PSNI and the Department of Justice earlier this year. It includes targeted messaging on social media that urges men and boys to help play their part in effecting a cultural and societal shift.

Mrs Guy: Thank you, First Minister, for the response. The issue of smartphone access and digital devices and the associated impact of social media is a real concern in our communities. Does the First Minister recognise the frustration of many that the Executive Office refuses to take the lead on developing online safety strategies and policies in Northern Ireland?

Mrs O'Neill: No, I think that we all need to work together. It is a societal problem that we have to address together. The Member might be aware that Ofcom is consulting on draft guidance that sets out nine areas where tech firms should do more to impose online safety. That is the right way in which we need to engage with the issue. As I said, our junior Ministers met Ofcom recently and discussed these very issues, so I suspect that we will hear a lot more about that in the coming weeks and months. It is really important that we have that strategy in place, and I am glad that that was one of the first strategies that we were able to publish. We will all very much welcome the Ofcom draft guidance.

Mr Buckley: At a recent Question Time, I asked the First Minister, when it comes to safeguarding women and young girls, whether she agreed with me and the vast majority of women, who believe that biological men should not be in women's safe spaces, particularly women's changing rooms. The First Minister did not answer me. In light of the Supreme Court ruling that, in terms of sex and gender, it is biological sex that defines a woman, I ask the First Minister this: will you still not answer the question? Is it yes, or is it no? What is your view on the Supreme Court ruling?

Mrs O'Neill: First, I have said this to the Member before and will repeat it: we need to be very sensitive about these issues. They are complex issues, and we need to work our way through the outworking of the Supreme Court ruling. We are all aware of the headline — you have just spoken about it in the Chamber — but you forgot to acknowledge any sensitivity around the issue at all, particularly for our trans community, who are feeling quite attacked right now and are feeling under attack in their own community and society. Let us be mindful of that.

Let us work our way through the ruling from the Supreme Court, which does not cover here, because it refers to the Equality Act 2010. We have sought advice from our officials. We await the Equality Commission's ruling and guidance, because that will be important for everybody in how we respond to this in a wider way when it comes to any relevant issue. I encourage a bit of sensitivity in the Chamber. I encourage people to work towards an inclusive society. I encourage us all to demonstrate some compassion for the LGBTQ community right now.

Ms Flynn: The First Minister will know that tackling violence against women and girls requires a whole-government and whole-society approach. Can the First Minister outline how our young people are being engaged with in the process and the strategy?

Mrs O'Neill: Thank you for that. You are absolutely right that it requires that whole-of-government and whole-of-society approach if we are to end the scourge of violence and misogyny towards women and girls, whether that be online, at work, in school or at home. We all have to continue to do everything that we can.

We need to make space to ensure that the voices of our young people in particular are heard. Today's world, in which young people are growing up, is complex: things are very different from when I was growing up. I very much value our strategy team's work with the Education Authority (EA) and the youth engagement team over the past two years to build that wider societal approach. It has very much listened to and engaged with youth panels across the North to give them a voice in the work that we develop to respond to this societal issue. We have also established youth reference groups, which will be crucial. The Commissioner for Children and Young People, the Secondary Students' Union, the Youth Forum, Girlguiding Ulster and a raft of young people's groups are coming together to help to shape the strategy. The Member may have seen the Power to Change campaign. Young people were very engaged with that and helped us to devise that work.

Collaboration will be key. For my part, I will continue to engage with young people and others to amplify their voice and empower our young people to speak up. Only by speaking out and highlighting the issues can we make the difference that, I am sure, we all want to see in our society.

Ms Hunter: First Minister, will you confirm whether a review of the 2020-25 online safety strategy is planned? If it is, will you ensure that it includes a specific focus on ending violence against women and girls online? Have you had any recent conversations with Ofcom on those matters?

Mrs O'Neill: As I said, our junior Ministers met Ofcom in the past number of weeks to chat about the work that they are doing around the strategy and what that looks like. Ofcom has set out three objectives — they are very much geared towards online providers — for what, it hopes, the draft guidance will achieve: to give providers a detailed and holistic framework for understanding harms to women and girls online; to set out practical, ambitious steps that providers can take to secure women and girls' safety online; and to encourage service providers to take action to achieve a safer online environment for women and girls. It has set out nine actions that, essentially, say to technology firms, "This is what you must do", and we all can then hold them to account. It intends to publish that guidance by the end of this year and then publish an assessment of how the providers have responded to the recommendations. It will do that in the first half of 2027, which will be about 18 months after publication. Hopefully, we will then start to see positive changes.

Mr Speaker: Ms Hunter just asked a question, and, during the First Minister's response, two Members walked in front of Ms Hunter. That is not protocol in the House. If Members come in late, I encourage them to observe protocol and not to walk in front of Members who are engaging.

Mrs O'Neill: The reform and transformation of our public services is an Executive priority, as laid out in the Programme for Government. The voluntary and community sector is, obviously, a key partner in helping to address the challenges facing our public services here. Our officials regularly engage with the sector in the planning and delivery of our priorities, and we would expect other Departments to do likewise. We have also been very clear that we want to achieve delivery, which will require collaboration with our key stakeholders, including the community and voluntary sector, which has a vital role to play in all of the work that we drive forward.

Ms Forsythe: As the chair of the all-party group (APG) on voluntary and community sector, I welcome the First Minister's recognition of the sector's value. As we move to public-sector transformation pieces, will there be an attempt to quantify some of the return on investment from some of our voluntary and community sector organisations? For example, Extern and NIACRO recently gave the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) specific examples of how a small amount of funding to them has significant value in reducing adult reoffending.

Mrs O'Neill: We have had no specific conversations about that measurement piece, but it makes good sense. Having established our delivery unit and as we move to transforming public services, we have to open our eyes to the things that work well in society. Often, from my experience — it sounds as though it is also your experience — the community and voluntary sector provides services that would cost an awful lot more, if they were brought back into the control of Departments. If we can find ways to ensure that we properly capture what the community and voluntary sector does for what we invest, we can perhaps ramp that up where it works best. Certainly, I can take that away, and we can discuss it as we advance our delivery unit's work even further.

Mr Delargy: Will the First Minister detail her thoughts on the benefits of the community and voluntary sector partnering with government in delivering services that support and build communities?

Mrs O'Neill: As I said, we can all attest to the value of the community and voluntary sector in our constituencies. It is very much the lifeblood of our local communities, and the work that it does on the ground day to day really makes a difference to people's lives. I concur with the Member and commend the work of our community and voluntary sector. I see it every day in my constituency. I see what is done at a local level, whether it is through the GAA or other sporting organisations, community groups or residents' associations. There are so many charities out there. There are senior citizens' groups and groups that work with our migrant and newcomer communities. There is so much to be appreciative of in our society. All of that helps to build a better and more wholesome society for us all.

Looking forward, particularly given the challenging fiscal climate that we face, we need to continue to learn from what works well and replicate and do more of it, working in tandem with the community and voluntary sector on how we can better design public services. I am certainly up for having that conversation.

Ms Bradshaw: I very much agree with the sentiments that the First Minister has raised in response to the question. One of the issues that we all hear from the community and voluntary sector is that of sustainability and funding pressures. What role can you, as First Minister, play in ensuring the continued delivery of community and voluntary sector organisations into the future?

Mrs O'Neill: We will continue to work with the sector — that is vital. We have to have open communication, because the sector can help us so much in what we want to achieve, particularly when it comes to the transformation agenda and doing things better. I will certainly continue to work with NICVA as the representative organisation and with many others. You have only to look at what is delivered by the voluntary and community sector across a raft of services. Sure Start is a great example of the community and voluntary sector working with the Department, as is the work in the health improvement area. In our Department, we have introduced a pilot programme that is about collaboration test-and-learn pilots to explore how we can better place collaborative working between Departments and the community and voluntary sector. If that model of testing works, I would like us to pick it up and run with it. There is an openness on our part to engage and to continue to listen to those that provide services on the ground, because, ultimately, they are best placed to give us advice on how things are or are not working.

Mr O'Toole: First Minister, you mentioned the reform and transformation unit. We have not heard that much about the detail of its working. Has it been set up? When will the House have a detailed update on its work?

Mrs O'Neill: It is not just one area of work; we have identified a range of areas of work. The interim public-sector transformation board is already established. It is a non-statutory independent body, the primary role of which will be to advise and make recommendations on how to utilise funding that has been ring-fenced for transformation. A sustainability plan has been agreed by the Executive, and, recently, as part of the reform package, Minister O'Dowd announced £129 million for six transformation projects. We hope to make further announcements on that very soon. We have established a delivery unit in our Department. You can see that there is a transformation and reform package that will bear dividends over the weeks and months ahead. In addition, there is the work on how AI can be used and harnessed more, another area on which we are focused.

Mrs O'Neill: With your permission, Mr Speaker, junior Minister Reilly will answer the question.

Ms Reilly (Junior Minister, The Executive Office): We know the significant and positive impact that the current Urban Villages programme has had on communities, working through successful delivery of the remaining capital projects, which will increase access to shared-space facilities and continue to promote integration across the five Urban Villages areas and beyond.

We have set out the strategic direction for Urban Villages. It includes completing the current Urban Villages plan and securing the sustainability of capital projects by supporting those community organisations that are taking forward large capital projects.

Mr Kelly: Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire shóisearach as a freagra.

Before I move on, may I bend procedure, just a little, in order to welcome the Holy Cross Boys' Primary School's school council and teachers who are in the Public Gallery?

Will the junior Minister detail the criteria that will be required to be met in order to be part of phase 2 of the Urban Villages programme?

Ms Reilly: I thank the Member for his question. I echo his welcome to the school. As we come to the end of phase 1 of the Urban Villages initiative, it is worth reflecting on the fact that the project has supported a range of community-led, cross-cutting and capital projects that have made a real difference to improving good relations. Along with junior Minister Cameron, I have visited many of those projects. I know that the Member has been supportive of that work in his North Belfast constituency.

It is also worth noting that, to date, the Urban Villages programme has delivered approximately £50 million of capital investment and £15 million of revenue investment. Over 58 capital projects have now been completed. They had over 417,000 users, delivered 1,800 programmes, activities and training courses, and created 923 construction and administrative jobs. We are planning for a future Urban Villages programme that will include joined-up delivery between Departments and enhance the linkages that the Urban Villages programme has made in supporting ministerial priorities. We have also established a working group to take forward the development of phase 2 of Urban Villages. That will include establishing the criteria for the future programme. As I have said, once the criteria have been agreed, we will of course come to the Chamber to update Members.

Mrs O'Neill: With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will answer questions 5 and 13 together. The announcements that the US Administration made on 2 April set significant tariffs on goods entering the US market from over 60 countries and included 20% tariffs on EU goods and 10% on UK goods. Although President Trump has since announced a 90-day pause for countries hit by higher US tariffs, the measures have sent shock waves through the international economy, creating concern and a lot of uncertainty for businesses and Governments worldwide.

We have concentrated on building a globally competitive and outwardly focused economy. The US is an important trading partner for us. In 2024, alone, we exported £1·7 billion of goods to the US and imported £750 million of goods. Any actions that create barriers to trade with that significant market are always going to be unwelcome. We have therefore been working closely with our Economy Minister to understand what the announcements mean for businesses here, and, as international trade is a reserved matter, we continue to engage at political and official level to ensure that our economy and businesses here are protected as far as is possible. We also continue to engage with the Irish Government.

Mrs Dodds: I thank the First Minister for her answer. It was a very general answer, however. Should President Trump re-impose the tariffs, Northern Ireland will be hugely disadvantaged as a result of its being in the single market for goods and having to apply the EU customs code. We will therefore be liable to pay duty on US goods coming into Northern Ireland. What specific measures has the First Minister suggested to the UK Government that they might employ in order to protect Northern Ireland?

Mrs O'Neill: The question was more of a general question. Let me be clear: tariffs will serve none of us well. They are bad for business and create uncertainty. They can lead to so much uncertainty that we could end up with a hike in inflation. It is therefore not a good scenario for anybody. What is important right now is diplomacy, conversation and identifying our local priorities. Working with the Economy Minister, we have done so. We also continue to engage with the British Government and the Government in Dublin, and we have had such engagement over the past number of weeks. Unfortunately for us, international trade remains a reserved matter, so we need to continue to engage with Jonathan Reynolds, the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, to work out a strategy as far as one is possible. To be clear to the Member, I will tell her that the Economy Minister has advised that she has set out five key asks, because we have a particular circumstance here that needs to be recognised, and we have made that point. We are going to go back to that when the 90-day pause comes to an end. When we get back to the conversations leading up to that, we have asked that they keep our unique circumstances in mind. That is to the fore of all the conversations that are had, and we made that case to the British Government and the Irish Government. That is in relation to any negotiation about what might happen next and any countermeasure that may be brought forward. Caoimhe has also asked for the Governments to act in concert to minimise any divergence between Britain and the EU. She asked for a properly resourced advice service for local businesses because there is so much uncertainty. People are anxious, and they need to understand how the tariffs affect them. She held a round table with businesses here to understand their implications and to advance that conversation with the Governments.

The fourth thing is to improve existing trading initiatives such as the reimbursement and labour schemes —

Mr Speaker: Time is up. Minister, your two minutes are up.

Mrs O'Neill: OK — and that it will bring forward an economic package that protects our international competitiveness.

Mr Speaker: I call Cathal Boylan.

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

Mr Speaker: Apologies. Robbie Butler first.

Mr Butler: I will let you off with that one, Mr Speaker. Thank you very much.

I thank the First Minister for her answer. She will, I am sure, agree with me that businesses have had to bear, through the Windsor framework, the pressures of Brexit and getting their duties paid back through the HMRC reimbursement scheme and the customs duty waiver scheme. The Secretary of State said that that might be the recourse for businesses if the tariffs apply in Northern Ireland. Does the Minister agree that that is not a good or useful tool to use and that businesses without money for up to three months are put under undue pressure? Has the Executive Office been involved in any conversations in that regard?

Mrs O'Neill: That is something that the Economy Minister also raised with her counterpart. We do not know where this is going to end, but, if we find ourselves in a position at the end of this whereby, for example, you have to apply for the reimbursement, that needs to be simplified. They need to make it easy. Businesses cannot wait for three months to get that money back, so we need to find a way. That is what we have encouraged to happen in all our conversations; namely that, if we get to that juncture, it needs to be a simplified process whereby businesses can trade without barriers or, at least, with limited barriers. The point that the Member makes is one that we have already recognised and taken on board.

Mr Boylan: Brexit has had a huge negative impact socially and economically here. With regard to lessons learned, will the First Minister detail what work is ongoing in response to the US tariffs to protect the regional and all-Ireland economy?

Mrs O'Neill: Thanks. We all witnessed the shock waves that arose as a direct result of the tariff announcements, which have created much uncertainty and concern. Businesses are struggling, and they find themselves back in the situation of not knowing what is going to happen next. One thing that businesses dislike more than anything is uncertainty because it makes it very difficult to plan.

Throughout this crisis, the deputy First Minister, Caoimhe as the Economy Minister and I have engaged directly at Prime Minister level, Tánaiste level and Secretary of State level. We will continue to ensure that the voice of our local economy is heard. I take the Member's point about the all-island economy and the need to ensure that we have frictionless trade. You can see the growth of the all-island economy over recent years, and we want that to continue. I want to see free-flowing trade across these islands without barriers and interruptions so that our businesses, our economy and our people can flourish. We will continue to work as we navigate through this period dominated by uncertainty.

Mr Donnelly: There is great instability and uncertainty in global trade due to the Trump tariffs. Does the First Minister recognise the ongoing damage caused by trade friction of any kind and the need to maximise the benefits of Northern Ireland being able to trade at least for goods in all directions as freely as possible?

Mrs O'Neill: I agree with you absolutely. We should all work towards a situation where there are no barriers to trade across these islands, on this island and between our islands. That is where we should all aim to be, and we have highlighted that in every meeting and conversation that we have had. In May, we have a bilateral with Keir Starmer — I cannot remember the title of the meeting — when we will have another opportunity to highlight the particular challenges here because we have the Windsor framework and an added layer of complexity.

We will have to try to work our way through it, particularly around rules of origin, and minimise any barriers to trade. I do not want to see barriers to trade for anybody. I want our economy to grow, jobs to be created — well-paid jobs — and people to have money in their pockets. We will do everything that we can to ensure that that is the case.

Mrs O'Neill: There is no joint agreement on the issue.

Mr McNulty: First Minister, you have been highly vocal in public about the goal of achieving Irish unity, yet, with your hands on the levers of power in the North, you have taken few, if any, tangible steps towards formally advancing preparations for unity. The Irish Government, through the Shared Island unit, have pumped billions of euros into uplifting and uniting communities North and South. Why are you, when in power, treading water on Irish unity and a citizens' assembly? Why has there been such a gap between your words in public and your actions in government?

Mrs O'Neill: It is more a question of why you are so surprised that there is no agreement on that issue in this office. It is no secret to anybody that I am an Irish republican who wants to unite the people of the island. It is also no secret to anybody that the deputy First Minister is a unionist who wants to maintain the link to the Union. That adds complexity to the office that we inhabit.

I have personal views on constitutional change. I think that we will all be better served by Irish unity, uniting the people of the island, ending the divisions of the past and creating a more inclusive society and a more prosperous economy. I encourage the Member to use his energy to work with me to achieve that as opposed to making silly points that are far from reality, because there will not be agreement in this office on the issue.

Mr Gildernew: A recent report from the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI) provides further evidence that, compared with the North, the Southern part of our island has higher wages, stronger economic growth and better living standards. Does the First Minister agree that that shows that partition has failed and that it is negatively impacting on our quality of life, trade, economic productivity and growth?

Mrs O'Neill: Yes. As I said in my previous answer, there is no agreement in the Executive Office on the issue. I have also read that report and very much welcome more such reports coming into the public, which in itself encourages conversation and creates an opportunity for people to have hard data on what that looks like and the benefits of unity across the island. The report highlights the folly of partition and how it has failed every citizen who lives here. I very much welcome the report that has been published and look forward to more and more people engaging on the topic as we move through the weeks, months and years ahead.

The best thing that we could all do is work together, plan and prepare and have the maturity to debate what the health service would look like, what education would look like, how we can better people's lives, how we can improve people's standard of living and how we can grow our economy. That is the conversation that I want us to have. It is increasingly happening organically anyway, but, obviously, we want to see more of it in the time ahead.

Mrs O'Neill: In line with the requirements of the Identity and Language Act 2022, we are jointly responsible for the appointment of the Irish language commissioner, the commissioner for Ulster Scots and the Ulster-British tradition and the director and members of the board of the Office of Identity and Cultural Expression. We are committed to establishing the three new bodies and to making the appointments as soon as possible. We are very pleased to announce that the competitions launched on 10 March and closed on 28 March. It is anticipated that interviews will take place over the summer.

Ms Sheerin: Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as an fhreagra sin.

Can you provide an update on the current position on each appointment as per the Act?

Mrs O'Neill: Yes. As I said, the competitions to recruit the commissioners launched on 10 March and closed on 28 March. I am pleased to say that two of the panels have already completed their sift of applications: on 11 April for the Irish language commissioner and on 16 April for the Ulster-Scots and British tradition commissioner, with the first panel for the Office of Identity and Cultural Expression due to complete on 9 May. We are making good progress.

The Irish language proficiency assessment is planned to take place on 6 May. It is anticipated that the presentation and interview stage will be carried out on 20 June. For the Ulster-Scots and Ulster-British tradition commissioner, it is anticipated that the presentation and interview stage will take place on 5 June. I look forward to getting to the point where, after the interviews that are to be held over the summer, hopefully, we will be able to appoint. It has taken a bit of time to get here, but I am glad that we are at this juncture.

Mr Speaker: That concludes listed questions to the Minister. We now move to topical questions.

Mrs O'Neill: There are two points that I would like to make about what you have just said. First, austerity is a real thing. Austerity has happened.

Mr O'Toole: I know.

Mrs O'Neill: Yes, I know you do. That is why you signed the letter that we sent collectively to the British Government when we first formed the Executive. Austerity has hurt us badly. We are dealing with a difficult financial climate as a direct result, and we continue to do so under the new Labour Government.

People should always be very prudent with public money. Everything needs to be value for money. It needs to be proofed, and you need to be able to stand over every decision that is taken. I do not seek out five-star hotels. I do not seek to waste public money.

Mr O'Toole: You may not seek it out, First Minister, but you know that your colleague Conor Murphy, who is a former Economy Minister and Finance Minister, stayed in the Fullerton Hotel in Singapore, which says on its website that it reflects:

It cost more than £6,000 for him to stay there, which is much more than the cost of pedestrianising Hill Street.

We all agree that austerity was bad, First Minister, but I asked you specific questions. Are you comfortable with your ministerial colleagues staying in five-star hotels? Have you stayed in a five-star hotel at taxpayer expense since you have been in your role? It is quite a straightforward question.

Mrs O'Neill: I have no idea of what star rating of hotel I have stayed in. I do not interfere in any of that business. Somebody in our office will do the logistics, and that is fine.

I will say that I am very conscious of being prudent with public money. When Ministers have a job to do — they have a job to do to travel the world, sell our wares and create investment here — it is important that we do not just reach for the headline. You are absolutely right: value for money should be top of the agenda. That is certainly a principle that I adhere to in any of the travelling that I do, and I travel with only one objective, which is to better this place, better people's lives, increase the opportunities for investment, create jobs and ensure that we drum up business by telling people that we are very much open for business. That is important. However, I absolutely concur: there should be value for money all day long.

Mrs O'Neill: Yes, I absolutely can. It was absolutely disgraceful. Dissident republican groups or any such group should not exist. They should leave the stage. We are here because we are trying to build a shared and inclusive society. That is the work that we are all committed to doing. The scenes that we witnessed in Derry were an absolute disgrace.

Mr Tennyson: I thank the First Minister for that answer. Given what we have seen over the last week and the role of dissident republicans in that activity, do you stand by your support for the UK and Irish Governments' interlocutor, whom they are appointing to engage with those very organisations?

Mrs O'Neill: I have not pledged support for anybody's interlocutor; I have acknowledged that they are moving to that juncture. I have been clear in saying that those groups should not exist. They should not be given financial reward to leave the stage. They should just cease to exist. People should not engage with them on that basis, but the Irish Government and British Government will have to stand over any interlocutor that they appoint. I certainly will not have any hand or part in it.

Mrs O'Neill: They are two elements of the same thing for sure, given the conversation that we have just had about how unacceptable it is that paramilitaries still exist. Everybody should use their elected office to call it out for what it is and tell them to desist. If we are going to build a more inclusive society, we have to continue to work at that.

I am struck by the fact that, given the day that is in it and the commentary that we heard about how Pope Francis remarked that we had achieved so much in 25 years, we still have a journey to go.

Our peace is an ongoing process. I am committed to doing that through our good relations work, our ending violence against women and girls strategy and our work to end and tackle paramilitarism. All those things are interlinked, and looking at them in silos would do a disservice to our community.

Mr Donnelly: I thank the First Minister for her answer. We have seen a recent example in Lisburn, as well as examples in the past few years outside new housing developments in places as far afield as Antrim and Dungannon, of flags and symbols being intentionally used to intimidate local residents. What steps are being taken to end such intimidation and enable people to live free of territory marking in that way?

Mrs O'Neill: I concur with the Member in calling out those people who are responsible for intimidating communities and trying to claim space within communities by erecting flags, symbols and emblems. That is not acceptable. I am determined to build a better future for everybody, and that includes tackling some of those issues that have not been tackled to date. There is a difference in approach from what has been done before with the Flags, Identity, Culture and Tradition report. However, we now have an opportunity, with it being looked at in the round with the other areas of work, to maybe advance it and do something about what comes next. I look forward to engaging with the Member on the topic as we move forward.

Mrs O'Neill: In the vein of the conversation that we had earlier, there is no joint office opinion on the issue. I very much welcome his intervention, however; it is a very helpful intervention. I wish that more people had the maturity and ability to enter into the conversation and embrace it in a way where we could have one objective to make everybody's life better. That is the prize for us all in what we can achieve here going forward. I do not see any contradiction whatsoever between being able to govern on a day-to-day basis for our public services and trying to better people's lives whilst also having that conversation. I think that it is happening organically. For me, it is about much more than sticking the North onto the South. For me, it is about the unity of people and about building a better future for everybody.

Mr Kearney: Lena chois sin, a Chéad-Aire,

I am very sensitive to the fact that there is a divergence in thinking within your office around issues on the constitutional future of the island. Nevertheless, do you agree that it is now time for the British Secretary of State to set definitive criteria for the calling of a unity referendum, and do you agree that the British Government should commence a conversation with the Irish Government about setting out the transition for Irish reunification?

