Official Report: Tuesday 30 September 2025

Mrs Mason: Many families across the North are being approached by schools for voluntary contributions. We know the financial pressures that many schools in constituencies right across the North face in ensuring that they provide good learning environments for our children and support their development. However, the reality for many families is that those contributions are voluntary in name only. Many feel obliged to make the payments. Voluntary contributions can add hidden costs that disproportionately affect already struggling families and create inequality. When back-to-school costs are already sky high, with parents facing astronomical costs when buying school uniforms and PE gear, those hidden fees can be the straw that finally breaks the camel's back for many households.

At the moment, there is no statutory regulation on how schools request voluntary contributions and how they spend them. Guidance from the Department of Education and the Education Authority is very limited, leaving schools to set the level of contributions that are to be requested of parents. For many, that is an additional financial burden that they cannot, or struggle to, meet. Stronger guidance would provide transparency. It would give parents confidence that they will not be penalised for non-payment, create a level playing field across all schools and support a fairer and more inclusive education system.

I urge the Education Minister to listen to the concerns of hard-pressed families and offer a consistent and fairer approach to voluntary contributions.

Mr Brett: For decades, those on the Benches opposite lectured the people of Northern Ireland against majority rule. They told us that it was unfair, undemocratic and oppressive, yet, today, in Belfast City Council, with the help of the Alliance Party, they will impose minority rule on the people of Belfast by introducing the scandalous policy that says that Irish language street signs can be imposed upon communities with just 15% support. Yes, that is right, Mr Speaker — just 15% support.

As revealed in the 'Belfast Telegraph' yesterday, since 2022, 228 streets have been approved for Irish language street signs, yet only 12% of those applications had the majority support of residents who live in those streets.

In nearly nine out of 10 of those cases, the views of the minority trumped the view of the majority. That is not democracy; it is imposition.

Let us look at the facts. Signs were approved on Malone Valley Park and Eliza Street Close with support from just 15% of residents. On Upper Stanfield Street, it was 16%, and, at Wolfhill Gardens in my constituency, barely 17% of residents supported the change in signage. In each of those cases, the vast majority of local people did not back the change, yet the policy, championed by Sinn Féin, the SDLP and the Alliance Party, was pushed through.

I have been contacted by residents from across North Belfast, from all backgrounds and traditions, telling me that they do not want that territorial marking. They want to be left alone by Belfast City Council, and they want the council to get on with its job of emptying bins, cleaning streets and proper play park provision. While the flawed policy rolls ahead, the cost continues to spiral. To date, £170,000 has been spent on those signs, with 1,200 still to be erected. That is money that should have been spent on overcoming the crumbling of Belfast city centre, where shops are closing and businesses are leaving.

Parties talk about respect, but the policy delivers the opposite of that by forcing minority rule on streets, when the majority have been ignored. When they do not like the answer that they get from the resident survey results, do not worry; they will resurvey until they get the results that they want. Our message to Belfast City Council is clear: although we are a minority, we will continue to speak up for the majority. I trust that the Alliance Party will once again U-turn on this disgraceful policy.

Mr McReynolds: As chair of the all-party group on active travel, I will respond to today's Northern Ireland Audit Office report on active travel in Northern Ireland. Sadly, the findings were precisely what we expected. Under the Climate Change Act (Northern Ireland) 2022, the Department for Infrastructure is required to spend 10% of the transport budget on active travel. If that had been done, £85 million would have been spent annually, but it has spent a total of only £50 million to date. Moreover, we see that the Department is taking a creative approach, with street lighting repair and footpath repair considered to be appropriate spend from the active travel budget. I see what the Department is doing with that approach, but, unfortunately, that will not increase the number of people walking, cycling or wheeling to get around.

Active travel has the ability to make a positive impact on how we move around our towns and cities. It has benefits for health, the environment and our economy, but those benefits are going unrealised as they are repeatedly forgotten and ignored. Underinvestment and lack of targeted investment make it obvious why targets are not being met. Although £50 million has been put towards active travel, what has it actually achieved? The 2015 bicycle strategy aspired to:

by 2025, but, unfortunately, the figure is presently only 1%.

COVID represented an opportunity for us to reimagine how we get around, given that there were fewer cars and other vehicles on the roads. In Paris, where I used to live, the mayor ordered immediate changes, and it is now completely unrecognisable from what I used to know. In Belfast, we got some cones on Hill Street, which were driven over, and pedestrianisation is only now, five years later, being presented as an experimental scheme.

I commend the active travel and cycling lobby, which is calling for strategic investment and collaboration with key stakeholders to ensure the success of active travel, but to do that will also take the will of the Assembly and of departmental officials. Having active travel in a place the size of Northern Ireland should be a no-brainer, but we instead see a failure to get the basics right early on. We are cobbling together things that we know work later and at expense.

I call on the Infrastructure Minister to read to the Audit Office report and to work with the all-party group on active travel, the lobby and the Infrastructure Committee to deliver the necessary changes that will make getting around easier, safer and cleaner through active travel.

Mr Butler: I mark National Nonspeaking/Non-verbal Awareness Day. I want to be absolutely clear that we must not allow this to become just another date in the calendar of which we raise awareness and move on. I want to issue a challenge to all Members and to those beyond the Chamber. Stop for a moment and recognise perhaps the most undervalued human right of all: the right to communicate. We must remember that, just because someone cannot speak, it does not mean that they do not understand. We wake up every morning and speak without thinking, which is blatantly obvious sometimes, perhaps even from me. We debate; we interrupt; we shout across the Chamber. We treat speech like air: invisible, automatic and always available. However, for thousands across Northern Ireland, including children with autism, stroke survivors and people with degenerative conditions, speech is not guaranteed, and for some, it is impossible. It is a work. It is a frustration. It is silence, misunderstood sometimes as disinterest. It is intelligence trapped behind a barrier that others mistake for absence.