Mrs O'Neill: Yes. My personal view is that it is time to prepare, plan, engage and have the conversations. It is work that clearly both Governments, as co-guarantors of the agreement, need to put their minds to. I would like to have a more formal process where we can all engage around what the potential is, and I believe that there is huge potential. That is why I think that it is time for a citizens' assembly to be called. It is absolutely time for the Irish Government to begin that planning and preparation. My ambition for the people of this island is for an island that is inclusive and welcoming and where people can have their views and identities respected. There is a lot of continuity in the Good Friday Agreement; it is an international agreement that will carry through, so identity is very much protected. I think that it is time to build a better future for everybody who calls this place home, and I encourage the Irish Government and particularly the British Government, with their responsibility for the criteria, to be fulsome and come forward with plans so that we can all understand what we are working to.

Mrs O'Neill: The Minister will initiate lots of discussion in the Chamber over the next number of years, particularly in relation to her 'good jobs' employment rights Bill. I look forward to the debate on that Bill. There is no doubt that it is one of the most significant pieces of workers' rights legislation ever to be introduced in the North, so I praise the work of the Economy Minister, Caoimhe Archibald, on progressing it.

The legislation will include paid leave for parents whose newborn is admitted to neonatal care. That, to my mind, is compassionate legislation. Other key parts will be ending zero-hours contracts; introducing the right to disconnect from work; and stronger rights for trade unions and their members. Those proposals and others will genuinely put money into workers' and families' pockets, strengthen their rights, support their families and empower trade unions. As well as benefiting the individual worker, which, ultimately, is what it is all about, the legislation will benefit our business community and the wider economy, supporting them to thrive. That, in essence, is what it is all about: politics making a difference in people's lives.

The statement that Caoimhe Archibald, the Economy Minister, will make later today will be a huge, positive step in demonstrating our commitment to delivering for workers, families and communities.

Mr Speaker: Before I call Ms Flynn to ask a supplementary question, I note that it would be more appropriate to have asked the responsible Minister at a later point. Go ahead with your supplementary, Ms Flynn.

Ms Flynn: Thanks very much, Mr Speaker. Will the First Minister commit to working with all Ministers and with the Executive to try to progress that legislation as quickly as possible?

Mrs O'Neill: I want to see the legislation progressed as quickly as possible. As I said, I look forward to the debate in the Assembly, but it is a game-changing possibility. That is how I embrace it. The possibility that the proposals could begin to be rolled out is game-changing. I am sure that there will be differences of opinion, and that is all right: we will have those political debates. I am absolutely committed, however, to working with all Ministers and with colleagues in the Assembly to ensure that that happens and to support the Economy Minister in what she tries to achieve. Cross-party support, endorsing the full implementation of the legislation, would, of course, send a very powerful political message to workers and families. There is a huge opportunity for us here, so I would love to see us unite around the legislation and build a stronger economy in which workers, businesses and our economy can thrive.

Mrs O'Neill: Thank you for that. I have been at Bridie's side and will continue to be at the family's side. Bridie Brown is such a strong woman and has held herself with grace, courage and dignity. She stood outside the court earlier this month and made a direct plea to the British Government not to have her travel to London.

No matter how you look at it, Lady Chief Justice Keegan has been clear that the decision to refuse a public inquiry cannot stand, is unlawful and is in breach of ECHR article 2 obligations. The British Government need to get on and grant the public inquiry. The legal system has said, five times, that that needs to happen. The Brown family have waited for far too long; it is time for them to have truth, justice and accountability. They — particularly Bridie, at her age — should not have to endure the indignity and insult of further delays and appeals to the legal process because the British Government are burying their head in the sand and ignoring the reality that the courts have said that the family are entitled to the public inquiry.

Ms Finnegan: What is the First Minister's view on recent engagements between the Irish and British Governments on the issue of legacy?

Mrs O'Neill: I welcome the fact that legacy was on the agenda of last week's meeting of the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference (BIIC). It is very much for the two Governments to work together on that area. I welcome their joint commitment to establishing legacy institutions that are fully human-rights compliant and within the parameters of the 2014 Stormont House Agreement.

As we know, the legacy framework was endorsed in 2014 in the Stormont House Agreement. That is the basis on which to move forward.

I want to work with both Governments, resolve outstanding issues and ensure that all the families get access to truth and justice. It is crucial that whatever is brought forward in the weeks ahead commands the confidence of families, because this is about families. It is about loved ones; it is about grief; it is about healing; and it is about truth and justice. The only way for us to move forward that will command families' confidence is to have article 2-compliant frameworks.

Mr Speaker: I ask Members to take their ease.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Question 8 has been withdrawn.

Ms Kimmins (The Minister for Infrastructure): I have previously provided the Assembly with my position on the matter. My Department has already extensively reviewed NI Water's funding model and analysed the opportunities for NI Water in raising additional revenue, operating more efficiently and using financial transactions capital (FTC) and additional borrowing and additional public expenditure funding. My Department has also reviewed alternative water utility company structures across Britain and Ireland for best practice, including mutualisation, which, I know, is a model that seems to have some support here. My predecessor reviewed that work again in 2022 and 2024 for the purpose of evaluating any change of conditions that might merit further opportunities. Given that nothing has changed in the policy of how NI Water receives most of its revenue, which is through domestic subsidy, and the continuing government sponsorship of and accountability for NI Water, there are few additional options to be explored.

Any proposal to review NI Water's funding arrangements must satisfy three key tests: will a new structure help to secure long-term investment; can the model service the debt necessary to upgrade the infrastructure at the scale required; and can the model provide assurance in terms of controlling the cost burden on the public? As recently as this month, my officials again reviewed potential models against those three tests, and I am considering that review.

For the avoidance of doubt, I will not implement any review that will lead to household water charges on already hard-pressed families; I have reiterated that numerous times in the Chamber and in Committee. A model that takes NI Water out of government control, such as mutualisation, will require the introduction of water charging, no matter how we look at it.

I continue to work hard in partnership with the Executive to progress a three-pronged approach to ensure that NI Water remains fit for purpose: working with Executive colleagues to increase investment in waste water; consulting on developer contributions; and securing Executive agreement for the water, flooding and sustainable drainage Bill to be introduced in the Assembly.

Mr Blair: I thank the Minister for her answer. The context is human waste on our roads and in Belfast lough, the Lough Neagh situation, the stalled living with water programme in Belfast and the calling in of forensic accountants, and, in managing our water, we are not in a good place. Does the Minister accept that a review should be undertaken urgently, with governance arrangements included in its remit and its outcome made public?

Ms Kimmins: As I said, I am considering a review that officials have undertaken. We have done numerous reviews to date and looked at all options, but no one has brought forward an alternative that will not lead to water charges, which I am not prepared to implement. If others want to do so, they should make that clear. My point is this: the funding model that we have is the best one to make sure that we avoid water charges, but we do not have enough investment. That is why the Executive need to continually work together and look at what else we can do to ensure that we continue with that model, ensuring that it is funded properly, and at alternative methods for managing our waste water.

Mrs Erskine: Last month, the Minister announced that a forensic accountant would look at NI Water's finances for 2024-25. It was reported that it would take about six weeks for the forensic accountant to do that work. I note that the terms of reference state that there will be a:

Can the Minister confirm whether the accountant is in place and carrying out the work? How much will it cost the Department? When will the Committee and the Assembly have sight of the report?

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Minister, there are three questions in there. It is at your discretion to answer them.

Ms Kimmins: Yes, the accountant is in place, and the work has commenced. As it stands, the work is running on time. I will consider the report when it comes back to me and will share it with the Committee and the Assembly in due course.

Mr Boylan: Does the Minister agree that the experience of privatisation and mutualisation in England and Wales has been a disaster?

Ms Kimmins: We have seen what mutualisation has done, and the Member alluded to what has happened in Wales. Mutualisation does not necessarily deliver the immediate benefits that others may have perceived that it would. We have seen that significant issues remain in the waste water system. Companies are burdened by excessive debt and are having to be bailed out by the Government. For me, that is a red flag. We therefore have to ensure that any system that is put in place here is fit for purpose and continues to deliver for the people whom it serves.

Mr O'Toole: Minister, I am afraid that you are pursuing a straw man argument. You have said that you do not want water charges rather than explain what you will do about water infrastructure in the North. I do not want water charges and nor does my party, but Lough Neagh is turning into an open-air cesspool, we cannot build affordable houses and business is being held back from developing. All those things will continue to be the case, and get worse, if we do not have some form of solution. You do not appear to have one, so can you tell us how we can invest in our water infrastructure if you have ruled everything off the table?

Ms Kimmins: I have made it clear what I am doing. I have pointed out the three things that we are doing specifically, which are working with Executive colleagues, undertaking the developer contributions consultation, which is out at the minute, and introducing legislation. Those three things are very clear. I am, however, glad that the SDLP has now made it clear that it does not want water charges. The SDLP has also not provided an alternative, but I look forward to hearing it.

Mr Stewart: Minister, it is clear that the funding model simply is not working and that, as a result, Northern Ireland Water is currently not fit for purpose. Do you accept that people are paying for water through the rates process? To that end, would you support there being a line in the rates bill to highlight what is specifically for water? Doing so could potentially open up other models for funding Northern Ireland Water.

Ms Kimmins: Our rates bills go towards all our public services, which further strengthens my argument about why we should not impose further bills and costs on households and families at a time when the cost of everything else is going up. We have to improve what we have, but there are ways in which to do that within the remit that we already have.

Ms Kimmins: Following the flooding in 2023, my Department commissioned a consultant to undertake a feasibility study to determine whether there were viable options to alleviate the threat of flooding in Downpatrick. The study is using information not only from the 2023 flooding incident but from additional historical records. A detailed computer model of the river has been created to simulate flooding events in order to assist with the identification of possible engineering solutions. Once the flood risks are fully understood, the list of potential solutions will be carefully investigated and assessed for viability. To do that properly can be quite a lengthy process. I am pleased, however, to be able to inform the Member that substantial progress has been made, and it is currently anticipated that the feasibility report will be completed in the coming weeks.

Mrs Mason: I thank the Minister for that information, which will be a comfort to many businesses in Downpatrick. Can she provide a further timeline for the actual implementation of flood mitigation measures for Downpatrick?

Ms Kimmins: The published 'Review of South East Flooding: Autumn 2023' detailed 22 recommendations, which the Department and multi-agency partners will be responsible for delivering. The recommendations include developing flood forecasting capability and further enhancements to communications, resilience and surface water management. Although my Department is not the lead agency for the delivery of all the recommendations from the review, we will take the lead in the coordination and oversight of the implementation of all recommendations through the establishment of a flooding review recommendations group. Regular meetings continue with members of the group, and there is a focus on the development of an agreed action plan to outline responsibilities and associated timescales, with the anticipation that all recommendations will be addressed within 24 months.

Mr McGrath: It recently came to light that only half of the money that was allocated to give desperately needed help to businesses in places such as Downpatrick after the floods was actually allocated to businesses. Instead, it was allocated to Departments such as the Minister's. Does she think that it was fair on those beleaguered businesses of Downpatrick and other places that the finance that was allocated for them was instead used for departmental spend?

Ms Kimmins: Part of my constituency was impacted on by what the Member outlined. I can speak only about my Department and what we were allocated. We were provided with £10·5 million of additional funding for the response and remedial actions that were required following the major flooding incidents that he mentioned. That was made up of £1·9 million in resource and £8·6 million in capital. Those amounts were fully spent. The funding allowed the additional costs associated with the flooding to be met, which included repair and remediation work; replacement of damaged equipment; staff costs; and other costs that were essential for us to deal directly with the response and lost revenue. From our perspective, every penny of that was spent in a way that was effective. Like all Departments, we probably could have done with more, if that could have been the case, but that is where we are at with it.

Mr McMurray: On the feasibility study of flood mitigation measures, will the Minister commit resources in order to expedite putting such measures in place to prevent any further flooding?

Ms Kimmins: I have had regular engagement with officials, particularly those in DFI Rivers, because a huge amount of work has gone into the study. As I outlined, there were 22 recommendations, and we need to make sure that we are well prepared, because, as we are all aware, such incidents will become more frequent, particularly given the climate emergency. We see that day and daily. It is a key priority for the Department.

I have to say this: officials do not often get the credit that they deserve, but, since coming into post, I have been extremely impressed with the work that has gone into ensuring that we move at pace and that we are better prepared to deal with what is coming further down the line. I absolutely think that it is a huge priority for all of us.

Ms Kimmins: The Department's regional development strategy 2035 and the strategic planning policy statements support the creation of balanced communities. The policy approach to all types of housing is to facilitate an adequate and available supply of quality housing to meet the needs of everyone. Council local development plans (LDPs) are the main vehicle for delivering that by assessing future housing land requirements and managing housing growth in their areas to achieve sustainable patterns of residential development. That process allows councils to address local housing issues in their communities, such as the balance between residential properties and short-term holiday lets. Councils are also responsible for operating effective development management in respect of planning applications for housing, and, in doing so, the provisions of their LDP, the regional strategic planning policy and all other material planning considerations must be taken into account. Whilst my Department will continue to perform an important oversight role in relation to LDPs, I have no plans to revise the Department's approach to housing to restrict the conversion of residential properties into short-term holiday lets at this time.

Mr Bradley: I thank the Minister for her answer, but, given the pressures that short-term holiday lets can place on the local housing supply and on community cohesion, is she prepared to set plans in place to introduce specific measures, such as requiring planning permission or establishing control areas, to better manage the impact of holiday lets and houses in multiple occupation (HMOs) on residential neighbourhoods? I hear what the Minister says, but the issue is getting to epidemic proportions across Northern Ireland, and something needs to be done —

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Maurice.

Mr Bradley: — and it needs to be done at that level.

Ms Kimmins: I will take into consideration what the Member said. I appreciate that it is a very important issue. As I said, it relates more to the local development plans. It is important that councillors, as elected representatives, feed into that as best as possible. It is about trying to strike the right balance as well.

Mr Carroll: Minister, you are probably aware that there are cities in Britain and parts of Dublin in which there is a litany of Airbnbs but few, if any, are registered. It is concerning, Minister, that you do not believe that the planning system should be used to crack down on the use of Airbnbs and short-term holiday lets. Will you reconsider that position, given the lack of permanent housing stock and the scale of the housing crisis that so many people are facing?

Ms Kimmins: I take the Member's point. However, the extent of the short-term let or the changes to the use or the character of the property will impact on whether planning permission is required. The situation varies for different units. You will be aware that decisions on planning applications that seek permission for a change of use for an existing building or for a new build to provide a short-term let or self-contained holiday accommodation unit are normally determined by local councils. As part of that process, there is already provision for that scrutiny. I take the point that there are probably units that are not going through that process. We could feed that into the planning improvement programme. As it stands, there are no plans in that regard.

Ms Sugden: Minister, this is a well-rehearsed issue, and it is disappointing that you and your Department keep deferring to councils and blaming them for it. You have ultimate responsibility for implementing the Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011, and, through it, you have powers to intervene and take more action. Will the Minister go back and read the legislation to see what she and the House can do to try to fix something that has been an issue in seaside areas for many years?

Ms Kimmins: As I said, we have the planning improvement programme, which is an opportunity to feed all those issues into the discussion. We are engaging with local councils, councillors, architects and all the stakeholders who are involved in that process. If, coming out of that, there is scope to intervene, we can definitely consider that.

Miss Brogan: Will the Minister outline the work that is being done to explore the impact of second homes being used as short-term holiday lets?

Ms Kimmins: As I said, I appreciate that that remains a major area of concern, not in all council areas but, as Members have outlined, in certain ones. As things stand, the LDPs have some means of addressing the issue of second homes at a local level. Notwithstanding that, I can advise that early discussions by the cross-departmental group, comprising DFC, DFI and DFE, recently commenced. The broad purpose of that group is to provide an informed understanding of the nature and scale of second homes across the North and to assess the effects of second homes on the housing market and on the sustainability of local communities and services. I await more advice on that, which could feed into the broader discussion that we are having today.

Ms Hunter: The issue continues and, year-on-year, worsens in my constituency, in Portrush, Portstewart, Castlerock etc. Minister, will you commit to an additional meeting with the Department for Communities to talk about the issue? If we keep pushing it back to councils, we will not find any answers.

Ms Kimmins: As I have said, there is some cross-departmental work ongoing between DFI, DFC and the Department for the Economy. We will look at that as part of those discussions.

Ms Kimmins: I am happy to advise that the works associated with a significant embankment failure on the Glenshesk Road commenced on Tuesday 18 March this year. The works will involve drainage improvements, slope reconstruction and resurfacing. It is anticipated that all works will be completed by the end of August 2025, with a completion target date in advance of the Ould Lammas Fair, subject to favourable weather conditions and no unforeseen delays.

Mr McGuigan: I thank the Minister for her answer. More importantly, the residents of Glenshesk Road, who have been severely impacted on as a result of the landslide since March 2024, will welcome the completion of the work in August. Given that that was not the first landslide on the Glenshesk Road, will the works that you have outlined look at future-proofing to help to prevent another similar landslide?

Ms Kimmins: To be blunt, it is very difficult to prevent future slippages along the road, given the ground conditions and the topography. To reduce the risk of and potential for future slippages, my Department will incorporate an improved drainage regime along the carriageway that will, hopefully, help to alleviate some of the challenges in advance. Therefore, it is envisaged that the embankment along Glenshesk Road will be afforded greater protection that will, hopefully, reduce the risk of slippage.

Ms Mulholland: As my North Antrim colleague Philip McGuigan outlined, 17 months is a long time for a community to be cut off. I am glad to hear that there will be preventative works. Will there be any works to the parallel Drumavoley Road to take some of the strain away from Glenshesk Road and alleviate future risks?

Ms Kimmins: I do not have specific detail on that question, Sian, but I am happy to come back to you about it. This is more specific to Glenshesk Road. I will come back to you in writing about the detail of your question and confirm the point.

Ms Kimmins: The planning system plays a key role in supporting sustainable development and economic growth. It must operate in the public interest and provide a fair and balanced framework for all types of development, regardless of the extent or scale of investment.

We are all very aware that planning is a collective issue, and all stakeholders must play their part in delivering the necessary changes and improvements to establish an environment that will enhance the prospects for investment and trade in the North. That includes local councils, which have responsibility for a significant number of planning functions. Whilst I have no plans to revise planning legislation specifically to reflect trading advantages, you will be aware of my Department's ongoing work to bring forward the planning improvement programme, which I mentioned. That is intended to improve the efficiency of the planning system by bringing about improvements in application processing times, the quality of applications and the delivery of local development plans. That is the right approach to ensuring that the planning system works better for everyone and remains focused on delivering balanced, sustainable outcomes. That, in turn, will provide impetus in achieving a positive environment for potential investment in the North and enhance the prospects of developing trade.

Mr Honeyford: Thank you, Minister, for your response. PRM, in my constituency, has seen significant growth in its business through dual market access. It has just completed a planning application to help it realise that. That took three years. That company is embedded in my community. Other people will not wait around for three years for a planning application. That is not a problem with planning; it is the system. I ask the Minister to prioritise the issue, because it is holding back our economy and growth.

Ms Kimmins: I will go back to my previous answer and say that that is exactly one of the reasons why my predecessor, John O'Dowd, initiated the work on the planning improvement programme. It is critical for everything across government that we talk about here, whether it be housing, the economy, education or health.

I agree with the Member. I come from a constituency that has been critically impacted on by long planning times. We have been able to identify common issues right across the 11 council areas, including staffing and resource issues, and how we can better streamline that process so that people do not have to wait for three years on an application. However, it has been a really extensive piece of work, and we will see good outcomes. I hope that the Member will be reassured to know that that is a key element of the work that is taking place.

Mr McHugh: Minister, in the same vein, this is a problem that exists throughout the North of Ireland, so will you outline the steps that you are taking to improve planning statutory consultees' response times?

Ms Kimmins: I thank the Member for the question. As elected representatives from different constituencies, we all hear about some of the delays. I have introduced a number of measures to improve that planning consultation process, including the publication of quarterly and annual reports on statutory consultation performance to enhance and encourage improvements; statutory requirements for validation checklists to make the planning application process more efficient and effective; the delivery of specific bespoke training to statutory consultees' staff on environmental impact assessments; the production of a protocol for statutory consultees to support them as well as local government; and the planning statutory consultee forum, which is a cross-governmental group that will continue to meet regularly to constructively address issues impacting on the effectiveness of the consultation process.

When you speak to applicants, businesses and people who are in that process, you find that this can be an area of real frustration, especially if they are waiting on one consultee response. I hope that all those measures will help to speed up and streamline the process.

Ms Kimmins: My Department maintains its financial records by financial year on the NICS accounting system, Account NI. Given the time of year, the figures that are available in relation to claim numbers and expenditure on vehicle damage compensation due to road surface defects since February 2024 may be subject to change. This is because the normal end-of-year financial adjustments on the Account NI system and data management exercises on my Department’s claims management system have yet to be finalised. I can confirm, from the data currently available, that the expenditure on vehicle damage compensation claims due to road surface defects from 1 February 2024 to 31 March 2025 was approximately £1·4 million. That figure includes compensation payments along with payment of vehicle damage loss assessor fees, departmental legal costs and claimants’ legal costs.

The Member should be aware that claims that are received in a financial year are not always concluded in the same financial year. Therefore, the expenditure figures for a given financial year will usually include spend on claims that were received in prior years. In addition, although my Department has a statutory duty under article 8 of the Roads Order 1993 to maintain public roads, there is no automatic entitlement to compensation. My Department investigates and defends public liability claims, with every case turning on its own facts. In cases where officials believe that the Department can raise a legal defence, claims will be repudiated.

Mr McNulty: I thank the Minister for her answer. Does she intend to review the current penny wise, pound foolish approach to pothole repair policy in order to ensure that her Department is delivering long-term value for money and improved road safety and to allow for the more practical and efficient use of maintenance staff who are under-resourced and worked to the pin of their collars?

Ms Kimmins: I have said in the Chamber before that officials are currently working on a new road maintenance strategy for all the reasons outlined. We have staffing shortages across the Department as well as a lack of investment in the Department for Infrastructure. His former colleague, who previously served as Infrastructure Minister, would agree that that was the case during her time in office. This is something that we have been dealing with for many years. It will be important to look at how we can do things differently and how we can deliver higher-quality repairs instead of what we have had to do for many years, spreading resources too thinly. It is important that, where we intervene, we ensure that we have a safer and more reliable road network.

Ms Sheerin: Will the Minister outline what her Department is doing to use technology to improve road maintenance?

Ms Kimmins: As part of the new strategy that we are currently working on — I will be considering it in detail in the coming weeks — we want to focus on higher-quality repairs that will be more sustainable. That will involve the use of modern technology to direct our investments where they are needed most, ensuring smarter maintenance decisions but also future-proofing our roads to meet society's changing needs, including active travel, reducing the carbon footprint of our operations and ensuring that the network is resilient after adverse weather events.

Mr Dunne: In 2019-2020, your Department paid out over £35,000 for vehicle damage claims in its Ards and North Down section office area. In 2023-24, that amount rose to an eye-watering £122,000. Will you take action to ensure that the Ards and North Down area receives a fair funding allocation for proper roads maintenance going forward?

Ms Kimmins: We discussed the situation in Ards and North Down in a recent Adjournment debate. Funding is allocated to each division using a very technical methodology, and we talked about that at length in that debate. As I said in my previous answers, there is no doubt that we do not have enough money to do all the work that is required and to deliver what is needed across our road network. That is why we are trying to do as much as we can with the budget that is available and to be smarter with it. All road users, whether they are motorists, cyclists or pedestrians, should have access to safe, good-quality roads. That work is ongoing as part of the strategy that is being developed, and I hope to see that being implemented fairly soon.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Minister, I you have only seconds here.

Ms Kimmins: OK. I will do my best.

As you know, my Department has been operating under significant underfunding for many years. Regrettably, structural maintenance funding, which is used to deliver resurfacing projects, has not kept pace with what is needed to keep roads in a reasonable condition, as we have discussed at length today. That said, the Department has completed two resurfacing schemes on the A2 Newcastle Road in Kilkeel in 2024-25, with over 3 kilometres of the road having been resurfaced. Any further resurfacing improvements will be taken forward on the basis of priority need and subject to the level of structural maintenance funding in future years. Officials will continue to review and assess the A2 through regular inspections and will take forward the repair of defects in line with the Department's current limited service policy.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Sorry, Diane. The time for listed questions has ended. We now move on to topical questions.

Ms Kimmins: I thank the Member for his question and recognise the significance of the announcement about Magee university. Hopefully, that will be huge for the north-west.

To alleviate the issues, as in many other cases, we need to work collaboratively and collectively, not just through the planning process but in our work with NI Water and in addressing any other barriers that may be holding back potential for delivering new housing and HMOs, to ensure the best outcome for everybody.

Mr Durkan: Thank you, Minister, for that response. It is my understanding that the publication of the planning strategy as part of the local development plan is imminent. Work will then begin on a local policies plan that will look at thresholds or limits on the number of HMOs in specific areas or streets. Can you assure us that the intervening period will not create a no man's land or "no plans land" that can be exploited by developers at the expense of local neighbourhoods?

Ms Kimmins: With any such work, it is important that we get it right, that we do not leave gaps that could be exploited and that the benefits are seen by the people to whom they are directed. We have to look at all those potentials as part of that process. In expediting any process, I would be concerned, at the same time, to take the right time to ensure that the work is done properly. I welcome any input or contributions from the Member or others in the area on those concerns so that they can be addressed early in the process.

Ms Kimmins: I recently met Newbridge Integrated College, which has done a huge amount of work on a campaign for the A1, and I have met other roads campaigners, including Monica Heaney, who have been instrumental in ensuring that the work moves at pace. As it stands, the work will be open to the consultation process, and officials are working through the design of that. We are due to start work in 2026, but I will get more specific dates for you. I have them but not in front of me, Diane. The intention is to start work next year.

Mrs Dodds: I appreciate that. I would appreciate a more detailed follow-up answer on the matter. Minister, do you understand that the issue is of great importance to my constituents? Lives have been lost on that road and will continue to be put in danger as long as the small openings remain, the crossings are not closed and the improvements are not made.

Ms Kimmins: Absolutely. It affects my constituency. I use that road every day, and I am sure that the Member does also. Knowing some of the families who have been impacted and have lost loved ones on that road, I think that it is something that we need to ensure. Like on the A5, too many lives have been lost along that stretch of road. I am giving a commitment that I want this to move at the fastest pace possible and in a timely manner.

When speaking to those first-year children, it struck me when one asked, "Do you know how scary it is to cross that road when going to school every day?". That child's perspective will always stick with me. As adults and motorists, we are aware, but a child being as cognisant of that, as those children are, is something that I take with me all the time. I want to ensure that we see that expedited.

Ms Kimmins: I do not have the update with me, Stewart, but I can come back to you on that. I know that we have also launched the review of the Taxis Act 2008 and that there is lots of work happening around taxis. I am happy to come back to you specifically on where that is. I will hopefully be able to provide the most up-to-date detail on it.

Mr Dickson: Thank you, Minister. I will appreciate you coming back to me. Can you indicate to the House any of the initial findings and whether there is support, either for or against, the continuation of taxis using certain bus lanes?

Ms Kimmins: This is predominantly anecdotal, I suppose, because I have not yet been briefed in detail on the issue since coming into post, but we have heard the positives of it. We saw that it helped with traffic congestion. I have heard that in various discussions since coming into post in February. It is important to look at that, but it is about hearing from all sides to see what the balanced approach should be.

Ms Kimmins: Road safety is a key priority for the Department. As we have talked about, the number of road deaths is, unfortunately, increasing year-on-year. My officials are already progressing work to introduce a single lower drink-driving offence that is applicable to all drivers. We are also taking forward consultation options for enabling primary legislation to address drug-driving, and we will consult on further proposed changes to the legislation regulating the use of mobile phones while driving. I have asked officials to look urgently at all the options that may be available to improve safety for schoolchildren. I want to explore wider road safety measures such as speed limit reductions, including 20 mph zones in residential areas and outside schools. I have also asked officials to reinforce the messaging to help keep all road users, especially the vulnerable, safe.

It is important that we, as motorists, are conscious of the damage that we can do while on the road. When it comes to mobile phones, alcohol, drugs and things like that, many people maybe think, "Well, it won't happen to me": unfortunately, it does, and that impacts on lots of other people's lives. We have to make sure that there is messaging to change that culture and behaviour.

Mr McGuigan: I thank the Minister for bringing forward those positive initiatives. As a motorist and a cyclist, I can verify just how scary our roads can be. Will the Minister ensure that adequate funding is secured in her budget to bring forward those measures?

Ms Kimmins: As I said, road safety is a huge priority for me. The road safety strategy until 2030 reflects our continuing commitment to work in partnership to reduce the number of deaths and serious injuries on our roads. In 2024-25, my Department spent £0·5 million on road safety advertising to encourage safer behaviour on our roads, as I have talked about, which was an increase of £0·3 million or 60% from the previous year.

I have not taken any decisions on it in this year's budget, as it is subject to consideration of the responses to my Department's equality impact consultation, which closes on 5 June 2025. On the other side of that, I will take decisions on budgetary allocation.

Ms Kimmins: I thank the Member for asking that question. It is an issue that has attracted quite a lot of media attention in recent weeks, but a lot of that attention has been based on information that is not factual. The scheme has been delayed not because of cost, as the Member for South Belfast, who has now left the Chamber, said at Question Time, but because of staffing shortages, as staff have been taken elsewhere to work on Grand Central station and deal with traffic congestion in Belfast.

As the Member may be aware, however, an informal consultation was undertaken in March 2024, to which nine representations were received. A review of the representations indicated that, while businesses were content with the concept of pedestrianisation, they sought longer vehicular access times for deliveries. Concerns were also raised about how access would be maintained for people with disabilities. I have therefore agreed that officials will commence engagement with stakeholders in the coming weeks in advance of progressing the development of an experimental scheme and associated legislation. Officials will provide updates to stakeholders throughout the process. We have asked for that process to move at pace.

Miss McAllister: I thank the Minister for her answer. Her party's previous Infrastructure Minister said that austerity was one of the reasons that the pedestrianisation had not happened.

Belfast City Council recently announced that Culture Night, for which the Cathedral Quarter is a hub, would return to Belfast. That is just one example of the benefits of pedestrianising —

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Is there a question, Nuala?

Miss McAllister: — parts of our city centre. Will the Minister outline when the experimental pilot that she referred to will come to fruition?

Ms Kimmins: As I said, we have to ensure that we engage with all the stakeholders that will be impacted on, including the businesses that operate in that area. To ensure that we get it right, it is important that the process conclude. As I said, it will commence in the next few weeks. Hopefully, with all being well, unless there are any unforeseen issues, we will be able to move forward at pace with the scheme.

Ms Kimmins: Major road schemes are an important part of the work that my Department delivers as we seek to reduce journey times, increase reliability and improve road safety. The A2 Buncrana Road scheme will be considered as part of the north-west transport plan, which will be subject to a public consultation process. Views from the public were sought to help shape the vision and objectives of the transport plan, as well as to identify local transport concerns in the district through public engagement, which commenced on 27 August and concluded on 5 November last year. The draft plan is expected to be published for public consultation in December this year, after which we hope to be able to move on it. Everything is subject to budget, but that is a priority scheme.

Mr Delargy: Thank you, Minister. It is reassuring to hear that. You have answered my supplementary question. It is great to hear about that progress. When will the regional strategic transport network transport plan be published? Do you have any further details on the timeline for it?

Ms Kimmins: As the Member is aware, my Department is developing the new regional strategic transport network transport plan, which will set out priorities for investment in our road, rail and interurban limited stock bus network, including park-and-ride, through to 2035. I expect a draft of the plan to be ready for public consultation at the end of this year.

Ms Kimmins: I have had a number of meetings with the DVA in recent weeks, but I do not have a specific date for the Member. I have not met it specifically about the processing of driving licences, but, if the Member wants to provide me with more information about local experiences, I can raise the issue with the DVA and try to get an update for him.

Mr Mathison: I thank the Minister for her answer. I will try to be brief.

Will the Minister commit to meeting the DVA again to hear about some of the issues that constituents raise, such as the lack of a digital process for full driving licence applications and the impact that that undoubtedly has on processing times?

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Minister, you have 30 seconds.

Ms Kimmins: Absolutely. As I said, I meet the DVA regularly on a range of issues. I am happy to do that in order to see where things are and how we can improve the system.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Much appreciated. That ends Question Time.

Mr Dickson: On a point of order, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I apologise to the Speaker for missing the first question to the First Minister this afternoon, and I apologise to the First Minister.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: That is a mortal sin, Stewart.

I ask Members who are at the back of the Chamber to try to raise their voices. It is very hard to hear up here. I also ask Members who are seated at the back to stop talking when Members are on their feet.

Members, please take your ease.

Mr Speaker: Apologies for the delay, Members. We had the Hungarian ambassador with us today. We have quite a lot of ambassadorial visits to this place, which is to the good. We now move back to the Matter of the Day.

Mr Martin: First, I want to turn to some comments that the leader of the Opposition made before the business was suspended for Question Time. He said that it was "dehumanising" in some way to trans individuals. I take issue with that. In fact, all that I have heard from this side is that single-sex spaces need to be protected and that biological males should not be using female toilets. Those are not controversial statements. In fact, the Supreme Court referenced some of those on the way through. It is also clear from listening to some of the other Members who have spoken so far that they think that, somehow, trans rights have evaporated. That is simply not the case and is a straw man argument. In fact, trans individuals are still protected under a whole range of equality legislation, including the Equality Act. I further make it clear that, in my view, discrimination is wrong and always will be wrong.

Getting back to what we are discussing this afternoon, it has already been referenced that the Supreme Court identified that the terms "man", woman" and "sex" in the Equality Act do refer to biological sex, not certified or asserted. That is a victory for women's rights and for basic biological facts. Today, I want to pay tribute to some people who have brought us this far in this area and to the bravery and sacrifices that some women have shown and made. I pay tribute in particular to For Women Scotland, which took this case and took on a Government to get the case won. It was supported by a whole range of other organisations such as Sex Matters and the Women's Rights Network. Very recently, my party met the Women's Rights Network Northern Ireland, and we made clear our continued commitment to stand up for women's rights in Northern Ireland. Many of the campaigners who fought for this have lost jobs, lost friends and family, been vilified as bigots and subjected to torrents of abuse; in fact, someone recently called for witch-burning to come back because they wanted to burn J K Rowling. She is not alone. The struggle for justice in this area by such women as Rosie Duffield, Sharron Davies, Helen Joyce, Susan Smith and Kathleen Stock has been vindicated by the Supreme Court ruling.

In closing, following the Supreme Court ruling, I wonder whether members of Sinn Féin, Alliance and the SDLP will have gleaned the additional insight and wisdom required to answer the tough question that they have so far grappled and struggled with —

Mr Speaker: The Member's time is up.

Mr Martin: — the answer to which has eluded them: what is a woman?

Ms Bradshaw: I wish to contribute to this Matter of the Day and appreciate that it has been tabled. It is timely, as it allows us to put on record our thoughts on the Supreme Court ruling. It is an extremely sensitive issue. I emphasise the fact that we need to look at the equality law in its totality and to think about non-discrimination against all nine protected categories in Great Britain, including sex and gender reassignment. Although the ruling does not apply directly to us in Northern Ireland, it means that discrimination and harassment based on someone's sex or on gender reassignment are and will be regarded as unlawful by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom under the terms and definitions laid out.

There have already been complaints about the guidance that was provided by the Equality and Human Rights Commission in England prior to and subsequent to the ruling, and there are concerns that the ruling does not provide clarity on what it will mean in practice for people on whom it impacts. Given the sensitivities and our position in Northern Ireland as a distinct legal jurisdiction with devolved equality law, we need to act to ensure that there is clarity on what it means here. The first thing that we need is a consistent approach by public bodies that is based on guidance from the Equality Commission and the Human Rights Commission here in Northern Ireland. I sincerely hope that they will provide and publish their guidance, imminently. Today, I emailed both organisations asking for a meeting. Although the ruling was quite clear, the legal ramifications in Northern Ireland, given our particular circumstances, are complex. We are already seeing public authorities making assumptions about how the ruling is to be applied, but it is essential that its application be based on appropriate guidance from the appropriate commissions.

The second key aspect is that this is just the latest issue to reinforce the need for a single equality Act in Northern Ireland. Currently, we operate according to section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act, which was already somewhat outdated by the time the Equality Act 2010 was passed for Great Britain, and a scattering of other legislation and regulations, some of which are decades out of date. That creates a minefield, which needs a clear application of the law and an ending of direct and indirect discrimination and harassment. I trust that the ruling, whatever our views on it may be, has at least demonstrated the merit of a single equality Act here in Northern Ireland and of courts providing clarification on such legislation once it is produced. We cannot continue to be left behind in this regard.

Ms Bunting: I welcome the ruling. As my colleague has said, it is a victory not just for women in the UK but for common sense. Nevertheless, I express my regret that this was the length to which women in this country had to go to ensure that their spaces were protected and their very existence recognised, defined and protected from biological men. It seems to me that, of late and until now — after hundreds of years of fighting for rights and equality — the most fundamental of rights for women and girls were being eroded and erased under the guise of so-called progress, even in language, never mind definition. Women are not merely "people who menstruate" or "people who chest feed". Let me be clear: women did not view any of this as progress or advancement for them. At every turn, as these changes were being made for biological males, it was at the expense of biological women and their rights and needs. It is women who have suffered and watched as their rights have been eroded and their safety compromised.

Some in the House have been seeking to dilute women and their rights by making them invisible — erasing their very definition, as per biology, and regardless of their basic respect, safety and privacy. Yet those same Members, without a hint of irony or self-awareness, will come to the House and wax lyrical on their supposed prioritisation of the safety of women and girls from violence, abuse, predatory behaviour and intimidation, yet they see no problem in permitting biological males with full male genitalia into women's safe and private spaces and into their sport, which presents enormous physical risk. There are those who argue that there is no difference and no distinction in performance in sport. However, if that were the case, why is sport segregated at all? Nonsense has prevailed for too long at the expense of half our population. In the course of this Matter of the Day, many have sought to acknowledge the trans community and its needs, but this whole issue is not about trans; it is about women — biological women. For once, what about acknowledging them, their protection and their needs?

Following the ruling, we saw criminal damage to female statues and footage and photographs of takeovers of women's toilets in order to film videos and protests outside women's toilets. Hence, women and girls have had to run that gauntlet to use the bathroom. Is that in any way acceptable? I look forward to hearing from each Minister about the implications of the ruling and actions across each of their Departments, given the Supreme Court's indications on the judgement's likely highly persuasive and consequential precedent for local courts. Women in Northern Ireland deserve the same legal definitions, equality and protections as every other woman in the UK, and they will accept nothing less. As I have said in the Chamber many times, I reiterate this: there is no place for biological males in women's safe and single-sex spaces, including changing rooms, shower rooms, toilets, sports and even prison cells.

A Member: Hear, hear.

Mr Frew: I thank my colleague Jonny Buckley for bringing this Matter of the Day to the House. It is very timely, and it is important that the House has the measure of what the Supreme Court ruling was about. It was about the Equality Act 2010 and how the terms "women" and "sex" refer strictly to biological sex.

The issue at hand, though, is about a number of things: the truth; women's rights in a number of areas, including single-sex spaces and their privacy and safety; and women competing in sports with a fair chance, an equal playing field and in safety. It is also about how some parties and politicians have fumbled their way through the matter, trying to be somewhat populist, denying truth and creating dangers for women and girls everywhere.

When you want to help people, you tell them the truth; when you want to help yourself, you tell people what they want to hear. That has been the maxim of many parties in the House, namely the Alliance Party, the SDLP and Sinn Féin. Their populist stance has put women in danger. Their populist stance has put women and girls, who already feel so vulnerable in this day and age, at risk.

There was absolutely no doubt, given that women fought so hard for so many decades to maintain and achieve rights, that, when we talked about the trans movement, it was very clear that the diminishing of women's rights was taking place. Of course, there should be a place for trans people to have privacy and safety, but that should not be at the expense of women's safety and privacy or their private spaces, toilets and changing areas. How have we come to this place? How have we been practising this madness?

I am glad of the Supreme Court ruling, because it has clarified things, but I did not need that ruling to know the truth and to know what is a woman. I hope that the parties opposite that have grappled with and fumbled their way through the issue now have a clear definition of what a woman is and will practise that in their politics for everyone's safety, including for trans, but more so for women.

A Member: Hear, hear.

Ms Sugden: I broadly welcome the clarity that the UK Supreme Court ruling has provided, not because it excludes but because it gives certainty where there has long been uncertainty, particularly in law, policy and public service delivery, which is where it is of interest to us as policymakers.

Some have criticised the fact that the issue went before the courts at all. I disagree. In our democracy, the legislature makes the law, the Government implement it, but it is the judiciary and, ultimately, the Supreme Court that interpret it. That is not an accident; it is a deliberate and vital part and structure of our democracy. The courts ensure that the law is applied fairly, consistently and in line with the rights and protections that Parliament has set out. Especially when society changes and new complexities arise, it is not only appropriate but essential that the courts fulfil that role.

The judgement speaks to the legal definition of sex, a biological characteristic that is distinct from gender, which is about personal identity. Both matter. Both deserve recognition and respect. However, there are times, especially in areas like medicine, safeguarding, data collection and single-sex spaces, when sex and gender need to be considered separately to ensure that protections work as intended and why we segregated on the basis of sex in the first place. That is not a denial of anyone's identity or worth; it is about ensuring that law and policy are clear, effective and fair to everyone where it is appropriate.

I want to be absolutely clear, however, that the ruling must not be twisted into justification for hatred of or discrimination against transgender individuals. That would be a profound misuse of both the court's reasoning and our broader democratic values. Trans people are a valued part of our society. They deserve dignity, safety and legal protection just like anyone else. Predators are something else.

The law exists to safeguard rights, not to erode them. In a world that is changing, sometimes rapidly, the role of the courts in interpreting and clarifying the law is not just helpful but essential to a just and stable society. We must use that clarity not to divide but to strengthen our commitment to fairness, respect and humanity for all.

Ms Forsythe: I welcome the ruling of the UK Supreme Court. It is disappointing, as others have said, that it took this case to go to court to confirm what we already know: the definition of a woman. Over the past year, I have been working on progressing a private Member's Bill on women and girls in sport, because I feel really strongly about that as a woman and a mother of two young girls who are feeling the vulnerabilities and facing challenges in accessing sport. I am taking my opportunity in the House to speak out on that.

We need to stand up in this place to support and champion women and girls in sport here. We need to remove barriers that exist and progress serious issues, including safeguarding, access to fair competition, medical research on women in sports and securing safe single-sex spaces for women and girls to change and shower when accessing sport. For me, a key part of progressing the Bill has been raising awareness of existing laws that are in place in Northern Ireland that protect the integrity of female sports. The sporting bodies should be confident in their application of those laws, even before taking account of this judgement.

The ruling of the UK Supreme Court is a victory for common sense, as others have said. It is an important reminder of women's rights across the United Kingdom. I look forward to using it to strengthen the principles in my Bill as it progresses. Women's rights in modern society have been hard fought for. The ruling is important: it is an important step towards ensuring that those rights are not diminished. As a female MLA in the House, I am proud to stand here for women's rights.

Mr Speaker: Time is up for further statements.

Miss McIlveen: On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I seek clarification on the appropriateness of public commentary by Members concerning matters that are under active police investigation. I refer specifically to social media posts by the Alliance MLA for East Antrim, Mr Danny Donnelly, regarding the inflammatory statements that were made during performances by the rap group Kneecap, which are currently being assessed by counterterrorism police for potential incitement to violence. Given the serious nature of the allegations and the ongoing investigation, is it appropriate for Members to publicly characterise such content as "art" and make excuses for the group? Surely that could be perceived as dismissive or even prejudicial.

I request guidance on maintaining the integrity of the Assembly's discourse and ensuring that Members' public statements do not inadvertently undermine legal processes or public confidence in our commitment to upholding the rule of law. Can I further ask you, Mr Speaker, whether you have been notified that Mr Donnelly wishes to make a statement to the House to apologise for his comments?

Mr Speaker: No such notification has been received. First of all, the Speaker's role does not extend to social media, so I cannot make a ruling on what Members put on social media. Thankfully, I do not have to make those rulings: I would never be finished. We do not rule on social media issues. However, where a Member is seen to have acted inappropriately, that is something for the standards commissioner. Therefore, if Members wish to put complaints about Members' conduct outside the Chamber, that is the appropriate mechanism to deal with that. I will leave it there at this stage.

We now move to Members' Statements, which is running about four hours behind normal timings.

Mr Baker: I call on all Members of the Chamber to send a strong message today that we call out and condemn those behind sectarian intimidation and threats. In recent weeks, we have seen sectarian hate directed at a pregnant woman in the Suffolk Drive area of west Belfast; towards residents of Altona Drive in Lisburn; and at the Apprentice Boys parade in Lisburn over the Easter period. Acts such as vandalism, graffiti and threatening letters sent to residents have left young families terrified in their own home and others homeless. The erection of flags by masked men outside people's homes has added to the intimidation and was a clear attempt to deter Catholic families from living in certain areas. That is completely unacceptable and absolutely disgraceful.

There should be no no-go areas in any society. Sectarianism needs to be called out at every level and on every occasion that it rears its ugly head, including what we witnessed at the recent Apprentice Boys parade. All sectarianism is wrong. All attempts to intimidate are wrong. If they are not confronted, they create a toxic atmosphere where the poisonous and unacceptable behaviour is allowed to fester.

I urge all Members in the Chamber, particularly those who were present at the parade in Lisburn, to be absolutely clear and unequivocal and to join me in saying that we demand better for the people we represent and we demand an end to such blatant sectarian hate whenever and wherever it occurs.

Mr Frew: I raise a serious matter that was aired in public discourse and in the media last weekend and over the last number of hours: the alleged commentary that has come to light from the rap group, Kneecap. The serious allegation that, at one of their concerts, members of the band shouted, "Kill your local MP" and "The only good Tory is a dead Tory" is absolutely mind-blowing and shameful. I welcome the news that it is being investigated by the Counter Terrorism Internet Referral Unit.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with popular music artists or groups fighting for campaigns through lyrics or being anti-establishment. What is not acceptable is when they incite violence on anyone and, by extension, break the law. I remind the House that, in my lifetime, six MPs have been murdered — four by republican terrorists and, in the last 10 years, two others. They include Conservative Party, Labour Party and Ulster Unionist MPs: Sir David Amess, Jo Cox, Ian Gow, Sir Anthony Berry, our own Robert Bradford and Airey Neave. There are, of course, more throughout history, not least, Sir Henry Wilson, whose portrait adorns these corridors.

This place has also felt loss throughout its history. Our walls are engraved with the names of people who have lost their lives, so, it is incredibly important that, when a line is crossed, when something is totally unacceptable and could be unlawful, thorough investigation should be conducted. Incitement to murder people or a particular person is incredibly worrying and needs to be condemned by all right-thinking people, including everyone in the House.

Mr Mathison: I take the opportunity to highlight Global Intergenerational Week, a campaign that runs every year and aims to inspire us to embrace intergenerational practice and learn more about the benefits of connecting people of all ages. This year, it runs from 24 to 30 April, and, no doubt, there will be events taking place across many constituencies.

Linking Generations Northern Ireland is a local charity based in my constituency. It does fantastic work in connecting generations and communities across Northern Ireland. Vicki, the charity's director, whom many Members will have engaged with, is incredibly passionate about the work that she does. She recently gave an excellent presentation at one of the Education Committee's informal stakeholder briefings. It covered, in particular, the multiple linkages that intergenerational practice has across the Northern Ireland curriculum.

The charity offers continuing professional development (CPD)-accredited training in intergenerational practice and has a range of resources that can be used with primary, secondary and FE students. It can also provide training to care homes on developing intergenerational approaches alongside bespoke training sessions and workshops that are tailored to meet the needs of each specific audience. A great example of its work locally, which shows why we should take the time to acknowledge Global Intergenerational Week, comes when we see it working out practically on the ground. Little Stars Preschool in Killyleagh and Beechvale Nursing Home in Killinchy in the Strangford constituency regularly engage in a range of activities in the nursing home. The feedback, spanning the generations, from those engagements is that they are really positive experiences for young and old alike.

As Global Intergenerational Week will come to a close on Wednesday, I pay tribute to the work of Linking Generations NI, which runs on a shoestring budget. It has extremely limited funding to deliver its work. Crucially, I also call on all Departments, particularly the Executive Office, to engage seriously with the value of intergenerational work, facilitate collaboration across the Executive and come together to ensure that the work is funded adequately, appropriately and sustainably. Organisations such as Linking Generations cannot exist on goodwill alone. An element of what they do needs to be funded if we want it to be delivered and to confirm that we value it. The work benefits our education system, our health settings and a range of key Executive strategies. Last year, a motion to support the progression of the loneliness strategy was passed unanimously in the Assembly, and intergenerational work is absolutely vital for that. If we are serious about the issue, we need to make sure that intergenerational practice is properly supported across all Executive Departments.

Mr Durkan: There is palpable outrage across Derry and beyond at the disgraceful decision to cut core funding for the Northlands Centre. It is shameful that Executive parties and all of us stood here in February speaking passionately about the impact of the addiction crisis in the north-west, which is enveloping families and destroying communities, yet, weeks later, core funding for that addiction treatment centre was removed. Furthermore, the £1 million promised for Northlands in 'New Decade, New Approach' (NDNA) remains undelivered.

Let me be clear: this is not just about numbers on a balance sheet; it is a lifeline for individuals who are battling addiction. It is a light in the depths of the darkness that so many families have been dragged into. Cutting funding does not just undermine the services and support that they provide, services that they are commissioned to provide by the Department of Health; it undermines the people who depend on them.

I speak today not only as an elected representative who has seen the value of the service to my constituents; I have felt the impact of it myself. Lives are not saved by hollow words and empty promises. The individuals who are at rock bottom with nowhere left to turn deserve leadership from the Executive. The excuse of budget pressures does not always hold up. The public's anger is entirely justified when we see how resources are wasted elsewhere. Just weeks ago, I established that, over the past three years, Executive Departments had spent over £5 million on unoccupied buildings and land. Millions are frittered away on nothing while vital life-saving services such as Northlands are left to scrape around and fight for survival. Is that the mark of a functioning or fit for purpose Government whose priorities are in the right place? We hear, time and again, rhetoric about transformation and prevention, but where is the action? It is certainly not in the Programme for Government (PFG), in which, shockingly, the word "addiction" does not appear on any of the 120 pages.

Nobody can argue against, nor have I heard anyone argue against, investing in Northlands. It is not about politics but about people, community and saving lives. We need a Government who do not just talk about doing what matters most but actually do it. People deserve better. People need more. We have called on the Minister of Health to find the money to fund that life-changing and life-saving centre, and we now call on the Executive to do so.

Ms Flynn: The House must come out with one voice and the clear message that it is time to move forward and build Casement Park. For far too long, Casement Park has stood silent: a sleeping giant in the heart of West Belfast. The site has lain dormant for more than a decade, while our young people, our clubs and our communities have been left without the home that they deserve. Today, we say that enough is enough. This is not just about bricks and mortar but about giving the next generation of Gaels a stadium that they can call their own: a place where dreams are made, heroes are born and lasting memories are created.

A couple of weeks ago, just after the Assembly had broken for recess, thousands of people, young and old, from across Belfast and beyond, turned out at a rally on the Andersonstown Road to demand progress. We saw the passion and the energy of our communities and heard the powerful words of legends, including Oisín McConville, who said:

He is right. The delaying tactics must stop. Our people deserve better. Casement Park is not a luxury but a necessity. It will be an economic engine for the community, bringing in jobs, attracting investment and driving regeneration across West Belfast, Antrim, Ulster and beyond. It will put Belfast and Ulster Gaels back on the national sporting map, which is where we belong.

The British Government must clarify their position on funding for Casement Park. Hilary Benn has committed to the project time and time again, but words are not enough. Communities cannot wait. The British Government must deliver on the financial commitment that is needed in order to unlock that game-changing project. We call on the Minister for Communities please to work alongside all Ministers to stand up for the Gaels of Antrim, Ulster and Ireland and to champion the redevelopment of Casement Park. There must be no more hiding, no more delays and no more broken promises. Other sports have their stadiums, and rightly so, but now is our time. It is Casement's time. Let us move forward together and build a stadium that inspires. Let us build a home for the next generation of Gaels. Let us build Casement Park.

Mr Chambers: Saturday past saw yet another significant day in the history of Bangor Football Club, when it was presented with the Northern Ireland Football League (NIFL) Championship trophy. The club's elevation to the Premiership has brought much joy to the people of the city of Bangor and has created the exciting prospect of big crowds and big games at Clandeboye Park next season.

Although the eyes of the sporting world are on the tremendous achievement of the players, management and back-room staff at Bangor Football Club, it is perhaps time to reflect on the boardroom journey of recent years, during which the club was on the brink of collapse. There was the situation in which the club had to play its football in a Ballymena league after losing its status in the upper tiers of the local game in around 2016. The club's finances were on the verge of collapse. A series of poor internal management decisions historically had seen the higher income from the 3G pitch, which had been installed at Clandeboye Park with a view to providing a funding stream for the club, go to a third party for a time. It would have been easy to throw in the towel at that point, but a small band of Seagulls supporters took on board the advice that was offered recently by Rory McIlroy and followed their dream. Few of them had any previous experience of running a football club, but they met the negatives head on and received their reward last weekend. Long may the club continue to prosper under the stewardship of its current board.

Mr Middleton: I rise with sadness and concern following a week of sectarianism and violence in my constituency of Foyle. On Easter Monday, we saw violence from republicans near the Fountain estate. Following the Easter Monday parade, petrol bombs, fireworks and masonry were thrown near an old people's home. At the weekend, we saw two young people targeted in the Nelson Drive area. Yesterday, there were arranged fights, with fireworks and masonry being thrown. A bus carrying young people from a cross-community tournament was targeted with stones and masonry. The murals in the Fountain estate were also targeted.

It is deeply disappointing that that level of sectarianism still exists. I urgently call on those involved in it to stop what they are doing. It is unfortunate that we are seeing a rise in that activity, but the ultimate result of it will be serious injury, if not death. I urge those who have information to bring it to the PSNI. There is an onus on us all to show political leadership, and I welcome the condemnation of that activity across the board. It is not about finger-pointing at one section of the community. Sectarianism, unfortunately, blights all sections of our society. There is an onus on us to highlight that, so it is important that, today, we call it out for what it is and we urge those involved to bring it to an end and those with information to bring it to the PSNI.

Ms Mulholland: I am not to be found wanting when it comes to advocating and speaking in the Chamber for the arts as a powerful force for change, for the expression of solidarity and of political pressure. In the Chamber, I have also been a vocal supporter of the Irish language, which I want to be a living, breathing vehicle for cultural expression and identity that inspires and nourishes all, particularly our younger generations.

The issue that I raise is nothing to do with a smear campaign. It is not about holding perfectly valid political views about human rights abuses in Gaza. It is nothing to do with the horrific scenes of collective punishment and mass starvation of the Palestinian people that we have witnessed. It has everything to do with standing on a stage, shouting support for proscribed organisations such as Hezbollah. It has everything to do with yelling at an audience to kill their MP.

In the past decade, we have seen the murder of two sitting MPs: Jo Cox and David Amess. I witnessed my party leader, Naomi Long, receive death threats on multiple occasions. My colleague Stewart Dickson's office was burnt out. My friend Councillor Christine Bower's windows were smashed. Other colleagues were sent bullets to their home and sympathy cards on their supposed demise to their office. As I look around the Chamber, I see others whom I know will have experienced the terror of the knock on the door from the PSNI to inform them of a threat to their life.

The footage purported to be of members of Kneecap shouting at people to kill their MP and professing support for Hamas and Hezbollah crosses a line from art as a tool of protest to incitement. It takes the focus of the message of solidarity away from the atrocity and puts it on to the messenger, as we have seen from the countless headlines and column inches that Kneecap have garnered lately. Whilst that does little to harm ticket sales, the noise detracts the glare from where it should rightfully be. The valid political views that Kneecap holds on the conflict in Gaza are being undermined and overshadowed by those actions.

I will once more be unequivocal: art can and should be provocative and challenging, and great art has the power to change minds and nurture new ideas, but statements that promote violence and proscribed organisations, regardless of their target or intent, are to be condemned and challenged, and I wholeheartedly do so.

Mr Gildernew: I flag up and acknowledge the remarkable achievements of three sports clubs in Dungannon, which will, over the next two weekends, see our soccer, rugby and hockey clubs compete in major finals.

On Saturday, Dungannon Swifts FC will take on Cliftonville in the Irish Cup final at Windsor Park. On the same day and at the same time, Dungannon Rugby Football Club will take on Ballynahinch in the Ulster Senior Cup final at Kingspan Stadium. In the following week, on 10 May, Dungannon Ladies' Hockey Club will seek to retain the Ulster Senior Cup against Randalstown at Stormont.

The achievement is all the more remarkable because the three clubs sit side by side on the Circular Road as you go into Dungannon, which many Members will be familiar with from coming off the M1. I acknowledge the work, practice and commitment that it takes for those clubs to reach such a level in their sport. I wish the three managers, Rodney McAree from the Swifts, Jonny Gillespie from the rugby club and Norman Purdy, all the very best in those games, and I wish all the teams, their families, their supporters and the entire community well for travelling to and enjoying the games. I look forward to the games and to as many of those trophies as possible coming up the road.

Mr Dunne: In what has been a very special few weeks for sport in North Down, I congratulate Bangor Football Club on the fantastic achievement of winning the very competitive Championship and securing promotion to the NIFL premiership. It is a moment of immense pride for the club, players, the manager, Lee Feeney, the coaching staff, directors, loyal supporters and the many volunteers who are at the heart of this great club. They have backed the "Seasiders" through thick and thin on this incredible journey, which culminated in their lifting the trophy on Saturday.

The journey included playing in the Ballymena and Provincial Football League back in the 2018-19 season. Subsequently, the team won three promotions, including the Premier Intermediate League a few seasons ago, before winning the Championship this season, which, as anyone who follows local football will know, is very competitive. Bangor Football Club has earned a well-deserved promotion to the top tier of local football, which it had not achieved since 2009. The success is a testament to the hard work, dedication and passion shown by those who are involved with Bangor Football Club, on and off the pitch, including the many volunteers who work week in, week out and are very much the heartbeat of the club.

The club continues to grow and progress, and the promotion is richly deserved after such a season. I commend the board of directors, particularly the chairman, Graham Bailie, all of whom share a passion for and commitment and dedication to Bangor Football Club. For many years, the club has been very much part of our local community, with its vibrant academy, active social club and much more. The achievement will inspire many more young people across our local area to get involved in sport. I know that many fans are eagerly looking forward to the new Premiership season kicking off.

Once again, congratulations to Bangor Football Club. It has very exciting plans for the time ahead, on and off the pitch, and I wish it well.

Mr O'Toole: Mr Speaker, since the Assembly's return last February, you have been in the Chair for much of that time, and I have been in the Chamber probably more than most Members, and we have repeatedly heard Ministers from all parties talk about the financial and fiscal constraints that the Executive face, and they do. As a constructive Opposition, we have consistently acknowledged those real constraints. At times, austerity and a lack of funds have been used as an excuse to justify not delivering even the smallest and seemingly most straightforward and trivial projects. Mr Brett and others have called out the preposterous situation where the Infrastructure Minister blamed austerity for not delivering the pedestrianisation of Hill Street in the Cathedral Quarter at a cost of just a few thousand pounds.

Mr Speaker, colour me shocked to read that Ministers from the Executive have spent tens of thousands of pounds staying in five-star hotels. One single stay by former Sinn Féin Economy Minister Conor Murphy — he is now in the Seanad and was previously Finance Minister — at the Willard Hotel in Washington DC, a five-star hotel described on its website as the "Residence of Presidents", cost £6,000. That would have paid for the pedestrianisation of Hill Street, but that is not the only five-star stay that Conor Murphy undertook while he was the Economy Minister. He stayed at the Hotel Luc in Berlin and the Fullerton Hotel in Singapore. When I was backpacking 20 years ago, I stayed in a hostel in Little India. I could not afford to stay in the Fullerton Hotel; I walked past it. Little did I think that, 20 years on, a Sinn Féin Minister would stay in the lap of luxury at a cost of £4000. However. it is not just Sinn Féin Ministers. Gordon Lyons, the Communities Minister, who is primarily responsible for welfare, housing and so on in Northern Ireland, has been on two or three trips to North America. He stayed at the five-star Dupont Circle Hotel in Washington DC.

I do not think that Ministers should not travel or that they should stay in flea-ridden hotels or backpackers hostels when they do. To be fair to the Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs Minister, Mr Muir, when he went to New York and Brussels, he stayed in reasonable three- and four-star business accommodation. That is not an unacceptable thing to do, and I recognise that he has done that. I wish that the Communities Minister and the former Economy Minister would do likewise.

Earlier today, when I asked the First Minister whether she had stayed in a five-star hotel, I was shocked to hear that she did not know.

I do not know about your constituents, Mr Speaker, or the First Minister's — I know that the First Minister has previous in not seeing things that are right in front of her — but I have never met an individual anywhere who did not know that they were staying in a five-star hotel.

It is absurd. It is taking the public for mugs. Do not blame austerity for not delivering small projects. Do not tell your constituents and the people of Northern Ireland that you cannot spend tuppence ha'penny —

Mr Speaker: The Member's time is up.

Mr O'Toole: — on arts projects or on pedestrianising Hill Street and then swan off on five-star trips. That is gaslighting the public.

Mr Speaker: The Member's time is up.

Mr O'Toole: It is mugging people off, and it will be called out —

Mr Speaker: The Member's time is up.

Mr O'Toole: — consistently and robustly by a constructive Opposition. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Speaker: Entertaining, but your time was up about 15 seconds ago.

Mr McReynolds: I rise as an MLA for East Belfast and someone living with multiple sclerosis (MS) to mark MS Awareness Week. MS affects over 5,000 people in Northern Ireland, and we continue to have one of the highest prevalence rates in the world. Despite that, access to neurology services remains limited, with many patients regularly facing delays in their diagnosis and, ultimately, treatment. I remember that, when I was diagnosed in 2013, I was kept in the hospital by my consultant not as a precaution but to speed up access to an MRI, because, had I been sent home, who knows when I would have received that crucial assessment of lesions on my brain?

Unfortunately, research carried out by the MS Society shows that, while many are aware of the condition, around three quarters of respondents said that they know only a little or not much about how it affects people. That is despite nearly half of respondents personally knowing or having known someone who has lived with MS. That can add to misunderstandings and misconceptions about the condition. That is why this year's national theme is "MS conversations". It is about encouraging people to start conversations about their MS and to raise awareness.

When I was diagnosed, I was told that, once you have met someone living with MS, you have met one person living with MS. That demonstrates that, as a neurological condition, it affects everyone differently. I am thankful that it does not limit me in carrying out the work that I do for my constituents every day or in standing in the Chamber today.

The first Northern Ireland multiple sclerosis research hub, which will be dedicated to tackling MS, will be launched at Queen's University this evening. It will increase capacity in MS research and create opportunities for those interested in building a career in researching MS, training and retaining the future generations of researchers in Northern Ireland. It will benefit those around the world who have been or may in the future be diagnosed with the condition.

I again thank the MS Society for the help that it has given to me since my diagnosis and to thousands of other individuals and family members over the years. I encourage all Members to learn about MS and to increase their awareness and understanding of it. Together, we can tackle the stigma that is associated with the condition and how it affects people in various forms in Northern Ireland.

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

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: I have received notice from the Minister for the Economy that she wishes to make a statement. Before I call the Minister, I remind Members that they must be concise in asking their questions, as this is not an opportunity for debate. Long introductions will not be permitted. Without further ado, I call the Minister.

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

It is fitting that I make the statement on Workers' Memorial Day. Everyone benefits from good jobs. A decent, reliable wage benefits workers and their families. The flexibility to balance a career with family life means that more people can stay in work, giving employers access to a larger pool of people. More people working in better-paid jobs reduces poverty and its associated societal problems, which benefits communities as well as the public finances. That is why creating good jobs is one of the key objectives in the Executive's Programme for Government (PFG).

My Department's 'good jobs' agenda involves supporting businesses to become more productive so that they are in a better position to offer good jobs. It involves building our skills base so that more people are equipped to take up those jobs. It also involves strengthening employment legislation.

Last July, my predecessor, Conor Murphy, launched a consultation on a Bill to promote good jobs. The consultation ran for 13 weeks. Responses were received from 25 industry representative bodies that have a combined local membership of over 18,000 individuals and businesses. Submissions were received from 19 trade union bodies that, together, have a membership of around 375,000 workers. The NUS-USI, which represents over 130,000 students and apprentices in the North of Ireland, also provided its views. Since the consultation closed on 30 September, my Department has been carefully considering the feedback.

Today, I am outlining an employment Bill that will be supported by secondary legislation, statutory codes of practice and guidance. My proposed Bill contains four themes, the first of which is terms of employment. Zero-hours contracts that provide workers with no guaranteed hours do not provide a good basis for a stable income. They should be used only for work that is genuinely casual or seasonal. Under my Bill, people on a zero-hours contract will have the right to move to a banded-hours contract that reflects their average working hours. Workers on a zero-hours contract will also have the right to reasonable notice of shifts and the right to compensation if shifts are cancelled or curtailed at short notice. That package of measures will bring to an end exploitative zero-hours contracts for people who work regular hours. Such contracts will be permissible only where work is genuinely seasonal or casual.

Under the current law, workers are not entitled to the same rights as employees. That distinction does not apply in many other European economies. However, due to its interaction with the tax system, the Executive cannot by themselves bring an end to that categorisation. I therefore propose to work with the British Government to end that unhelpful and unnecessary distinction. In the meantime, the Executive can address the fact that only employees are entitled to a written statement of particulars setting out their terms of employment. My proposed Bill extends that right to workers and ensures that that information is available to everyone. It will also be provided from the first day of employment rather than within two months, as is currently the case.

My proposed Bill will also tackle the unscrupulous practice of a perfectly solvent business firing workers and rehiring them on less favourable terms. The practice known as "fire and rehire" will be permissible only when the business can show that it is not viable and the alternative is a loss of jobs. The legislation will also strengthen the obligations on employers to ensure compliance with formal notification procedures when making collective redundancies and ensure that those responsibilities apply to companies employing people who work at sea.

Under this theme, I also propose better protection for agency workers. Agency workers will be provided with clear information on the terms of their work assignment, such as the name of the company that is employing them, the rate of pay they will receive, payment dates and intervals and holiday entitlement. The loophole known as the "Swedish derogation", which permits agency workers to receive less pay than their permanent counterparts even after 12 weeks in the job, will be abolished. The enforcement and information-sharing powers available to my Department's Employment Agency Inspectorate will be strengthened.

The next theme is pay and benefits. The emergence of new technologies has meant that the lines between work and home life have become increasingly blurred. While workers need to be able to switch off from work, there may be a need for businesses to have flexibility, for example, to deliver services to international clients in different time zones. More clarity is needed in that area to help workers and employers navigate the challenges. I therefore propose to introduce a statutory code of practice on the right to disconnect. My Department will monitor compliance with that code of practice and consider whether legislation will be required.

My proposed legislation will also ensure that tips are passed on to workers in full. That will give added reassurance to workers in the hospitality and services industries who rely on tips. As part of my legislation, all workers will be legally entitled to a payslip that, if they are paid hourly, details the time worked. The accurate recording of hours is already provided for in legislation. To complement that, I intend to produce guidance for employers and workers that clearly articulates those record-keeping requirements. I propose to increase the reference period used to calculate holiday pay from 12 to 52 weeks. That will help to avoid seasonal fluctuations and provide a fairer and more robust reference period for employers and workers.

The third theme is voice and representation. Many countries have a constructive relationship between trade unions and industry bodies that recognises and promotes the shared interest of workers and employers. Workforces that are listened to and respected are more productive, which benefits employers also. My officials will work with the Labour Relations Agency (LRA), trade unions and employers to strengthen the tripartite model of social dialogue. Together, we will introduce a code of practice detailing the behaviours that underpin positive workplace relationships.

The LRA engagement forum will be used to promote collective bargaining, with the overarching aim of working towards the target in the EU adequate minimum wage directive of a collective bargaining coverage rate of 80%. Current collective bargaining coverage varies greatly between the public and private sectors, with 80% of public-sector workers having their pay determined by a collective bargaining agreement. That figure falls to 20% in the private sector. To reach that target across the economy, we need to expand trade union membership. My proposed legislation will therefore give more workers the opportunity to be represented by a recognised trade union by lowering the recognition threshold from 21 employees in a business to 10 employees. Trade unions will be able to request access to a workplace in order to promote the benefits of trade unions, engage with members and negotiate with employers on issues such as terms, pay and conditions. An employer will not be permitted to unreasonably withhold access. The rules of engagement on workplace access will be stipulated in guidance.

At the moment, balloting must be conducted on paper through postal vote. My proposed Bill will modernise that practice by permitting trade unions to use electronic balloting. I will also consider how the existing bureaucratic requirements placed on trade unions when balloting members can be reduced. Currently, trade unions must keep detailed records of members' addresses, jobs and workplaces. Sanctions for administrative error and the provision of incorrect information are unnecessarily severe. My officials will consider, in consultation with employers and trade unions, what changes can be made to reduce the restrictions on trade unions when balloting their members.

My Bill also proposes to abolish the 12-week time limit on protection against dismissal for employees taking part in official industrial action.

Under the Information and Consultation of Employees Regulations 2005, employees in larger businesses can request information about the business's economic situation, employment prospects and decisions likely to lead to changes in work organisation or contractual relations. At least 10% of employees and at least 15 people must request a formal information agreement for it to be valid. I intend to reduce that threshold to 2% of employees and at least 10 people. I also intend to ensure that employees of larger organisations who work in smaller offices can avail themselves of a formal information agreement.

The final theme is work-life balance. As much as possible, people should be able to balance their work with their family and private life. That will allow more people to stay in work and broaden the pool of staff available to employers. I propose to legislate to remove the current 26-week qualifying period for employees to request flexible working; instead, it will be a day-1 right. The process will also be made easier by removing the requirement for an employee to consider the impact of a flexible working request on the employer; instead, the onus will be on the employer to state why their decision to refuse an application for flexible working is reasonable. At the moment, only one request for flexible working can be made in a rolling 12-month period: I propose that that be increased to two requests each year.

Many people require flexibility in order to care for a loved one. I propose, in the first instance, a new right for employees with caring responsibilities to take up to one week of unpaid carer's leave every 12 months to care for a family member or dependant with a long-term care need. My objective is to make carer's leave a paid right. I therefore propose that my Bill provide my Department with powers to enable a statutory entitlement to paid carer's leave that could be introduced when the Executive can afford to fund paid carer's leave or if funding flows from that entitlement being introduced in Britain.

Some babies are born requiring intensive care due to premature birth or illness. That is a hugely stressful time for their parents. I plan to introduce a new legal right of up to 12 weeks' leave and pay for parents whose newborn babies require neonatal care. I propose to enhance paternity leave protections for employees who have a new child — by birth, surrogacy or adoption — by permitting paternity leave to be taken as two separate blocks of one week or a single block of two weeks. My Bill will increase the time in which paternity leave can be taken to 52 weeks from the current 56-day limit. Through the Bill, I propose to enable paternity leave to be taken either before or after a period of shared parental leave and to reduce the notice period that is required for paternity leave from the current 15 weeks to 28 days. I also wish for powers to be delegated in order to make it possible to increase the duration of paternity leave in future, should such an entitlement be introduced in Britain or if the Executive can afford to fund such an entitlement. Finally, I propose to enhance protections from redundancy and dismissal for pregnant employees and for employees who have recently returned to work after a period of maternity or adoption leave or six or more weeks of shared parental leave.

Today, I am setting out an ambitious programme that will see the biggest upgrade in workers' rights since the Good Friday Agreement: an end to exploitative zero-hours contracts; paid leave during neonatal care; more protections for agency workers; stronger trade union rights; stronger rights to flexible working; and a fairer distribution of tips. I have, this morning, written to Executive colleagues to seek their endorsement of my proposals. I look forward to my paper being put on the Executive's agenda so that colleagues can come to a collective view. The Executive's decisions will then be translated into a Bill, which can and should become law within the two years that are left of the mandate.

As the fine details of proposals are refined in legislation, there will be further opportunities for engagement with the business community, trade unions, the Committee for the Economy and the Assembly. There will then be a phased period of implementation over the next mandate in order to give businesses time to prepare and adapt. In conjunction with the Labour Relations Agency, my Department will provide training and support to employers during the transition period. The legislation will provide a sound foundation on which to create good jobs. I hope that the Executive and the Assembly will support me in paving the road to prosperity.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: I call Matthew O'Toole for the Opposition.

Mr O'Toole: Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.

Minister, we are obviously a party of the left. We believe in workers' rights, and we strongly welcome many of these proposals. We are decades overdue an employment rights Bill in this place to improve workers' rights. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, however: none of this has even been discussed at the Executive, let alone a Bill agreed. Is there not a degree of deception, frankly, in introducing all these potential rights and telling workers that they will be legislated for, when, unless I am wrong, you do not even have a date for when it will be discussed at the Executive, let alone for when legislation will be introduced by the Assembly?

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: OK, Matthew.

Mr O'Toole: Will you confirm that it has not been agreed at the Executive?

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Are you finished?

Mr O'Toole: I have sat down.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you. Minister?

Dr Archibald: I thank the Member for his question. I said in my statement that I wrote to Executive colleagues this morning with my set of proposals. There was a 13-week consultation period in which over 190 responses, representing the views of tens of thousands of people, were received. I believe that my proposals strike a balance in being effective for workers and employers. I look forward to engaging with Executive colleagues on the proposals, which, I believe, everybody can get behind and support.

Mr Brett (The Chairperson of the Committee for the Economy): I thank the Minister for her statement and for her pre-brief to me as the Chair of the Committee. Given that the Executive have not yet discussed the matter, the House is in some doubt as to if and when a Bill will ever arrive. On Friday, Minister, you received a letter from the five largest business organisations in Northern Ireland — the Confederation of British Industry (CBI), the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB), the Institute of Directors (IOD), Manufacturing NI and the Northern Ireland Chamber — outlining their concerns about your proposals. You briefed them on your proposals this morning. Which of those organisations now endorse your proposals?

Dr Archibald: I thank the Member for taking the time to engage with me this afternoon on my proposals. What I have set out today and what I presented to business and trade union representatives and other stakeholders this morning is detailed, and I expect that they will rightly take their time to consider the proposals. I hope that they will come to the conclusion that I have recognised their views, which were shared during the consultation period, and arrived at a balanced way forward. I look forward to continued engagement with all those stakeholders.

Mr Kearney: Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire. Cuirim fáilte roimh an ráiteas fhórasach shuntasach seo inniu.

Precarious work is a systemic practice in the world of work. Minister, what is your message to workers across this society who endure the scourge of precarious employment?

Dr Archibald: I thank the Member for his question. He is right to highlight the plight of workers who continue to face precarious work. My message to them is this: we have your back, and we want to address the challenges that you continue to face. Some of the actions that we are taking through the Bill — ending exploitative zero-hours contracts; protecting people who choose to remain on zero-hours contracts for their own purposes or who are in seasonal or casual work by providing a right to reasonable notice of shifts and a right to compensation when shifts are cancelled at short notice; and banning exclusivity clauses in zero-hours and low-hours contracts — go some way to addressing those concerns. There are other measures in the Bill to tackle fire-and-rehire practices, which will also support those workers.

I look forward to continuing to engage with trade unions and others as the Bill progresses in order to ensure that we continue to enhance workers' rights. I see this as the first step on the journey. We are choosing to do some of the things that we propose in the form of guidance or statutory codes of practice, but the Department will be able to return to them if there is a need to do so. We will also continue to develop our employment legislation in the future to meet the needs of businesses and workers.

Mr Honeyford: I welcome the Minister's coming to the Chamber. Hopefully, we will now see the 'good jobs' Bill move forward in order to protect workers and to provide a better business environment in Northern Ireland.

I appreciate that the Minister listened to the issues that we raised, and I am pleased to see some movement in that direction in her statement. With legislation going through Westminster, however, will the Minister set out clearly where the Bill differs from that of our GB counterparts? Will she also provide an update on the engagement that she has had with the UK Government? Minister, you mentioned that there will be funding available if the UK Government move, so can you give us an update on that?

Dr Archibald: Yes. The legislation that is passing through Westminster differs in a number of areas from what we are proposing to do. In some cases, it has perhaps clouded some of the engagement that we have been having on our Bill. There are concerns about measures that are in the Bill that is going through Westminster not being proposed in our Bill, while, in some areas, we are going further than what is being proposed in Britain. For example, some of our proposals on trade union access go further. There are differences in the proposed way forward on things such as zero-hours contracts. We propose that people have a right to a banded-hours contract after a period of working. We will engage on what that period might be. As I set out in the document, it could be 26 weeks. We see that as being a reasonable period, but we are open to hearing views. The worker would instigate such a request. That right would be set out clearly in the written statement of particulars that workers would receive as a day-1 right so that they are clear on their rights and entitlements. A different system is being proposed in Britain, whereby the employer will be obliged to offer a move away from a zero-hours contract every 12 weeks. Businesses have some concerns about the administrative burden that that would place on them.

On parental and family-related leave, there are some differences. With some of that, we are catching up with what has already been put in place in Britain, but having an enabling power, for example, to introduce paid carers' leave is not something that I am aware of being introduced in Britain. I know that there will be engagement, and extensive lobbying will be happening there as well. It is something that I would very much like to see brought forward here, and I will engage with Executive colleagues on that.

I am sure that there are other differences that I have missed, but we will engage further through the Committee and in correspondence in the weeks ahead.

Miss Brogan: Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a ráiteas.

I thank the Minister for her welcome statement and the ambitious Bill. Can the Minister outline whether the Bill could provide a vehicle for bringing forward gender pay gap reporting, please?

Dr Archibald: As the Member is likely aware, gender pay gap reporting protections are the responsibility of the Minister for Communities. I believe that that is an important way of promoting equality and preventing differences in pay based on gender. Minister Lyons corresponded with my predecessor on the issue, and I am more than happy to work with him to accommodate his Department in legislating on those issues using my Bill as a vehicle, should he wish to do so and if he is able to do so within the time frames that we propose.

Mr Buckley: Whilst there are elements of the Minister's statement that will be universally welcomed, she will know that there is huge concern among business stakeholders about the consequences of the proposed Bill. Given that concern and given the need for key business engagement at this difficult time, does the Minister share any concern that this botched Bill could potentially lead to job losses rather than good jobs?

Dr Archibald: I do not agree with the Member's characterisation of a Bill that is not yet drafted. There needs to be further engagement with the business community, trade unions and other stakeholders on the shape of what is brought forward. As I outlined in response to other Members and in my statement itself, what we have achieved and what I have proposed today is a balanced way forward that takes on board the views of employers and the need to very much upgrade our workers' rights legislation. Yes, what we are proposing is ambitious, but it is achievable, and I look forward to engaging with and working with the Committee as we bring forward the legislation, which, with the support of my Executive colleagues, I aim to introduce to the Assembly in January 2026.

Mr Mathison: I thank the Minister for her statement. There is a significant role for the Labour Relations Agency in the proposed Bill. Can the Minister advise what additional resource will be provided to that organisation so that it can carry out those functions?

Dr Archibald: Obviously, the Labour Relations Agency has been involved in the engagement to get the proposed legislation to this stage. I continue to engage with that organisation, and I am happy to engage on any resourcing issues that it may have. It has not highlighted those to me to date.

Mr Middleton: I thank the Minister for her statement. Minister, since the consultation, the general feedback that we have received through the Committee has been that, broadly, the unions have been supportive and, broadly, the business community and its representatives have serious and genuine concerns. One of the sectors with concerns is the hospitality sector, and those concerns include issues around contracts, zero-hours contracts and the role that they have to play. Minister, do you know how many people in Northern Ireland have zero-hours contracts and what the impact of your proposals would be?

Dr Archibald: I thank the Member for his question. He is testing me here in relation to me being able to find my figures. Off the top of my head, I believe that there are about 11,000 people. I think that those figures are from 2023. I think that, in the last figures, the coverage of zero-hours contracts in business as a whole was about 1·8%. They are quite a small cohort of the coverage of contracts as a whole across our economy.

However, the nature of those contracts and how that affects the people trapped in one even though they work regular hours each week is the issue that I want to tackle. As I have set out, a small number of exceptions will be set out in regulations for where there is genuinely seasonal or casual work. I will engage with unions and employers as we develop those regulations.

Mr Carroll: There is no doubt that there are some positives in the announcement, some of which were detailed in my trade union freedom Bill many years ago. I am happy to have played a part in helping the Department and Minister to make decisions. However, there are gaps already. 'New Decade, New Approach' promised an outright ban on zero-hours contracts, but the statement does not have one: will you explain that? Will you also clarify what is meant by "genuinely seasonal or casual work"?

Dr Archibald: I thank the Member for his question. As I set out, where a worker is on a zero-hours contract but works regular weekly hours, that person will have a right to a banded-hours contract. There will be a small number of exceptions in cases of what is genuinely casual and seasonal work. The Member will understand that that arrangement may suit some people. For most people, it will not; they will want regular shift work. For music events, for example, a large number of people may be needed for a short period, so such an arrangement may be required there. There will also be seasonal work that, by its very nature, is on a short-term basis. Those conditions will be set out in regulations and will be narrow in their scope. The intention is to ensure that people who are currently on zero-hours contracts that I would view as exploitative will be entitled to a regular work contract and a set of hours that they can expect to work every week.

Ms Flynn: I thank the Minister for her positive statement and announcement today. Her proposals are great news. I really welcome the neonatal care pay. That is important, as you outlined in your statement, for parents who have had that experience of caring for wee babies in a neonatal unit. Will the Minister confirm the rate at which that will be paid?

Dr Archibald: I thank the Member for her question. The experience of people such as her helped to shape the proposals. We are trying to meet the needs of our community out there. Neonatal care pay will be paid at the statutory rate, which is uplifted annually in line with inflation. It is currently £187·18 a week or 90% of the employee's weekly earnings, whichever is lower. Any difference from how the rights operate in Britain would require HMRC to implement costly system changes that would result not only in a delay in the right's becoming operational but in annually recurring costs for the Executive.

Mr McGuigan: I welcome the Minister's statement and all the positive aspects contained in it. It is particularly encouraging, Minister, that you intend to introduce paid carer's leave. Do you have any estimate of how much that is likely to cost?

Dr Archibald: I thank the Member for his question. As I have made clear over the course of the statement and my responses today, my desire is that the right to carer's leave be a paid entitlement, but that will be subject to funding being agreed by the Executive. The cost of a paid entitlement will, of course, depend on a number of factors. Ulster University analysis commissioned by my Department suggests that the annually recurring costs of a paid carer's leave entitlement could be between £10·3 million and £75·2 million a year, depending on the rate of pay and uptake and assuming a maximum entitlement of five days a year.

To ensure that the policy best meets the needs of stakeholders and best serves the desired strategic outcome of ensuring that carers can remain in or enter the workforce, I will commission further research and a call for evidence. That important body of work will help to inform cost options for the Executive to consider and, hopefully, agree. If, however, a paid entitlement is introduced in Britain — obviously, the legislation is still going through Westminster, and similar lobbying will take place among carers there, as you would rightly expect — the terms and conditions that would be adopted there could be mirrored here. The annually recurring costs would then be paid from the Consolidated Fund, and there would be no additional cost for the Executive. I think that we all recognise the invaluable role that unpaid carers have in supporting their loved ones and others, and we want to be able to recognise that.

Ms Mulholland: Thank you so much, Minister. My question follows on from the previous one, which was on carer's leave. There has been a really low uptake of that leave in GB, where it is already in law. You referenced the research on paid carer's leave, so is there a timeline for that and for any discussions about paid carer's leave going through the Executive?

Dr Archibald: I thank the Member for her question. When I wrote to Executive colleagues today, I highlighted the proposals that I have made and my desire to discuss a paid carer's leave entitlement. The timelines on research will have to correspond with the timelines on drafting and introducing the legislation. That will happen in the very near future, and I am happy to correspond with the Member on the exact timetables.

Ms Sheerin: Minister, I know that your predecessor met businesses and trade unions to discuss the Bill in the pre-consultation and consultation stages. Will you confirm that you will continue those conversations as the detail of the Bill is worked out?

Dr Archibald: I thank the Member for her question. Yes, of course, continued engagement with stakeholders is a fundamental part of the next stage of the process. My Department will seek to further refine the details of the proposals in consultation with key stakeholders, primarily through the LRA engagement forum. I encourage all members of that forum to engage constructively with the Department as it is only by being part of the process that stakeholders' views can be reflected. For example, I seek to introduce a statutory code of practice on facilitating workplace relationships. That will be one of the first key asks for the LRA forum. There will also be further opportunities for engagement, once the Bill is introduced in the Assembly, through the scrutiny of the Economy Committee. I very much look forward to the further engagement that I will have with all involved in relation to the proposals and getting them introduced to the Assembly.

Mr Delargy: I thank the Minister for her detailed answers. Minister, your statement represents a significant step forward on your 'good jobs' Bill agenda. Do you agree that it will also help us to improve productivity, which is another of your key economic objectives?

Dr Archibald: I thank the Member for his question. Research was published on 18 June last year by my predecessor, Conor Murphy, on the case for good jobs. That research from the Labour Relations Agency, which was carried out by the University of Warwick, demonstrates the benefits of good jobs for businesses as well as for workers. The research looked at local case studies, comparing the seven components of job quality with three key business outcomes: increased innovation; productivity; and employee health and well-being. The research demonstrates the link between good jobs and those outcomes, highlighting the fact that positive employee engagement and well-being are mutually beneficial for workers and business performance.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: That ends questions to the Minister on her statement on the 'good jobs' employment rights Bill. Members, please take your ease.

Mr Givan (The Minister of Education): In compliance with section 52 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, I make the following statement on the meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC) in the education sector that was held on Wednesday 2 April 2025. The meeting took place in the Middletown Centre for Autism and was chaired by me. Other attendees included Helen McEntee TD, Minister for Education in the Republic of Ireland, and John O'Dowd, Minister of Finance, who attended as the accompanying Minister. Minister O'Dowd has agreed the statement and that I make it on his behalf.

The meeting was held on World Autism Awareness Day. I thank the Middletown Centre for Autism for hosting the meeting. All delegates welcomed the opportunity to visit the centre and to see at first hand the important specialist educational services being provided to autistic children and young people. The following main areas were discussed at the meeting: special educational needs (SEN); addressing educational disadvantage; digital literacy; school, youth and teacher exchanges; and promoting well-being and mental health in schools. I will go through each one in detail

On special educational needs, Ministers welcomed the continued work of both Departments and the Middletown Centre for Autism to develop, extend and enhance its services and to scope the potential for expansion of the services to meet the needs, including emergent needs, across the jurisdictions. The Council noted further opportunities for joint cooperation by both Departments in relation to special educational needs and inclusion to develop, extend and enhance the transformation of services to support children and young people with SEN across both jurisdictions. The Council also welcomed the appointment of five new members to the board of Middletown last year. We thank the outgoing members for their contribution to the governance of the centre.

On addressing educational disadvantage, the Council received an update on the implementation of the RAISE programme and noted the signing of the memorandum of understanding between the Departments of Education in both jurisdictions supporting the pilot cooperation programme to address educational disadvantage, which includes the RAISE programme. Ministers noted the announcement of the RAISE programme on 16 October 2024, supported by an allocation of up to €25 million from the Government of Ireland's Shared Island Fund, and agreed that updates on the overall delivery of the pilot programme will be provided at future meetings.

The NSMC noted that the funding allocation also includes up to €4 million for Northern Ireland to extend the teacher research exchange (T-REX) platform and provide a new Creative Connections arts education pilot programme and that those programmes are currently under development. The progress made in implementing projects that are being supported under the PEACE PLUS Shared Learning Together programme was noted, and we welcomed the official launches of related projects that have been held to date or are planned to take place shortly. The Council agreed that officials will explore the potential for further cooperation in addressing educational disadvantage and provide an update at the next sectoral meeting.

On digital literacy, Ministers welcomed the proposed project to provide teacher professional learning resources on how to inform students on disinformation/misinformation, including the impact of AI, and heard how both Departments intend to explore that area further for potential collaboration.

The Council noted the activity on pupil, youth, student and teacher exchanges on a North/South basis and the valuable experience that they have provided to those involved. Ministers requested that a progress report on those activities be provided on an annual basis to the NSMC education sectoral meetings. Ministers noted progress to the implementation stage of successful applicants to the PEACE PLUS programme under the Shared Learning Together investment area, including specific North/South school civic exchanges and youth mental health and well-being area programmes. We welcomed the progress that has been made by both Education Departments and Mary Immaculate College, Limerick, to extend development and delivery of the teacher research exchange across both jurisdictions. The NSMC noted the ongoing review of the North/South education and training standards committee, which endorses undergraduate and postgraduate youth work programmes.

It also noted the ongoing work of the North/South youth work sector practice development hub in strengthening and developing sustainable North/South youth work sector relationships and enhancing the quality of the learning experience of young people participating in youth services across the island.

Ministers noted the continued cooperation across inspectorates in promoting well-being and mental health in schools. The council welcomed a presentation on behalf of the OUR Generation partnership, funded under the PEACE PLUS theme 3, which is empowering and investing in young people, and investment area 3.3, youth mental health and well-being, and commended the joint working in that area across the jurisdictions. Ministers noted the policy and delivery framework position in both jurisdictions on an emotional health and well-being framework and noted that officials would explore potential options for collaboration and provide an update at the next meeting.

That concludes my update on that North/South meeting.

Ms Hunter: Thank you, Minister, for your important briefing. I welcome the cross-border engagement, particularly on mental health in schools. Teachers and parents across my constituency are crying out for further support for mental health in the school setting. Will you provide more detail on the conversations that you had on a North/South basis on those matters and with Minister Nesbitt on that urgent issue? Also, what level of investment do you think is necessary to adequately meet the mental health needs of schoolchildren in Northern Ireland?

Mr Givan: I thank the Member for that important question. We have important work in that area in Northern Ireland, but on a North/South cooperative basis, an emotional health and well-being framework is in place that helps to provide overarching guidance. The framework was published in 2021, and it helps with a whole-school approach. That is what we are doing in Northern Ireland with the Department of Health. That is an area that Helen McEntee, the new Minister, is keen to explore, so both jurisdictions have a well-being framework in place, which focuses on a whole-school preventative approach.

The position is similar as regards schools that have the autonomy to use programmes that can support emotional health and well-being to best meet the needs of their pupils. It is an area in which we in Northern Ireland do a considerable amount of work, as does the Republic of Ireland. There is a well-being framework that can connect both jurisdictions, and where we can learn from each other, we should — and we do.

Mr Mathison: Minister, you said that the Council received an update on the RAISE programme. Will you provide more detail on its progress in Northern Ireland, specifically when communities earmarked for investment will start to see projects delivered?

Mr Givan: I thank the Member for the question. An update was provided on the RAISE programme. We have been continuing to roll the programme out. Members and stakeholders provided feedback, which was taken into account in making subsequent decisions. All groups have now been informed of their allocations. They are developing their plans, which will need to come forward for approval. However, work continues to take ahead RAISE programmes where they are operating in Northern Ireland. The key tenet of the programme's design is the locality reference groups, which are being established in each RAISE area. I am keen that we get on with the work, and that we can get funding rolled out. That work is ongoing. The Minister in the Republic of Ireland was particularly keen to get an update, and I hope that we will be able to make progress on the roll-out of the RAISE programmes in the various areas.

Mrs Mason: Has the Minister reflected on any of the criticisms regarding the eligibility criteria for RAISE? Also, were there discussions on possible future funding from the Shared Island funding pot?

Mr Givan: To pick up on the point that I made to Mr Mathison, issues were brought to my attention that were reflected upon. For example, flexibility has been provided to allow one area in West Belfast to include, if it wishes, areas that are, strictly speaking, outside the parameters, but it is still within the funding envelope provided for that area.

I know that many other areas in Northern Ireland would love to be included. The pot of funding that is available for it is limited. The Government in the Republic of Ireland have provided funding and are keen to provide future funding. It is important that we get on with developing the plans in those areas so that they can come forward and decisions can be taken to proceed with funding. If there are opportunities for it to be extended beyond two years, we need to start to develop those programmes. The Irish Government have indicated a willingness to have the conversation. I believe that we can secure additional funding beyond the two-year period. Let us progress the work. Then, we can go to the Government in the South and see whether there is potential for funding. They have indicated that there may be funding for a further two years, but we would need to engage with them on that. The priority now has to be to develop the specific plans through the locality reference groups in those 15 areas and allocate the funding to them to allow that work to commence.

Mr Brooks: I thank the Minister for his statement. Can he provide additional information on the school youth and teacher exchanges?

Mr Givan: I thank the Member for his question. The exchange programme is an opportunity not just for teachers but for young people to engage in civic exchanges, particularly in border communities. The North/South body provides funding to the programme. I would like to see that work being taken forward. To date, funding allocations for seven education-related projects have been approved under the PEACE PLUS investment area. That is worth almost €68 million, so it is not an insignificant amount of funding; it is very significant. Support for two Shared Learning Together projects is also included. My Department has a role in accounting for that particular area of spend in SEUPB — and I think that it is an area of very worthwhile expenditure.

Mr Crawford: I thank the Minister for his update this afternoon. Going back to RAISE, can you detail how much of the €24 million that has been allocated to Northern Ireland will actually be spent? Are any guarantees in place to ensure that it directly benefits disadvantaged pupils here?

Mr Givan: The Assembly has discussed that area on a number of occasions. At a high level, €24 million is being made available to us for the RAISE programme. It is being funded through the Republic of Ireland. We identified 15 areas that provided regional balance to that. I made the point that many areas did not qualify that would have liked to have qualified but that the funding that is available for it is limited. The groups have now been formally advised of the allocations. That allows them to get on with designing the particular schemes that they want to design and to bring them forward. However, clearly, that has to be tied to an output in helping to close the educational under-attainment gap. The gap is most pronounced between those who have and those who have not. We must ensure that we seek to close that attainment gap by putting effective measures in place. That will be really important in assessing what proposals come forward. Without prejudging what local areas design — ultimately, it is something that they need to design — underpinning all of it has to be closing that educational underachievement gap.

There has been detailed communication with the Education Committee on RAISE. The Committee has taken an interest in that area and received briefings on it. I am happy to provide the Member with any more information if he wants to have it.

Mr Baker: Can the Minister expand on the opportunities that he and his counterpart in the South are looking at to support children with special educational needs across the island?

Mr Givan: I thank the Member for the question. It is apt, because the meeting was held in Middletown, which is a centre of excellence. Although Middletown is the headquarters, its staff, who are from across Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, are out providing support to schools, and also to families, so, as an example, it is important that we continue to support the work of Middletown.

The two Departments jointly fund the centre. There is a funding allocation of just over £3 million. We have just refreshed the board appointments at Middletown. The centre also undertakes important research work, which can be to the benefit of all schools, so, where we can collaborate, we should, because the issues that we are facing in Northern Ireland are the same as those being faced in the Republic of Ireland. I think that Northern Ireland is better at capturing data and information on autism, however. That is borne out by the higher prevalence of children with additional needs. It is not that I think that there are fewer children in the Republic of Ireland with additional needs. Rather, it is the case that we are good at capturing the information. When it comes to meeting the needs out of the resources that we are able to provide, however, we have a different challenge from that in the South. There is very much a willingness in both Departments of Education, North and South, to collaborate where we can. If we can share information and best practice, we should do so. I certainly encourage it.

Mr Martin: I thank the Minister for his statement. Does he believe that the NSMC is providing practical assistance to address educational disadvantage and underachievement in Northern Ireland, and if so, how?

Mr Givan: I thank the Member for his question, because Mr Brooks asked about some of the exchanges involving young people. One of the exchange programmes that I believe to be beneficial is the teachers' research exchange, which is otherwise known as T-REX. We will also be taking forward Creative Connections, which is a creative arts programme. That teacher exchange programme provides an opportunity for collaboration and for sharing of best practice. We can all learn from one another. Nobody is an expert in anything, so one always has to look elsewhere. If we can get that exchange of information, we should encourage it. The T-REX programme therefore provides a good opportunity for us to have that collaboration.

Mrs Guy: I thank the Minister for his statement. When engaging with your counterparts in the South on tackling educational disadvantage, have you visited any of the DEIS schools in order to bring back learning from that model to Northern Ireland?

Mr Givan: I missed that. What schools? Sorry.

Mrs Guy: It is spelt "D-E-I-S". I am probably pronouncing it incorrectly.

Mr Givan: I do not think that I have, but if there is an opportunity for me to visit and learn from a school, I will. I visited a number of schools in London to see how they deliver their approaches to teaching and to the curriculum that they cover. If, however, there is an opportunity for me to visit a school in the Republic of Ireland, I will do so, because, when we look at international measures of performance, the Republic of Ireland is outperforming Northern Ireland in a number of key areas. We rightly should ask, "Why is that? What is it doing that we could be doing?". That is why, for the TransformED strategy that I announced and am taking forward, we have an international ministerial advisory panel, and one of its members is a former Chief Inspector of Education in the Republic of Ireland. We are therefore trying to gather information at an international level to help inform what we do in Northern Ireland. I am, however, more than happy to visit a DEIS school.

Mr K Buchanan: Minister, I have never visited the Middletown Centre. As Minister, what impressed you from your visit? Can you provide further information on the work that it is doing now and that it is planning for the future?

Mr Givan: That is a good question, Mr Buchanan. I have been down to Middletown on a couple of occasions now. It is a beautiful site. It has within its responsibility some buildings, including a lovely, old, ornate chapel. It is not used from an education perspective, but there is a responsibility to help maintain it.

There is great heritage at that site. I think that the Education Committee visited it recently, but I say to anyone who has not been down that it is well worth visiting.

Beyond the site and its location, it is about the expertise that they provide when it comes to supporting children, particularly those with autism. There is a highly experienced team that is out visiting schools and providing support to schools and to families. It is a resource that we would do well to try to harness. It is something that I have been impressed with on my two visits. More important is the work that they are doing in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland in supporting children and young people who have autism and their families.

Ms Mulholland: Minister, artificial intelligence by its nature evolves and changes rapidly. Will you advise on whether there was any consideration of how training resources can be updated regularly as the technology evolves and changes?

Mr Givan: AI is something that we are all trying to harness effectively. In education, we have to look at what opportunities there are when it comes to AI. It was not discussed at the meeting at Middletown or, if it was, it was very tangentially on the margins, but, in a Northern Ireland context, a pilot scheme has been running in which AI is being used by some of our school leaders to create school development plans and update policies. Obviously, that has to be within certain safeguards when it comes to the parameters by which the technology is being used. There has been some really positive feedback from some of our principals in Northern Ireland on how that work is helping them to perform the administrative functions very effectively. If we can harness AI to help teachers at a leadership level with their workload and with the delivery of lesson plans and assessments, we should look at how AI can help to enable that work and allow teachers to do what they do best, which is delivering the lesson and working with our young people.

AI is an area that will continue to require exploration. One of the areas that we discussed was digital literacy and ensuring those essential skills. Equipping our young people to be literate when it comes to digital areas will be important. It is about critically assessing online content, how to identify misinformation and how to engage responsibly with digital media. We had some discussion on those areas, and there is a joint initiative to help to align efforts in developing good practice and high-quality resources for schools to avail themselves of.

Mr O'Toole: Minister, I wonder whether you discussed at the meeting or have had any engagement on the cross-border education issue that cuts across your Department and the Economy Department of the high points that are required for Northern students who are doing A levels and AS levels to get into Southern institutions. Some progress has been made on the issue, but what conversations have you had? It is in everyone’s interest that it is as easy as possible for Northern Irish students to go to university south of the border or across the water. We want to keep as many students as possible here. Some of those changes are coming in in September. Are you and your Department monitoring that and working with your counterparts, south of the border and in the Economy Department, to ensure that progress is made?

Mr Givan: That is a really important question. It is not a matter that was expressly on the agenda for that particular sectoral meeting. However, it is an area that my officials and I are engaged on in looking at the barriers that inhibit people from Northern Ireland from accessing universities in the Republic of Ireland. The way in which they look at A levels in comparison with the process and qualifications in the Republic of Ireland is an issue. It suggests that there is a real challenge when it comes to the portability and recognition of the qualifications when accessing higher education institutions in the Republic of Ireland.

The deputy First Minister has also been looking into that area and has raised the issue with the Taoiseach. I have every sympathy when it comes to that. It is an area on which we should try to make progress on behalf of young people, whether they are staying here in Northern Ireland or going to Great Britain. Likewise, it appears that it has become more difficult to access universities in the Republic of Ireland, and that has an impact on young people. We are undertaking a piece of work to identify a resolution to the issue and to try to make sure that the barriers to accessing higher education in the Republic of Ireland can be addressed.

Ms Egan: I welcome the update on joint working on youth mental health and well-being. Was there any direct engagement with children and young people in the development of the policy and delivery framework to ensure that the approach is led and informed by the user?

Mr Givan: As a Department, we engage with young people on any initiatives that we take forward, ensuring that any programmes that we develop have input from young people. That is at a strategic level, but schools have the autonomy to bring services in to help in the area of mental health and well-being. Having engaged with young people, schools are well placed to know, in the process of developing their approaches and policies, what types of services may be the most beneficial to those particular young people. It is important that we recognise the fact that schools have that autonomy and the ability to bring in support where they feel that it is necessary, tailoring it to the young people at their school.

Mr Carroll: Thank you, Minister. You mentioned the fact that the changing of the eligibility criteria for schools to avail themselves of the RAISE funding has seen some opposition. I noticed that that matter was raised at the meeting. Following on from your answer to the Member for South Down, will you clarify whether you are saying that schools in West Belfast and beyond that could not initially avail themselves of the funding can now do so? If that is correct, it is a change of position that would be welcomed.

Mr Givan: I will clarify that, if it was not clear. The process for identifying the 15 RAISE areas was identified and followed, and we have provided transparency around that. Some groups, particularly in West Belfast, said that there were some areas that they may wish to be included, and there has been a degree of flexibility to allow that. However, that is still done within the funding envelope that was awarded on the basis of the criteria that were used. Where there is a connection that, strictly speaking, falls outside a zoned RAISE area and another school or community wants to be involved, there is some flexibility for those RAISE areas to do that. They will, however, do it with the resources that they have. Again, I put on record that no school is being provided with funding as a result of the RAISE programme. It is a project-led funding stream. It may be that, in certain RAISE areas, a school comes forward with a project, and that project is funded. There may be some RAISE areas in which no school comes forward with a project but a project is led by other community-based organisations. The funding follows the project. No school will get any automatic funding as a result of the RAISE programme.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Thank you, Minister. That concludes questions on the statement.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): I have received notification from members of the Business Committee of a motion to extend the sitting past 7.00 pm under Standing Order 10(3A).

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): The Assembly may sit until 10.00 pm if necessary.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): The Speaker has received notice from the Minister of Finance that he wishes to make a statement.

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

In compliance with section 52 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, I wish to make the following statement on the twenty-third meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC) in Special EU Programmes sectoral format, which was held in the North/South Ministerial Council building, Armagh, on Wednesday 2 April 2025.

As Minister of Finance, I represented the Executive and was accompanied by Minister Givan from the Department of Education. The Irish Government were represented by Minister Jack Chambers TD from the Department for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform. This statement has been agreed with Minister Givan, and I am making it on behalf of us both.

The NSMC received a report on the implementation of the 2014-2020 Peace IV and INTERREG Va programmes. Ministers noted that, to date, all EU expenditure targets have been met and that both programmes are forecast to achieve full expenditure in line with the total programme allocations. Ministers noted that 65 of the 96 Peace IV projects and 25 of the 32 INTERREG Va projects have completed activity and all closure requirements. The remaining 38 projects across both programmes are undergoing the administrative process of closure, which is expected to conclude before the end of June 2025.

The Council noted the chief executive officer's progress report for the 2021-27 PEACE PLUS programme. The Council was advised that calls had been opened under 21 of the programme's 22 investment areas and that 81 projects, to the value of €758 million, had so far been approved for PEACE PLUS funding. Further steering committee meetings were subsequently held, and I can report that 97 projects, with a value of €875 million, have now been approved.

Ministers noted and approved the Special EU Programmes Body (SEUPB) business plan for 2025, which was drafted in line with guidance issued by the Finance Departments, and they recommended the associated budget provision. Ministers noted that the 2022 and 2023 SEUPB annual report and accounts, having been certified by the Comptrollers and Auditors General (C&AG) in both jurisdictions, had been laid before the Assembly and the Houses of the Oireachtas. Ministers noted that the governance structures of the SEUPB continue to operate effectively. The Council noted that the SEUPB continues to implement the recommendations of the SEUPB organisational review that the NSMC approved on 15 May 2024.

The Council welcomed the presentation that was made on the PEACE PLUS 'PEACE of Mind' project, which works to ensure emotional resilience in children and young people who are aged between nine and 25. The project was awarded PEACE PLUS funding of €7,699,611 under investment area 3.3, which is on youth mental health and well-being.

In other matters, a Waterways Ireland paper was tabled. Ministers noted that paper and consented to a property disposal.

The Council agreed to hold its next Special EU Programmes meeting in autumn 2025.

Mr O'Toole: I acknowledge the Minister's update for the Assembly, brief and factual as it is. Given what we hope is somewhat of an improvement in UK-EU relations in making progress towards some kind of an improved set of arrangements, including for sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) controls, which would be helpful for this place, has he made any representations about a potential extension of PEACE PLUS, with a next generation project to run beyond 2027? Has he had specific contact with the UK Government, the EU or, indeed, his counterparts in Dublin to advocate and start to develop such a plan?

Mr O'Dowd: I note that, as part of the joint communiqué that was released after the British-Irish Council (BIC) meeting that was held in Liverpool, both Governments said that, in principle, they were agreeable to a new programme after 2027. I assure the Member that I, along with my Executive colleagues, will work with the NIO and with the Irish Government to ensure that that commitment is fulfilled.

Ms Forsythe: I thank the Minister for his statement. Minister, you noted that you received a report in the Council on the implementation of the 2014-2020 Peace IV and INTERREG programmes. Have you any detail on the schemes that have closed? As a percentage of the total value of the claims that were made on those schemes, what was the value of claims that were found to be fraudulent or ineligible?

Mr O'Dowd: I do not have those figures in front of me, but I will provide them to the Member.

As the Member will note, a considerable number of projects have fulfilled and closed. While there is always a risk of fraudulent claims in any funding programme, it has to be noted that PEACE PLUS has delivered considerable change for communities across the island.

Ms Dolan: Minister, what funding calls for PEACE PLUS remain open?

Mr O'Dowd: A number of programmes have calls for funding, such as investment area 6·1, which opened on 20 March and closes on 15 May. A second call is open for:

The change maker funding programme is a small grants scheme opened on 23 April 2025 which:

Mr Honeyford: I thank the Minister for his statement. Can the Minister provide an assessment of how easy it is for groups, particularly smaller community groups, to access the current PEACE PLUS funding?

Mr O'Dowd: One of the new PEACE PLUS approaches compared with previous Peace programmes has been to reduce the bureaucracy to ensure that it is more accessible for community groups. The community groups' experience of getting into the PEACE PLUS programmes will have to be assessed. The new £100,000 fund is a good approach because it is a manageable amount of funding for small community groups, and the reduction in bureaucracy will assist those groups in applying for it.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Thank you, Minister. That concludes questions on the statement. Members can take their ease before we move to the next item of business.

Mr Delargy: 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. As an amendment has been selected and is published on the Marshalled List, the Business Committee has agreed that 15 minutes will be added to the total time for the debate.

The Minister for the Economy was due to respond to the debate, but she is now unavailable to do so. Thankfully, we have junior Minister Reilly, who will respond on her behalf.

Pádraig, will you open the debate on the motion?

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

A chairde

, we ask the House to support a simple but powerful idea: no young person on this island should be held back from accessing education by an artificial barrier, be it financial, bureaucratic or political. Education should open doors; it should not be a postcode lottery. We live on one island. Our communities are connected, and our students are ambitious; yet, for too long, the systems and structures that we have inherited continue to divide and disadvantage our students. It is time that we faced that head-on.

This is the reality: if you are a student in Donegal and want to study in Derry, given the great chances already at the Magee campus and the plans for more to come, you are more likely to face barriers than if you were to apply to study in Galway or Cork. That is not just wrong; it is absurd. The barriers come in many forms: a lack of joined-up information on courses across Ireland; differences in fee structures and funding supports; complexities in the recognition of qualifications; and — let us be honest — decades of underinvestment in and political indifference towards the potential of all-island cooperation and collaboration in education.

Here is the good news: we can change that. The motion calls for a coordinated effort on an all-island basis to harmonise student support; ensure fair access to funding, regardless of which part of the island a student is from; strengthen cross-border pathways in further and higher education; recognise the need for alignment in the Central Applications Office (CAO) and UCAS results dates to ensure that students can choose which option is best for them; and create greater harmony between the two systems. Crucially, we want to create a shared strategy to make all-Ireland student mobility a reality, not just a talking point.

With my colleagues in the Dáil, Mairéad Farrell and Donna McGettigan, I have met dozens of students to discuss the issue, and one common theme prevailed: they want greater choice. While I welcome the progress in the South to reduce the requirement from four A levels to three A levels plus an AS level, that is still restrictive. We have further to go to create real parity across Ireland. I acknowledge the amendment's intent to increase that parity. We have seen great progress on the issue, but, of course, there is further to go. I recognise and welcome the amendment's intent and am happy to support it. From our discussions, we know that many students are not aware that the CAO system is different, nor are they informed and supported by many schools around that. That is why we make our call primarily to the Department of Education. Let us work together to put as many options and opportunities on the table as possible.

Across Ireland, we face many of the same skills gaps, such as those in green and renewable energy technologies, cybersecurity, digital transformation, allied health professions, construction and advanced manufacturing. As members of the Economy Committee, we know those skills gaps, and they are clearly identified in both the skills barometer in the North and the 'National Skills Bulletin' in the South. We are planning for two economies on one island: that is inefficient. It does not make sense. A unified approach to skills planning would mean shared forecasts for our future industry needs and an ability to respond faster to cross-border economic demands regarding, for example, data centres, offshore wind, and biopharmacy. Student mobility is the same as skills mobility. Enabling more North-to-South and South-to-North student movement is a low-cost, high-impact way to address the urgent workforce shortages and boost economic growth in our border regions.

This is about choice and opportunity. It does not impose or compel. It creates additional opportunities for our students and would augment the already fantastic further and higher education systems that we have. Students would have all the data, all the careers support, all the joined-up thinking and all the opportunities to make informed choices. That opportunity needs to be clear in our colleges and schools. It is vital that we all push in the same direction.

I am disappointed that neither the Education Minister nor his colleagues who sit on the Economy Committee are here. I ask him to communicate the changes and opportunities to all schools to ensure that the Careers Service works effectively in providing the information to students and encouraging students to look at all the opportunities that are open to them. Similarly, the Department for the Economy should communicate that information to colleges. I acknowledge the ongoing work of Minister Archibald to engage with her counterparts in the South to discuss and promote all-Ireland student mobility.

Let us build an Ireland of equals, one that is not divided by invisible lines but is united by a common purpose of learning, growing and thriving together. I urge Members to support the motion. Let us tear down barriers and open a future that works for all our students.

Mr Honeyford: I beg to move the following amendment:

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you, David. You will have 10 minutes to propose the amendment and five minutes to make a winding-up speech. All other Members who wish to speak will have five minutes. David, please open the debate on the amendment.

Mr Honeyford: Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. Alliance believes in having a shared society, building a united community and providing greater opportunities for everyone. A few weeks back, I talked about sharing the island and working towards solutions for our economy and in health and education and a more prosperous future for everyone that creates opportunities and grows possibilities here. Alliance believes that we should work towards increased student mobility on the island of Ireland. We also have kids who move across to GB. This creates different and greater opportunities for students here, which is welcome. We recognise the critical role that our education establishments play in our economy in diversifying our skills and through educational and student life. We welcome the diversity of opinion. Bringing people here brings strength: it challenges us and further strengthens and unites our community.

In the Economy Committee, I have talked about CAO and the entrance requirements for Northern students for some time. I have lived it: my daughter is studying at Trinity College Dublin, so, as a family, we went through the CAO system. My son went to Loughborough University in England via the UCAS process, so I can compare. In 1998, approximately 10% of students in Trinity were from Northern Ireland. Today, that figure is less than 1%, so there is a massive issue that needs to be resolved. Although I welcome the changes that Pádraig talked through, including the need for a fourth A level being downgraded to an AS level, the issue is far from sorted, which is the reason for our amendment. We are trying to help and work towards solutions that mean that we see students moving North to South. The number of Southern students who apply to study in the North also needs to be noted: it has trebled in the past five years. The number of students from the South who are being accepted in Northern Ireland has trebled, yet the number of students from Northern Ireland who are accepted into universities in the Republic of Ireland remains low.

I want to talk about three key issues. One is grade disparity. The number of points required to achieve entry into the South's universities has meant, up to this point, that Northern Ireland students have had to study an extra A level; now, it will be an AS level instead. However, it is more than that: they need A* grades across the board to gain entry, so there is no grade comparison. The CAO points requirement is unjust on our students. With four A levels at A*, a Northern student would still get only 600 points. They get 25 points if they study maths, but that has always been the case. I will use Trinity as an example, as it is one that I know, although the issue is not exclusive to it.

A Northern student cannot gain entry to a variety of courses there, including pharmacy, medicine, law and politics, as well as a range of science subjects.

The prospective entry requirements to study pharmacy, to take that as an example, at Queen's University are two As and a B. That works out at 443 points under the CAO system. If any Northern students had wanted to study pharmacy at Trinity last year, they would have needed 613 points, which they could not have achieved even with four A* grades. They would therefore have had to have done maths as one of their subjects. That is a discrepancy that has to be addressed.

That imbalance — that unjust requirement — for our students is one of the key issues. Our students study three A levels as a default. When the system is flawed, very few Northern students have any chance of getting a place at Trinity, University College Dublin (UCD), the University of Galway or wherever. The standards do not align. Our system is based on three A levels. Whether that is the best way of doing 16-18 education is a debate for another day, but that is currently what our students study. They take three A levels, and the 600 points should equate to those three A levels so that students here have the ability to get the score to meet the entry requirement to access a place in the South. On a side note, COVID has also increased the differential. Our results have come back down after COVID, but that has not happened in the South.

The other major problem for Northern students is that they are not offered a place in the South. That is something that we lived out as a family. Under the UCAS system, students get offered a place. They get an offer and know with certainty that, if they get the grades, they have got a place, be it at Queen's University, the University of Ulster or anywhere else. Under the CAO system, that does not happen. Students therefore do not know until the day on which the Leaving Cert results come out what place they have been awarded. The Leaving Cert results come out two weeks after our A-level results. If you are a student here, you therefore put at risk your place at university in order to wait to find out, basically via a lottery, whether you are going to gain a place at a university in the South. You either cannot confirm the place that you have or have to defer it.

In our case, my daughter, Emma, deferred her place. She had a place at University College London (UCL), but she wanted to go to Trinity. She therefore took the decision that she was prepared to take a year out if she did not get a place at Trinity. It is absolutely ridiculous for an 18-year-old to have to make the decision to defer part of her life based on the lottery that is getting into a university in the South. It means that the hopes and dreams of our young people are being left to a lottery. Their immediate future is being put on hold. That is not fair. I know that the issue of allowing students from here access is outside the control of our Minister of Education, but it is one that he needs to continue to raise with his counterpart in the South.

Advice from schools is another major issue. Again, I speak from experience, but I have spoken to quite a few people about it, and it is a common issue. The careers advice that we got at school was on applying through UCAS. There was very limited help, if any, for applying through CAO. It was basically left to students themselves to apply. They had to remember the closing date and go on ahead and do it themselves. I remember going to a parents' evening. We were simply told that the closing date for applying through CAO was in February and that we should go online to get the information. An email would have been much more useful, because the link to the CAO application would have been in there, rather than my having to go look for it.

How to apply through CAO is therefore not explained or supported by schools here, meaning that students have to complete the application process on their own. The implications of that are that students do not know that they get 25 extra points for maths. If they do not know that and do not pick that subject when they are 16, how can they ever get those extra 25 points? Moreover, they need a language at GCSE. I know that most students study a language at GCSE but, if they do not, they are ruling themselves out from studying any course at university in the South. We therefore need to advise our students and make sure that that advice is in front of them when they are making career decisions.

We talk a lot in the Economy Committee about careers advice and decisions. When those decisions are happening in your life, you need to know at that point that you are not limiting yourself. That advice needs to come through from the Department of Education to schools so that schools are not solely emphasising UCAS but are offering and addressing CAO options, leaving those open for everyone.

I will leave it there. Those are the three key issues for us, and we have laid them out in our amendment. We need the Minister to continue to work to make this a fair, equality issue for our students. We need the Department of Education to highlight the issues that are there, so that all schools provide our kids with all the opportunities in order that we can build a better, shared society for all. Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: No bother, David; thank you very much. I call David Brooks.

Mr Brooks: Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I will probably speak along similar lines. There is some commonality, although I would dissent from some of the more ideological comments that were made by my colleague on the opposite Benches around the all-island elements in terms of the economy and so on, but we will not get into that now. We all recognise that making decisions to apply for a higher education course can be a stressful time for many young people across Northern Ireland. It comes with much uncertainty, and there are big choices to be made.

Mr Delargy: Will the Member give way?

Mr Brooks: Yes.

Mr Delargy: Does the Member not agree that, given the points that we raised about all-Ireland opportunities, what we are flagging is that the skills gaps in the North are the same as those in the South? There is nothing ideological about noting that there are economic gaps.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: David, you have an extra minute.

Mr Brooks: Thank you; I do not plan to use it. This party believes that it is sensible to have cross-border cooperation. We are not against that; we have seen it in health and other areas. I was not looking to get into a back and forward. From your party's point of view, there is a plan to project the idea of moving in a particular direction and to plan for a joining together of two jurisdictions. Nobody on these Benches is planning for that.

Mr Delargy: We are trying to get healthcare workers. That is what we are saying.

Mr Brooks: Well, look —.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Excuse me; through the Chair, please.

Mr Brooks: I was just outlining a point of difference. I do not plan to get into that particular debate. I am going to address the issue, but I was outlining how we come from a different angle in that regard.

There is a degree of uncertainty when those big choices have to be made. If more clarity can be provided for students when they are making those choices, that should be encouraged. Our party has been to the fore in raising that issue, and, indeed, I know that the deputy First Minister has raised it at the North/South Ministerial Council, with the Taoiseach and with other relevant stakeholders. We want a system that is fair for our students and for students here to have those choices not only open to them but achievable through appropriate recognition of their academic achievements. Whilst the Member on the opposite Benches has indicated his disappointment that the Education Minister is not here for the debate, the Education Minister addressed the issue in response to Mr O'Toole just 20 minutes ago, so his view is on the record.

The CAO system has clearly undervalued A-level qualifications in a way that has been exclusionary towards Northern Ireland students or, at least, forces them to go over and above in their A-level workload, despite the same qualifications being more than acceptable for many world-leading universities. It is, of course, any country's prerogative to set its own system, but, in wanting to support mobility for our students, I observe that there is a continuing disparity and unjustified disadvantage in the current CAO system; a disadvantage that has not been inherent for Republic of Ireland students who engage with UK universities and in our system. Indeed, those students are able to access our universities on a similar basis to students from Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK, rather than as students from a foreign jurisdiction.

Only a minority of applicants from Northern Ireland or the rest of the UK make it all the way through to be offered and to accept a place in Irish higher education institutions. The Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI) found that that partly relates to those candidates being less likely than those from Ireland to meet the minimum matriculation requirements. In Northern Ireland, very few students take four A-level subjects, and, therefore, when students apply to an institution in the Republic of Ireland, the points system can cause them difficulty. ESRI produced a report on student mobility in Ireland and Northern Ireland, which found that the points differential and the timing disparity between CAO and UCAS offers, as the Member mentioned, discourages our A-level students from applying to Irish universities. Mr Honeyford's personal experiences reflected some of that as well. The disparity in timing is further demonstrated by the fact that Leaving Certificate students applying to UK institutions will have their offer held pending confirmation from the UCAS system.

From our end, as well as engaging in working towards a fairer system for our students, we may wish to reflect on what more can be done to inform and prepare them for as wide a choice as possible. At my school, as far as I recall, we were encouraged to apply to the universities in Northern Ireland, one in GB and one in the South or internationally, but I am not sure that, back then — it seems a while ago now — I had a full understanding of the system. Perhaps those who expressed an interest in going South had more information provided to them. Nevertheless, students from the UK struggle with the CAO application and the translation of A-level results into Leaving Cert points. The British Council found that some schools in Northern Ireland provided information on the CAO application system but that, generally, students did not receive assistance. The CAO system is challenging for A-level students to navigate and understand.

Cross-border mobility provides opportunities for students and opens doors to a range of courses. That is particularly the case for those who seek to study veterinary medicine, as we have no established veterinary school in Northern Ireland, and it would help to address our current shortage. Undergraduate and postgraduate enrolment in Ireland from students based in the UK has been volatile. In 2020-21, students from Northern Ireland made up only 0·6% of students in Ireland. Numbers from NI have increased each year but increased by only 12 students in 2021-22. If Irish institutions want to attract A-level students to choose their offering, they must provide clarity on how they can do so.

We will support the motion and the amendment.

Ms D Armstrong: I thank the Member who moved the motion and will speak in favour of the motion and the amendment.

The motion discusses the disparities between the two systems. Of course, it is a positive aspiration to increase all-Ireland student mobility, but I want to look at this from another angle. We absolutely should want young people across the island to have access to the best educational opportunities. However, while we work to remove barriers, we need to stay focused on the central challenge, which is that Northern Ireland needs to retain and build its skills base if we want to grow our economy. That job starts at home.

Northern Ireland already faces a major skills drain. Over 5,000 of our young people leave every year to study elsewhere, often never returning. We cannot afford to lose even more of our talent, especially when our productivity remains amongst the lowest in these islands. For instance, a recent study showed that only 30% of students who leave Northern Ireland for their studies return to work here. It is worth remembering that Northern Ireland has a major competitive advantage: our undergraduate tuition fees are among the lowest in the UK and are relatively low compared with those in the Republic of Ireland. That should be a selling point for retaining our students and for attracting others to study here, not an encouragement for our students to study elsewhere to the detriment of our universities.

If we are serious about creating a skills-led economy, we must invest at home. We already have world-class universities in Belfast and Londonderry, with Queen's and Ulster. It is essential that we continue to support their growth. While I understand the reasoning behind the motion, I question the proposers' desire to promote more students going across the border while they cheerlead the expansion of Magee. We should be focused on student mobility within Northern Ireland and on removing barriers for those who wish to study here to support our university sector and the wider local economy, although, if we are to have greater cooperation on further education across the island, it must be focused on core subjects such as medicine and STEM to support our skills shortages.

Yes, let us work to reduce obstacles to all-Ireland study where it makes sense, but let us be clear: our top priority must be to build the skills and retain the talent that Northern Ireland needs for the future. That means investing in our universities, in affordable housing for our students and in promoting Northern Ireland as a world-class and accessible place to study and build a life.

Ms Hunter: Recognising not only the progress that has been made towards achieving parity in university admissions across the island but the challenges that still exist, I welcome the motion and the amendment.

For too long, students from the North have faced unnecessary barriers when trying to access higher education in the South. The SDLP has consistently called for those obstacles to be dismantled to ensure that there is an easy process for students who wish to study on the island, North and South. For a long time, previous requirements put unnecessary pressure on students from the North and forced them to keep doing four A levels, because having only three, as other Members have mentioned, would not generate enough points to meet the admissions criteria. That was grossly unfair.

Cross-border pathways must be strengthened. Student mobility remains too low. Students from the North make up just 0·6% of students in Southern universities. Meanwhile, a quarter of our higher education students here, which is over 16,000 of our young people, are studying in Britain, and many never return. I was almost one of them. That brain drain takes talent from our economy and society. Removing barriers to studying across this island is essential because it will not only keep skills on the island but strengthen our economy and communities. Cross-border student mobility grows our skills base, keeps our young people at home and sends a clear signal of political and economic stability to the world.

It is about more than just economics; it is about building a shared future and pushing for reconciliation across the island — our shared island. Prosperity is possible when we overcome the nonsensical restrictive barriers in academia and education. That will help create new opportunities for young people from the North and the South to live, learn and grow together. If we are serious about building a new Ireland, we must foster a shared identity through things such as education, health and, of course, employment. Greater alignment between higher education institutions in the North and the South will also benefit the Magee campus and the wider north-west. With stronger cross-border partnerships and streamlined admissions, Magee can become a thriving educational hub, particularly in fields such as medicine, and that will help us to reach the 10,000-student target as soon as possible.

Brexit and increasing competition for international students have also made today's conversation even more urgent, as many challenges remain. As other Members have mentioned — really articulately, by the way — there is a lack of information, and study options across the border are not communicated enough to our young people, meaning that options are available to them that they are not even aware of. There is total unfamiliarity with the application process and ongoing concerns about financial support. In particular, our young people who want to study in Dublin or the surrounding area really struggle with housing. We cannot leave our students and young people to navigate that alone, given the challenges that still evidently exist.

Today's reforms are a major achievement in fairness and opportunity on our island. Some things have changed, which is positive, but we must ensure that we do all that we can to overcome the remaining challenges. We must do what we can to ensure that the process is smooth and that we provide clarity to our young people and give them the support that they need to reach their ambitions and prosper.

Ms Sheerin: I support the motion. It is an important conversation for us.

I was born in the USA: Up Stairs Altnagelvin. At the time when I was born, a few miles over the road, several cousins of mine were born in Donegal, in the Twenty-six Counties. I have cousins — I am one of something like 35 grandchildren on my mum's side — who are of a similar age to me, and nothing separated our start in life except the border on our island, yet we had completely different opportunities as a result. That highlights the challenges that we are discussing and the things that we want to change.

People are not made aware when they are 16 or 17 of the opportunities that they have and what they have to do to avail themselves of different educational paths. I saw that clearly as I was growing up and speaking to my family members. They were working just as hard as I was, and I was working as hard as they were, yet the routes that were open to us were completely different. I was completely unaware of things that I needed to do in order to get the same sort of education that they were getting and vice versa. When I think of my cousins from west Donegal trekking to Dublin and the challenges in that — other Members mentioned them — it seems ridiculous that they were not able to go to Derry or Belfast, which are much closer, much cheaper and much easier places for them to attain their education. However, because of the differences in our system, there was another barrier in place, and so they were not able to avail themselves of such opportunities and ended up driving for four hours to Dublin and paying ridiculous rents and all the costs incurred in that regard.

We know that this is a common-sense approach. Just a few weeks ago, the ESRI report told us that we needed an upscaling of cross-border skills, employment and education and that there are benefits for all of us if we focus on that. It also stated that people who get their qualifications in a particular place are more likely to then be employed in that place. Therefore, it makes sense that we offer people as many choices as possible and that we open that up and have that conversation.

I welcome this work. It is key that the Education Minister places a priority on this so that all of our young people have all of the information that they need — knowledge is power — to see clearly what suits them best and what will give them the future that they want.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: The next Member to speak will be junior Minister Reilly to respond to the debate. Minister, you have up to 15 minutes.

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

I welcome the opportunity to speak to the motion on behalf of Minister Archibald and thank Members for bringing the issue to the Floor. As the proposer of the motion stated, people should be free to study anywhere on the island. To support that, we need to remove barriers to people from the South who want to study in the North and vice versa.

The review of A-level grade equivalences undertaken by the Irish Government is welcome. I understand that universities in the South have embraced it and are implementing the changes for applications for the coming academic year. The changes mean that A-level students from the North will no longer be required to achieve four top A-level grades to obtain maximum points; instead, those applicants will be considered for university places in the South with three A levels and one or two AS levels. That places students from across the island on a more equal footing with regard to the admissions points calculation system that operates in the South.

The Economy Minister has engaged with the National Union of Students-Union of Students in Ireland on cross-border student mobility, and her officials have worked with the Secondary Students' Union, which represents sixth-form students across the North, to improve information and guidance on applying for higher education courses across Britain and Ireland on nidirect. The Economy Department's Careers Service publication titled 'A Guide to Career Entry Routes' has also been updated. That publication is available online and is distributed to all schools in the North. The Careers Service is also considering the publication of a bulletin specifically about applying to HE and how to work with the Department of Education and schools to ensure that that information is disseminated to teachers.

In terms of financial support for students, from academic year 2024-25, postgraduate students from the North studying in the South have been able to access a tuition fee loan. Economy officials are actively working with the Student Loans Company to make a similar loan available to students from the North studying part-time undergraduate courses in the South. Those measures will help to alleviate some of the financial barriers to cross-border study.

Regarding access to doctoral study in the North, following recent changes to the terms and conditions of the Department's postgraduate award scheme, PhD students from the South of Ireland will be eligible to receive the full stipend, as well as payment of tuition fees under the scheme. Previously, students from the South were eligible for fee support only. Minister Archibald recently had a very positive meeting with her counterpart in the South, James Lawless TD, to discuss how they can work together to address the various barriers to all-Ireland student mobility. While various improvements have been made to date, there is more to be done, which Members have highlighted and of which Minister Archibald is aware. In January, when Conor Murphy was Economy Minister, he met the CEO of UCAS. The increased cooperation between UCAS and the CAO to date is very encouraging. Officials will continue to facilitate that cooperation with a view to ensuring that that momentum is maintained and opening further discussions about admission dates and clearing processes.

It is important that students of all ages be provided with clear guidance and support at the earliest possible opportunity to enable them to make informed choices and navigate the admissions processes. The Department of Education will have an important role in making sure that pupils have an awareness of a clear pathway of options and that their needs when applying for higher education courses across the island are met.

In closing, I thank colleagues for joining me today to discuss this important issue. The Economy Ministers, North and South, will continue to work together to make sure that barriers to all-Ireland student mobility are addressed and that all students, North and South, have equal opportunity to access higher education institutions across the island.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: The next Member to speak is Nick Mathison to wind up the debate on the amendment. Nick, you have five minutes.

Mr Mathison: Thank you, Principal Deputy Speaker. I rise to wind up the debate on the Alliance amendment to the motion. I do not need to reflect in too much detail the points of the debate, as I think that there has been broad agreement across the House, maybe with slightly different emphases. There seemed to be agreement that a more equitable system that promotes student mobility across the island of Ireland is to be welcomed, promoted and encouraged. It is a positive outworking of the debate that we have cross-party consensus on that. I welcome in particular the junior Minister's comments that, while some progress has been made, it is not a level playing field currently and that work needs to be done on the admissions process at the CAO.

My colleague David Honeyford set out the issues clearly from the Alliance Party perspective. He set out the benefits of the promotion of student mobility across the island. I will do my best not to rehearse any of his comments verbatim, but I may struggle and end up repeating some of what he said. Essentially, Alliance fully supports a higher education ecosystem across the island that promotes equality of access to institutions and to opportunities across the island. It is clear from the debate that we are all aware that unfair obstacles remain for many students in Northern Ireland. That is why we tabled the amendment. While we acknowledge that progress has been made and want to recognise the value of equitable access to higher education across the island, we want to be clear that a substantial amount of work is still to be done to create a level playing field for students in Northern Ireland.

It bears mention that, while the motion references the Education Minister, who undoubtedly has a role in this, the lack of reference to the Economy Minister in the motion seemed to be a glaring omission. If we are going to have a higher education system on the island that truly offers equality of access, North and South, the Economy Minister and her Southern counterpart will need to engage meaningfully to address the outstanding issues. I hope that our amendment brings that Economy focus in. Many of the Members who contributed to the debate sit on the Economy Committee, which, maybe, speaks to where some of the focus on the motion sits.

I do not want to rehearse all of the issues that have been discussed, but it is important to re-emphasise some of the barriers that exist for our students in Northern Ireland. I will focus on one in particular, which is the recent change that means that A-level candidates no longer need to achieve four A* grades, including an A* in maths, further maths or pure maths. While that is progress, as many have said, students still need to achieve top grades in three A levels in combination with a fourth A level or AS level, with one of those subjects still being maths, to get the maximum 625 points. That is simply not a level playing field, and David Honeyford set that out clearly from his family experience. I really urge the Economy Minister to take that forward, as well as all of the other issues that we have highlighted on which there is not genuine equity at the minute, with her counterpart in the South.

I will leave my comments at that point. We are clear about the issues, and we are clear about where the disparities sit. We are clear about where CAO and UCAS need to work better together, particularly on admissions timelines. The idea that, just because you may want to study in Trinity or Cork or Galway, you are compelled to defer your entry to give yourself some certainty is not a fair scenario for our students. Undoubtedly, there is a role for the Education Minister. It would have been good to hear from him today, and perhaps the Education Committee can pick up on this at its meeting this week. It would be really welcome to know what the Education Minister will do in the space around certainty and assurances that information will be communicated clearly to students in all schools around Northern Ireland on the changes that have already been made and on any future changes to the admissions process. I welcome the fact that there has been support across the House for our amendment.

The appetite for the promotion of student mobility across the island is welcome. Ultimately, it would benefit students, North and South. That is something that we all should be able to support today. Thank you.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Nick. The next Member to speak will be Cathy Mason. She will conclude and make the winding-up speech on the motion. Cathy, you have up to 10 minutes.

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

I welcome the opportunity to participate in this debate and to make a winding-up speech on the motion, which, I think it is safe to say, has had broad agreement across all parties. As suggested by the Member who has just spoken, it is not worth going through everything that everybody has said, because we have that broad agreement.

We believe that it is important that all children and young people have opportunities to develop appropriate knowledge and skills so that they can become economically active, find gainful employment and thrive. It is crucial that all children and young people, including those with disabilities, those from low-income families and those with special educational needs, are given support, knowledge, encouragement and opportunities to overcome barriers and avail themselves of education and training at whatever facility meets their needs, no matter where it is.

Sinn Féin believes in an all-island approach to education that is based on accessibility and inclusion and is free from barriers. Despite their living on a small island, it is clear that partition has had a huge impact on where young people choose to study — something that has limited their opportunities. Cross-border student enrolment on the island has remained low. Students from the North make up less than 1% of the student populations in the South's colleges, as Cara Hunter mentioned, even with a lack of third-level education capacity in the North. Differences in admissions and funding, and a general lack of collaboration between government institutions, have resulted in limited opportunities for young people. The process of going to university in Belfast or Derry should be the same as the process of going to college in Galway or Dublin. I commend the work of my colleagues Pádraig Delargy MLA and Mairéad Farrell TD, as well as many others, who have worked tirelessly to try to progress the issue.

Reducing barriers to all-island student mobility is also a priority for my colleague the Economy Minister, Caoimhe Archibald. As junior Minister Reilly outlined, Minister Archibald's Department has worked with students to design and publish improved information and guidance for students from the North who wish to apply to higher education in the South. Minister Archibald's Department has also introduced access to a tuition fee loan to postgraduate students from the North who are studying in the South, and work is ongoing to provide tuition fee support to students from the North who are studying part-time in the South.

The junior Minister outlined, and I acknowledge, the call that has been made by the North's Secondary Students' Union, with support from the South's Second-level Students' Union, for reform of the university application process between North and South. It is also welcome that further progress has been made in providing equivalence in A-level and Leaving Certificate admissions processes ahead of the 2025-26 academic year. The amendment to the admissions process is a significant step forward in opening opportunities for Northern students to attain university degrees in institutions across Ireland. As we know, previous arrangements created inequalities for Northern students because their grades were not recognised equally in the points systems and admission processes. The changes for the upcoming year will help address that imbalance and, in doing so, improve cross-border student mobility. Sinn Féin has long called for those changes to be made so that Northern students stand a fair chance of accessing courses and opportunities in universities in the South. The Department of Education must ensure that young people have the necessary information and guidance to apply for courses through the Central Applications Office processes. While it is disappointing that the Education Minister is not here this afternoon, it was positive to hear his acknowledgement earlier that there are circumstances in certain areas in education in which the North lags way behind.

Sinn Féin will continue to work to remove barriers and to promote education opportunities across Ireland as the best way to increase access to third-level education. Given the debate, it is clear that we should all continue to work to improve cross-border student mobility to enable our children and young people to build a future and a career in the communities on this island. Go raibh míle maith agat.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Members, please take your ease for a moment.

Ms Brownlee: 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 in which to propose and 10 minutes in which to make a winding-up speech. All other Members who are called to speak will have five minutes. Please open the debate on the motion.

Ms Brownlee: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Diabetes is a chronic illness, the complexity of which is often misunderstood. For a person living with diabetes, managing the condition is not something that is left until a check-up or a hospital appointment. It is every moment of every day and involves a constant cycle of monitoring, adjusting, planning and reacting. One of the best depictions that I have ever seen of what it is like is a simple video of a person going about their day, walking, working and parenting, all the while trying to keep a blue balloon in the air, constantly adjusting, constantly being aware and never quite being able to rest. Sometimes the balloon drops and sometimes it soars away, but the focus is always there, and it is exhausting. That is why we are here debating this important motion to drive forward quality standards in diabetes care in Northern Ireland.

First, the Assembly must recognise what the data clearly tells us, which is that diabetes is on the rise. Almost 115,000 people here live with diabetes, and that number continues to grow year-on-year. Type 2 diabetes accounts for most of those cases, but, among children, 98% of those diagnosed have type 1 diabetes, which is an autoimmune condition that cannot be prevented. Without urgent action, the health and well-being, and the very future, of thousands of our citizens is at risk.

One of the most critical elements for improving the life of those living with diabetes is technology. Technological advances, particularly continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and hybrid closed-loop (HCL) systems, have transformed what is possible. Hybrid closed-loop systems are often referred to as an artificial pancreas, as they integrate insulin pumps and glucose monitors to adjust insulin delivery automatically throughout the day and night. Rather than multiple daily injections, constant finger-pricking and complex calculations, individuals simply input the carbs that they consume, and the system does the work for them. However, that is not a luxury. It dramatically improves blood glucose control, reduces hypos, improves sleep quality, reduces hospital admissions and gives people back their freedom. It matters especially for children and vulnerable adults — those who may not be able to recognise the signs of dangerously low blood sugar in the time to act.

Whilst Northern Ireland has made significant strides in providing continuous glucose monitoring systems, challenges still persist. The Dexcom G6 is a real-time system with customisable alerts, but it is currently not listed on the Northern Ireland drug tariff. As a result, it cannot be prescribed in primary care and funding is not routinely available. That situation has led many families to self-fund those devices despite their critical role in enabling hybrid closed-loop systems and providing peace of mind, especially for parents of young children who may not be able to recognise the signs and symptoms of blood sugar levels during the night.

I also want to touch on the challenges of transitioning to adult services. Recently, I worked with the family of a young man with complex learning difficulties who was successfully managed with a hybrid closed-loop system during his paediatric care. However, on transitioning to adult services, the support for that technology was withdrawn. He was expected to revert to multiple daily injections and calculations, which he clearly could not manage. Only after significant advocacy was the decision reversed. That case underscores the need for clear, compassionate transitional pathways that consider the unique needs of individuals with additional challenges.

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has formally endorsed the use of hybrid technology through its technology appraisal guidance TA943, yet, today, while some children and adults here in Northern Ireland are clearly benefiting from that incredible technology, access is not equal and depends far too often on where you live. It is the cruel reality of that postcode lottery. That is despite clear commitments that were set out in our own diabetes strategic framework, dating back to 2016, which prioritised access to technology and better outcomes.

Alongside that, data is critical to drive improvements. The National Diabetes Audit that is undertaken in England, Scotland and Wales collects vital information, tracking outcomes, highlighting service gaps and identifying inequalities. In those regions, the audit has shaped better services and continues to drive stronger outcomes. In Northern Ireland, we are still not fully participating in the National Diabetes Audit despite the commitments that were made nearly a decade ago. Infrastructure challenges, including delayed systems, mean that we do not have a full picture of how our diabetes services are actually performing. Without robust data, how can we know whether our care is right? Without clear measurement, how can we improve? Without understanding, how can we allocate our limited budgets wisely? We note, with deep concern, that Northern Ireland has not yet been able to benefit from the insights of that audit. That, of course, must change. We call on the Minister of Health to ensure that regional participation in the audit is prioritised, supported and delivered as was committed to in the strategic framework.

Of course, none of that will come without challenges. We recognise the immense financial pressures facing the Department of Health. Implementing the hybrid closed-loop system will require not only devices but training, infrastructure and service design. However, the cost of inaction in complications, hospital admissions and early deaths is, sadly, far higher.

I will finish with some of the positives when we get it right. I know from my experience that the care of the diabetes team in the Northern Trust is nothing short of exceptional. Its compassion, education and understanding is a model of best practice. It is truly fantastic. It shows the difference that a service can make to people's lives when it is well designed and supported. Today, let us choose to lift the weight off the shoulders of those who are trying to keep their balloon in the air, act with urgency, compassion and clarity so that people understand where we are going, and drive forward quality standards for diabetes care.

Mr McGuigan: I will begin by declaring an interest as my wife has been a type 1 diabetic for 37 years and my son is a type 1 diabetic of nine years. Whilst I do not have first-hand experience, I have been party to thousands of hours of conversations on blood sugar levels, the sugar content of various foods and the number of units of insulin that is required for injections before or after various meals.

I have seen many hyperglycaemic events and many, many hypos. Thankfully, only a few times have I had to administer an emergency pen.

According to the Diabetes Network in the North, almost 115,000 people here are living with diabetes, and, as has been stated, that figure is rising. There is an annual rise of 3,000. That translates to a financial cost of nearly £300 million a year to treat and care for diabetics living in the North. More than 10 people are diagnosed every day in the North, so that cost will rise continually. It is also estimated that 12,000 individuals are living with type 2 diabetes but have not yet been diagnosed.

The motion is very welcome, and I thank those who tabled it for debate today. It notes the rising prevalence of diabetes, as I have done, and highlights the importance of technology in managing the condition and improving the quality of life of diabetics. I totally concur with that. For 37 years, I have witnessed the positive technological benefits and changes and their impact on my wife's quality of life. Gone are the days when I helped her and watched her continuously pricking her finger and taking her own blood samples 10, 20 times a day to test her blood before and after meals to guess how much insulin she needed to take. When I asked my wife what I should say during this debate, she told me to point out that having a continuous glucose monitor has been "life altering". Those are her words: "life altering".

The motion also talks about the importance of the National Diabetes Audit:

That framework was introduced by my colleague and now First Minister, Michelle O'Neill, when she was the Health Minister. It is due to end in 2026. We have all been engaged with those in the diabetes sector. Today, they want to know and we will seek clarity on what comes next when the framework runs out. Hopefully, the Minister can give clarity on what comes next: what preparatory work is under way; and will there be a co-design approach moving forward? We also want to seek a commitment from the Minister that there will be no gap between what is currently in place and what will follow.

As has been said, not all the recommendations in the framework have been actioned. In particular, as the motion indicates, the recommendation on regional participation in the National Diabetes Audit has not been actioned. It is important for diabetics in the North to have access to that audit. Perhaps the Minister, in his response, can tell us why we have not been included thus far and what the blockages have been, but, more importantly, give us an indication of when he expects us to be in a position to participate in that audit — when will that happen? As with all these things, particularly in the health service, the gathering of information is vital to providing the best patient outcomes, the best treatment and the best cost-efficiency.

The motion also talks about technology: the "hybrid closed-loop" system has the potential to transform the quality of life of and outcomes for those with type 1 diabetes.

In conclusion, audit participation and gathering information are vital. Technology is equally vital. However, I will add a third string: education programmes for diabetics themselves are equally important. It was 33 years after diagnosis that my wife was able to access the dose adjustment for normal eating (DAFNE) course, which, again in her words, was "life-altering". She got valuable information from the doctors and nurses that she had not heard in her 32 years' experience of being a diabetic.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Your time is up.

Mr McGuigan: I will finish on that.

Mr Donnelly: I am pleased to speak in support of the motion, which highlights the challenge facing thousands of people across Northern Ireland: the growing impact of diabetes on individuals, families and our health service. I thank Cheryl Brownlee, a DUP member, for tabling the motion for debate. I had not heard of the balloon analogy, but it is very apt when talking about trying to maintain safe blood sugars.

As a nurse, I am very aware of the impact of diabetes on a patient and a family and of the treatment of diabetes. I have given insulin many times and delivered other treatments. Today, almost 115,000 people in Northern Ireland are living with diabetes, and that number is rising by more than 3,000 every year. It is not just individuals who are feeling the strain; our health service is under increasing pressure too. Diabetes is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease, which can lead to serious complications, such as heart attacks, angina and strokes. According to Diabetes UK, complications that are linked to diabetes cost our health service £162 million a year. That figure that is projected to rise to over £290 million within the next decade. That is simply not sustainable.

While the number of cases and costs are rising, the same cannot be said for standards in care, innovation, treatment or accountability in outcomes. Like Philip, I have also noticed the advances in technology that Cheryl mentioned. You will see people at sports events or running marathons and things like that with censors on. People are using the technological advances to make their life easier. They certainly are a huge benefit. We need a system that is not just reactive but forward-looking, integrated, evidence-based and focused on prevention. Northern Ireland should be part of the National Diabetes Audit just like every other region in the UK.

Alliance is committed to ensuring that diabetes receives the attention that it deserves here in the Assembly, in our local health trusts and at a departmental level. We are working closely with healthcare professionals and organisations, such as Diabetes UK, to promote best practice across the board, whether that is supporting people living with type 1 or type 2 diabetes to access the community-based care that they need or ensuring that women with gestational diabetes receive informed continuous support throughout their pregnancies. Early intervention and prevention matter. Community-based care matters, and those things can and do change lives. I agree with Philip McGuigan that education programmes are hugely important.

It is also clear that we need more than just piecemeal improvements. We need systemic reform. Tackling diabetes properly means having a clear joined-up strategy that puts prevention, early diagnosis, education and consistent support at its heart. It means making sure that, no matter where you live in Northern Ireland, you can expect the same high standard of care as others. It means investing in community services to keep people well, not just treating complications when it is already too late.

The technological advances that we mentioned, such as the hybrid closed-loop system, are making the management of blood sugars much easier for people living with diabetes every day. We need ambition, coordination and, above all, leadership. Without those, we will simply keep spending more to achieve less, and patients will continue to pay the price. It is no secret that Alliance has been calling for reform for years — reform of our institutions, our health system and the way that decisions are made. Time and time again, we see issues such as this suffer because of outdated, reactive and siloed thinking. Diabetes care is a prime example of where joined-up strategic policy would make a real difference not just to the budget but to real people every day. It would improve the health of our population and reduce the number of people who develop severe complications, such as heart disease. It is about more than just policy; it is about people. Alliance will continue to push for a diabetes strategy that is fit for the future. That is why we will support the motion.

Mr Chambers: There is no doubt that diabetes is one of the biggest health threats of our time. The number of people who are living with the condition is expected to rise dramatically in the coming years. In just a decade, from 2014 to 2024, the number of people who are on the diabetic register jumped by 40%. Similar increases have also been witnessed in neighbouring jurisdictions. We often use the word "crisis" in the Chamber, but the increasing prevalence of diabetes genuinely is a health crisis that, if left unchecked, has the potential to overwhelm our already stretched healthcare system. The condition can also have a major impact on the physical and psychological well-being of individuals and their families. Whether you are male or female, young or old, diabetes can happen to anyone. Whilst this is by no means always the case, too many cases of type 2 diabetes are too often driven by lifestyle factors, such as poor diet, physical inactivity and obesity. On the latter point of obesity, greater awareness and early intervention are, of course, always more preferable to trying to resolve the problem once it manifests itself. I know that the Minister has also been focusing on the issue of societal obesity. I look forward to announcements being made in that space shortly.

It is clear that better communication and awareness-raising will not, on their own, turn the tide of the rapidly rising rates of diabetes. That is why any improvements to treatments and techniques are so important. The hybrid closed-loop system is one such innovation. Like everyone else, I want to see equitable access to that technology. However, I remind the proposers of the motion, not for the first time, that they are asking the health service in Northern Ireland to do more while tying its arms behind its back financially. That said, I hope that it will be rolled out as quickly as possible, not least because of the already proven benefit for the people whom it can help.

Mr McGrath: If we were to spend £1 million a day to give our children free sweets, I am sure that there would be absolute outcry — maybe not from the children, but from everybody within the health sector. In Northern Ireland, however, we spend in excess of £1 million every day to manage the consequences of diabetes, and the outcry is, at times, somewhat muted. It is not a distant crisis; it is a crisis that we face right now. It is present today, and it impacts on the people whom we represent. I support the motion and thank the proposers for tabling it.

Diabetes is not just a clinical diagnosis but a deeply social condition. It can be shaped and worsened by poverty, inequality and decades of missed opportunities in public health. When we talk about type 2 diabetes, which accounts for about 90% of cases, we are not talking only about blood sugar levels but about the food on somebody's table, the heating in their home and the streets and community services that are around them. That is why those in our poorest communities are twice as likely to develop diabetes. That is a fairly stark reality and tells us that this is not just about educating people on what to eat and what not to eat. There are many other underlying issues that we need to address. It is not just a healthcare failure; it is social injustice. The cost of inaction is staggering: as I said, diabetes costs us £1 million every day.

Those who live with diabetes know how difficult it can be to manage. There have been other experiences. I have family members with type 2 diabetes who sometimes have to go through the fight of staying off certain types of food, and it is never a polite response that comes back the way. It is important that we use the opportunity that is available to us all, whether that is education or tackling the social injustices in our community. It is up to us, as legislators, to stop managing diabetes after the damage is done. We must move much more quickly towards a preventative model whereby we stop people from getting diabetes. Of course, that will mean investing in a diabetes prevention programme. I remember back to the time of the Bengoa discussions. Bengoa talked about this type of thing: the idea that, if you stop people from getting sick, they will not have to use the health service. At that time, there was a suggestion that one of the greatest things that we could prevent is diabetes, because the impact that it has on our services is absolutely massive. As we go forward, that is only going to increase. unless we do something. I appreciate that there will be discussion amongst the Executive parties about, "If we want to change something, you need to give me the money to do it, and, if you don't give me the money to do it, I can't do it", but we have to analyse those decisions. I want to see an Executive that analyse all the decisions that they have to take and prioritise the ones that they can do.

Of course, the Executive will not be able to do everything, but, if they prioritise what they can do — what they can fund — on transformation of our community as well as of services, I am pretty certain that, when it comes to health services, trying to change the outcomes for people with diabetes will be up there.

I have gone off the script that was in front of me, so I will finish by saying that the technology that has been talked about is critical. We can see the devices that people have in the community. Anybody who has them talks about their transformational nature and the effect on their life. Given the difference between type 1 and type 2 diabetes, it is important for those devices to be rolled out as far as possible. We need to use and embrace technology in order to help people, and it is important that we fully support that effort.

I welcome the motion. I hope that the Executive can get beyond the discussion about money by finding transformation funds that could be used to look properly at how we can reduce diabetes in our communities and therefore help people to lead better lives.

Ms Flynn: The examples that have been given by Members who have family members and relatives with lived experience of diabetes are really interesting. I have no one closely connected to me who lives with diabetes, and, sometimes, if you do not have that lived experience, you are in the dark, so it is important to hear Members speak about people who have lived with it.

My baby, Torin, had a stay in hospital just before Christmas last year. A young child shared a room with Torin. That wee boy was only about eight or nine. He had just been diagnosed with diabetes, and he was in hospital with his parents. He shared a room with Torin for about a week. I still think about that child — I hope that he is doing great — because, although I was there for different reasons, I could sense the strain and pressure that that diagnosis put on the child and his family. That was my first insight into the life-changing impact of that diagnosis. I am sure that living with it is difficult for adults, but it must be especially so for children who are trying to manage diabetes. It is important to say that.

Diabetes UK was, thankfully, able to make it into the Gallery for the debate. The business has moved quickly, then more slowly, then quickly again, so it is good that the charity is here to hear Members' comments.

Points have been made about the connection between rates of diabetes diagnosis and areas of higher deprivation. It is no surprise that we see some of the bigger spikes in those areas. I am conscious that the Minister has spoken about making health inequalities one of his top priorities since coming into post, so he might have feedback on how his health inequalities programmes can target diabetes and do some of the preventive stuff that is referred to in the motion and that Members have talked about. Prevention has come up time and again. As with many other illnesses and diagnoses, where you can intervene earlier and educate better, there is probably a better chance of making living with the illness more bearable.

The National Diabetes Audit was referred to — Cheryl referenced it a good wee bit in her opening remarks — and it is important for us to participate in that as much as we can. Where it has been rolled out in other parts of these islands, it has shone a light on where services work well and, importantly, where they fall short. We will, hopefully, take any input or learning that we can get from that process.

Trying to move forward with technical advances and the NICE guidance on hybrid closed-loop technology was also mentioned. Philip mentioned his wife. We know patients who are living with the condition. We know of practical examples of life-changing treatments. Maybe there could be more of a focus on delivering the things that, patients with direct experience have told us, massively help them in their lives.

The diabetes strategy covers the period from 2016 to 2026, and it is coming to an end. The Minister, like most of us, is not a fan of strategies and long, drawn-out processes. Maybe the Minister can give us feedback about what will happen when the strategy expires. I know that he is focused on action and action plans, but it would be useful to get an update on his next steps and how he sees the matter progressing.

Mrs Dodds: I want to add some words to the areas that have been covered in the debate. I thank the Members who have spoken. The subject has a wide range of issues, but there is also wide consensus across the Chamber that we need to do something about it.

As has been mentioned, diabetes is one of the most significant long-term illnesses that our people face. It can have serious consequences, if it is not well treated and controlled. People with type 1 diabetes that is not well controlled are at risk of long-term complications, including sight loss, heart disease and stroke, which are very serious. The debate is worth having because of the number of people whom it can impact on.

As others have said in the debate, Diabetes UK has predicted that the cost to Northern Ireland is £291 million per year. That figure is expected to rise to approximately £524 million by 2035. Many of my colleagues are protective of the health budget, but surely this is the classic Professor Bengoa issue where we must do something to stop people getting sick in order to be able to spend money on other priority areas in the health budget. Therefore, it is important to look at this element.

As of 31 March 2024, there were 114, 673 patients on the diabetes register — that is a significant number. It equates to a raw prevalence rate of 70·3 per 1,000 patients, ranging from 65·3 per 1,000 among practices in the Southern Trust area to 77·4 in the Northern Trust area. There is a variation in the prevalence of diabetes across trust areas. By GP federation area, the raw prevalence rate ranged from 53·8 per 1,000 in south Belfast to 82·6 per 1,000 in Ards. I do not know whether the Minister has an insight into the reason for the variations, but it would make for an interesting study.

Many of those who have spoken, including my colleague when introducing the debate, have talked about technology and the care improvements that it can bring. While that is undoubtedly the case, we have to accept that the technology is available in Northern Ireland but almost via a postcode lottery system, which is not good enough. We should offer the same treatment to people across Northern Ireland. That is not the situation just for diabetes; it really has to change in a range of areas.

Many colleagues across the Chamber have talked about the National Diabetes Audit.

Surely it is sensible for us to know the key metrics in order to help us identify service gaps and to have the data to enable us to enhance outcomes, reduce complications and ensure that there is equitable care across Northern Ireland. We really want to see the Minister make progress on trying to have Northern Ireland included in the audit. It is important that we get a timeline for participating in it.

I will finish by quickly mentioning something that Órlaithí talked about, which is the impact on families with children with type 1 diabetes. Many of those parents fear for their children, particularly those children who do not have a hybrid closed-loop system to help them manage their diabetes. Children are less able or perhaps less careful when it comes to identifying the symptoms that they have. We could relieve a lot of the stress on parents and on family life —

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

Mrs Dodds: — by trying to eradicate diabetes and by managing it through the technology that is available to us.

Mr Dickson: I thank my East Antrim colleague Cheryl Brownlee for proposing the motion. It is a very important one. Like others, I can speak from personal experience. My wife is a type 2 diabetic. For her, the constant need to prick her finger and watch her diet has been dramatically changed by the sensor that she wears. It is the most amazing piece of technology that has come out, of that there is no doubt.

As others have said, diabetes is one of the most serious health issues of our time, with over 115,000 people in Northern Ireland living with it. That figure rises annually by some 3,000. Every day, more individuals are diagnosed and more families have to learn to adapt to new realities. Every day, the cost to our health service grows. It takes over £1 million to manage diabetes daily, which equates to 10% of our local health and social care budget. Behind those statistics are real people who are living with not just a medical condition but fear, anxiety and huge mental and emotional strain. That is why it is vital that our health system provide more than treatment. It also has to provide support, dignity and fairness. I have to say that I see that from my wife's team in the Northern Trust every time that she comes into contact with it.

I am pleased to be the chair of the all-party group (APG) on diabetes. I have had the privilege, and, at times, experienced the frustration, of hearing directly from people living with diabetes, from clinicians and from charities such as Diabetes UK NI. Their message has been constant: promises must become action, and strategies must become services that people can see and feel.

We have known for years that proper data is vital. In 2016, we committed to participating in the National Diabetes Audit, which is the audit used in England and Wales, but nothing has happened. Nine years later, Northern Ireland still does not have the infrastructure in place. Without that data, our clinicians and, worst of all, our patients are working blind. We cannot properly plan, properly measure or, importantly, properly improve. Think of where we would be today had that audit been put in place in 2016. I will now put direct questions to the Minister. Minister, will you commit to joining the audit? When can we expect to see it deliver for patients in Northern Ireland?

It is true that there has been the same slow progress with technology. Hybrid closed-loop systems are endorsed by NICE and are now recognised across the United Kingdom as a major advancement. They reduce the burden on patients and improve health outcomes and lives, yet, once again, Northern Ireland lags behind in their implementation. Good intentions are not enough. Approval on paper is not enough. Delivery is what matters, and it matters urgently.

In preparing for the debate, I consulted Diabetes UK NI, because I wanted to ensure that whatever I said reflected the voice of those who matter most: people living with diabetes and the organisations that support them. Although motions and debates are important, what matters far more is what happens after the words are spoken.

My colleague Danny Donnelly said that Alliance has been consistent in pushing for practical change. We have worked closely with stakeholders, we have listened, and we have acted. Last year, I sponsored the Live Well Hub event at Stormont, which showcased community-based support that is already making a difference.

Those who are living with diabetes are not asking for special treatment; they are asking for fairness, services that meet modern standards and technology and care that reflect best practice and not outdated systems and endless waiting. We support the motion because we recognise its important truths, but let us be clear that the real test will not be today's debate; it will be in what is done next. Over to you, Minister. For too long, people living with diabetes have heard commitments. They now deserve to see delivery. If the Minister can get it right, it will not just be the statistics that improve; it will be people's lives.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): I call the Minister of Health to respond to the debate. Minister, you have up to 15 minutes.

Mr Nesbitt (The Minister of Health): Deputy Speaker, thank you. I acknowledge some of the points and questions that have been raised by Members, including Mr Dickson, and will attempt to get as close as I can to providing a definitive answer to them over the next few minutes.

I start by taking you back to 2016, when the Department launched the diabetes strategic framework. The Diabetes Network was established under the 'Health and Wellbeing 2026: Delivering Together' plan to deliver against the framework, with the aim of transforming diabetes treatment and care across Northern Ireland. The network has been working alongside partners, locally and nationally, including Diabetes UK, and with people who are living with diabetes to achieve that goal. One of the key drivers for change is a partnership approach to service transformation. It states:

When I say "integrated", I mean regionally standardised services, and I acknowledge that, as raised by the proposer of the motion, that is not always the case with diabetes care. The role of people who are living with diabetes as service users, sharing lived experience, has set the direction of the network's efforts to improve treatment and care. Indeed, in the setting up of the network, provision was made for a collective leadership platform to support real change in improving outcomes for people who are living with diabetes.

That is the ethos under which the network has been working over recent years in the development of a regional integrated pathway. That pathway aligns primary and secondary care through the creation of a community care model for type 2 diabetes. The process has not been easy. The number of people who are living with diabetes continues to grow, and, as Members have noted, almost 115,000 people here live with diabetes. Through the valuable contribution of lived experience and the clinical insights and commitment of healthcare professionals in the context of local and national best practice, the network has delivered a service model that will enable people who are living with diabetes to receive the right support in the right place at the right time under the right healthcare professional.

Another key driver for change that is set out in the strategic framework is supporting self-management — empowering people through structured diabetes education. That structured education has been developed for people who are living with diabetes and meets nationally agreed criteria as defined by NICE, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. It has an evidence-based curriculum, which has quality-assured teaching standards and a regular audit. The aim of structured education is to improve the knowledge, skills and confidence of those who are living with diabetes. That, in turn, enables people with diabetes to take increasing control of their own condition and develop effective self-management in their daily lives.

There are three agreed and quality-assured structured education programmes for Northern Ireland that are consistent with NICE criteria: the dose adjustment for normal eating (DAFNE) programme, the diabetes education and self-management for ongoing and newly diagnosed (DESMOND) programme and the CHOICE programme. I am sure that Health Committee members in particular are aware that the HSC loves a good acronym. DAFNE is a way of managing type 1 diabetes. Specifically for adults, it provides the skills necessary to estimate the carbohydrates in each meal and inject, therefore, the right dose of insulin. DESMOND is an NHS organisation that helps to deliver high-quality patient education to people with type 2 diabetes and those who are at risk of the condition. The CHOICE programme is specifically for children, young people and their families or carers. It aims to provide the skills and knowledge that they need to manage their diabetes and reduce the impact of the condition on daily activities and lifestyle. The delivery of those programmes across Northern Ireland is crucial in providing people living with diabetes and their carers with the knowledge and skills needed to manage the condition effectively, supporting self-management and empowering individuals.

Key theme 5 of the diabetes strategic framework is:

One of the specific priorities identified within this theme is the:

In response, working with key stakeholders, a regionally agreed young adults transition pathway for type 1 diabetes has been developed. Consisting of three stages, it facilitates the smooth movement of children and young adults from paediatric services to adult services for their treatment and care. The paediatric preparation element is the first stage of the pathway, followed by the active progression stage, with stage 3 focusing on the provision of young adult services. The pathway supports and enables Health and Social Care trust clinical teams to identify young adults who should attend and the right time for them to attend. That identification is based on the young person's need as well on as their physical development, emotional maturity, local circumstances and all other relevant factors, so it is not based solely on age.

The commissioning of young adult transition coordinator posts in each trust supports young people living with diabetes, ensuring that they have a clearly defined pathway of transition and providing a supportive, smooth and seamless transition to adult services.

I assume that everybody here acknowledges the fragile health ecosystem in which we find ourselves. Today, however, we recognise what can be achieved when the parts of the system work together to support a common vision. I recognise that diabetes prevalence is rising in Northern Ireland, as it is in other nations. However, I have outlined examples of ongoing work in the nine years since the implementation of the framework that is directly improving treatment and care for people living with diabetes, improving their quality of life and their future health outcomes.

The Department of Health remains committed to working towards participation in the National Diabetes Audit, as stated in that framework. However, there have been significant challenges in progressing that recommendation: the infrastructure required to participate fully in the audit is not currently in place. However, with the full implementation of Encompass, which is being rolled out across all the health and social care trusts, the provision of data that is available and extractable for the region will become apparent. That will support participation in the National Diabetes Audit in the future.

Mr Dickson asked for a timeline. I can tell him that the two trusts that are currently not on Encompass will be on it on 8 May. Therefore, in just 10 days' time, all five trusts will be on it. There will need to be a period of embedding and validation. I am not entirely convinced that that will be done as quickly as it might be, but I certainly think that, within this calendar year, at the very outside, we should be harvesting the data that allows us to join that National Diabetes Audit. I make a commitment to the House to come back if there is any hint of a delay on that front.

All currently available data on diabetes prevalence, treatment and care has been collated and reviewed in the development of the regional integrated pathway for diabetes. That was co-produced with stakeholders, including people with lived experience. Another key service development that has taken place in the last few years under that network and in line with the framework is the regional insulin pump service. In January 2022, former Health Minister Swann formally announced the setting up of the regional insulin pump service to mark the 100th anniversary of the use of insulin to treat diabetes. That announcement, which was supported by £2 million of funding from my Department, enabled that life-changing service to be established. That investment made provision for pump devices and the specialist workforce that is required to support people who are living with type 1 diabetes to receive insulin pump therapy.

The aim of the regional service is to improve the lives of people who are living with type 1 diabetes. The regional pump service was co-produced by people who are living with diabetes alongside clinicians and healthcare professionals across all trusts and Diabetes UK. The goal is to provide equity, reduce variability and enhance outcomes for people who are living with diabetes. The service has established clear regional guidance and protocols in line with NICE and the Association of British Clinical Diabetologists (ABCD). Following a formal commissioning process, the Belfast Trust was selected to deliver the service. A regional multidisciplinary team delivers the insulin pump pathway, connecting with local trusts and providing a high-quality service. In year 1, the service began a rebalancing exercise across the region, directly supporting the ambition of equity as the chief priority.

People who are living with diabetes and who were involved in the co-design of the regional insulin pump service reflected the need for quality of life to be a key indicator. Centrally, quality of life is a key consideration in pump decision-making; that is, clinical consideration of where provision would significantly improve quality of life for the person who is living with diabetes. The acceptance of that recommendation made Northern Ireland the first region among the four nations to use quality of life as a criterion. Following the endorsement of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence's TA943, which is the provision that relates to hybrid closed-loop systems for managing blood glucose levels in type 1 diabetes, my Department has requested that work be undertaken to understand the implications, and an implementation plan is being drafted.

Funding is, of course, required for devices in addition to recruiting and upskilling the workforce that is needed to offer hybrid closed-loop systems safely, effectively, equitably and sustainably across the region. Therefore, given the scale of investment that is needed, financial requirements are also being considered. The NICE hybrid closed-loop systems guidance states that the support of a trained multidisciplinary team that is experienced in insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitoring is required.

In addition, the role of peer support is also to be considered. The importance of peer support has been a recurring theme throughout the conversations that have taken place on the different aspects of diabetes treatment and care. Sharing a lived experience, providing or receiving support from like-minded people or being able to talk with somebody who is going through a similar situation or has lived through it are empowering tools. The trained multidisciplinary team in the regional insulin pump service will enable the implementation plan, once approved, to be taken forward, although additional capacity will be required. That will support the integration of continuous glucose monitoring technologies into diabetes care, and updated information will be communicated to all stakeholders.

The critical role of our diabetes specialist healthcare professionals was recognised in the diabetes programme of care strategic workforce review, which was led by the Public Health Agency (PHA) and commissioned by my Department. That review was the first multidisciplinary workforce review to be undertaken and was a recommendation in the framework. Now in the final stages of completion, it will inform our workforce planning needs, ensuring equitable access to specialist diabetes professionals right across the region.

The Chair of the Health Committee mentioned the fact that the strategy expires in 2026. As Órlaithí Flynn pointed out, I am not particularly drawn to high-input plans but rather action plans for how we are going to deliver. She is quite right, but I assure Mr McGuigan that I am not envisaging any sort of cliff edge come 2026. I want us to focus particularly on two key developments: one is joining the national audit — I addressed that in my remarks already — and the other is a focus on that hybrid closed-loop system. Similar to the other UK nations, work has been taking place to develop an implementation plan in Northern Ireland. I hope that Members will understand that the establishment of any new clinical service to the required standards takes time. I have, however, recently supported the establishment of a clinical working group that will work with stakeholders across the trusts to develop that implementation plan.

That is being finalised, and it outlines an appropriate timescale for roll-out. I hope to have that as soon as possible.

The plan should provide equitable, sustainable and affordable access to the technology, targeted to optimise outcomes for those who are most likely to benefit from it. I have to put in the proviso, as always, that additional investment will be required for the devices and for the workforce. England has outlined a five-year implementation plan; in Northern Ireland, I am keen to emulate that in terms of the priority groups and the roll-out schedule, and I hope that that will be published in the near future. I hope that that gives some assurance to Members on this important issue, about which they are rightly passionate.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Thank you, Minister, for that response. I call Alan Robinson to conclude and wind up the debate. Alan, you have up to 10 minutes.

Mr Robinson: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Given the late hour and the fact that a number of us in the Building tonight have young families, I will make my speech as short as I can.

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak on the issue, given that diabetes is recognised as a public health challenge in Northern Ireland, with 115,000 individuals affected by the condition. I will also say that my party is grateful to Members across the Chamber for their support for the motion. It has been a long time since a Health debate has divided the House, and I hope that that brings a little comfort to the Health Minister. We are united in the Chamber when it comes to health. Our motion simply asks that everyone affected by diabetes in the Province receive the highest standard of care, that they get access to the best technologies available on a UK-wide basis and that they benefit from robust data-driven improvements to our services.

I will turn to some of the comments that were made. Ms Cheryl Brownlee said that, without intervention, many people are at risk. I applaud her for speaking so highly of those in the health service, who are on the front line. Philip McGuigan, the Chair of the Health Committee, talked of his family experiences. I have said before that our personal experiences sometimes add value to what can sometimes be stale debates in the Chamber. Danny Donnelly talked of the increase of 3,000 new cases every year. Those are startling figures and reinforce the need for early intervention and education. Alan Chambers, my colleague on the Health Committee, recognised the issue as a health crisis, and we thank him for that. Colin McGrath highlighted the fact that £1 million per day is required to manage the issue, keeping to the theme of other Members about the cost to the health service and to public funds. Órlaithí Flynn talked of the difficulties experienced by children living with the condition: we all very much share that view. Diane Dodds, my Health Committee colleague, talked of the long-term and serious consequences of the condition, which reinforces why we were keen to table the motion. I mention in particular my party colleague, Cheryl Brownlee: maybe another marathon beckons for her to raise money for yet another fantastic cause. Stewart Dickson brought life to the debate, giving a personal family testimony. He too spoke highly of the Northern Trust's teams, who are on the front line every day dealing with the issue.

Finally, I thank the Health Minister for his contribution. He was honest in his assessment today, as he always is, but without using his irony klaxon. It is promising that, with Encompass, we will see movement in the right direction by the end of the year. Given all that he said in the Chamber tonight, we look forward to him being back on the Floor with updates.

All that we ask for in the motion is fairness and the means to ensure that Northern Ireland keeps pace with the rest of the UK in delivering high-quality diabetes care. We ask the Department to be reactive but also proactive in addressing the needs of those living with diabetes.