Let me say it plainly: we do not value communication until it is taken from us, so this day serves as a reminder to support and advocate for non-verbal individuals, ensuring that their voices are heard and that their rights are respected. Today is not just about empathy but about urgency. Urgency for better access to assisted technology; urgency for training so that our public services can truly listen, even when no words are spoken; urgency to treat non-speaking individuals not as silent but as unheard. On National Nonspeaking/Non-verbal Awareness Day, I ask not for sympathy but for accountability and some awareness-raising. If we pride ourselves in the Assembly on giving voice to the voiceless, let us begin by ensuring that silence is not mistaken for invisibility.

Mr Durkan: Last week in the Chamber , the First Minister said:

The response from my constituents in the interim has been one of disbelief.

We do welcome any positivity for Derry. Last week, we welcomed four Ministers to mark the start of work at the DNA Museum, but let us be honest: we are not thriving. We are barely surviving, and we are surviving despite the Executive, not because of them. If anything has happened, it has at least shown the public how detached the Executive are from reality.

This week, Echo Echo Dance Theatre Company, one of our flagship arts organisations, will close its doors. Arts investment in the west is woeful. The legacy of the City of Culture has never been built upon, but sure, "The north-west is thriving".

The Executive have ignored calls to save our crisis intervention service, despite the fact that we have among the highest statistics for suicide on these islands, but sure, "The north-west is thriving".

When Derry jobs were cut at BT, there was no intervention to save them. Staff were let go, or the "lucky ones" offered roles in Belfast. In recent weeks, thousands of new jobs have been announced in Belfast. For Derry, nothing, nowhere near anything in that stratosphere. That is not regional balance: that is the exact opposite, but sure, "The north-west is thriving".

One in five children across the North lives in poverty. That is a disgrace in itself, but in Derry, that rises to one in four. The addiction centre promised under New Decade, New Approach has not been delivered. Funding has been stripped from the Northlands centre, and the Minister of Health has yet to meet that organisation. Football clubs across the north-west have been strung along for years with the promise of funding from the Northern Ireland Football Fund. They have been handed the grand sum of zero pounds, but sure, "The north-west is thriving".

Homelessness in Derry has doubled in the past decade. We are a housing crisis hotspot, with £6·5 million spent on temporary accommodation last year, but we are "thriving". My constituency has the highest unemployment rate, the highest claimant count, the highest household overcrowding. Derry City and Strabane ranks 357th out of 359 UK council regions for quality of life. How, then, is it that we are "thriving"?

The First Minister seems to think that if you say something often enough, it will become reality. That is not a fact. We are far from thriving, but we will continue to work, we will continue to fight and we will continue to overcome.

Mr Speaker: The Member's time is up.

Ms Ferguson: I rise to speak on bowel cancer, something that is quite personal to me, as I lost my father in 2002 to bowel cancer two weeks after his diagnosis.

Bowel cancer is treatable and curable, especially if diagnosed early. Nearly everyone survives bowel cancer if it is diagnosed at the earliest stage.

Survival rates drop significantly as the disease develops, however. Early diagnosis saves lives. While bowel cancer is most common in people over the age of 50, it is important to emphasise that it can affect anyone, whatever their age, gender or ethnicity or wherever they live.

In Ireland, around 2,500 people develop bowel cancer, also known as "colorectal cancer", each year. The Public Health Agency (PHA) in the North has indicated that one in 20 people here will develop bowel cancer. While bowel cancer is the fourth most frequently diagnosed cancer here, it is the second-biggest cause of cancer-related deaths. Symptoms of bowel cancer include blood in the faeces; rectal bleeding; changes in pooing habits; loss of weight for no obvious reason; feeling more tired than usual for some time; pain in the stomach or bottom; and a feeling of not having emptied the bowels after going to the toilet. If people have even one of those symptoms or are worried about any changes that they have noticed, they should ask their GP about accessing an at-home test kit, which is something that I received recently.

Our cancer strategy 2022-2032 has committed to reducing the sensitivity levels of faecal immunochemical tests (FITs), which check for hidden blood in stool samples. The strategy has also committed to lowering the age eligibility for our bowel cancer screening programme to 50. Screening is currently offered to those aged 60 to 74. I recently asked the Minister of Health about those commitments. He said that work is ongoing and will be reviewed in the context of financial and capacity challenges in supporting services. I remind the Minister that the fact that the fourth most common cancer is the second-biggest cancer killer here is evidence enough of the need to expand urgently what is a life-saving screening programme.

Mr Robinson: In early autumn 2024, the then Minister for Infrastructure, John O'Dowd, announced a £2·6 million active travel scheme for the A2 Clooney Road in Ballykelly. The scheme commenced in late 2024. The 2·6 kilometre-long scheme was touted as one that would improve facilities for pedestrians and cyclists. Furthermore, the carriageway was to be resurfaced. Minister O'Dowd said that the scheme would increase opportunities for walking, wheeling and cycling. He also asked road users for their patience while the scheme was being carried out. To facilitate the work, temporary traffic management measures were to be in place for a period of 33 weeks.

The scheme removes what was once a hard shoulder that, on many occasions, has been used by vehicles to pull over to allow ambulances and other emergency vehicles to pass on that exceptionally busy and key route in the north-west. The scheme is to create a cycle path on a road that has an estimated 18,000 vehicles on it every day. There is not a day that passes that I or any other public rep does not receive complaints from road users about the traffic delays on the Ballykelly to Greysteel road. In my 20 years in public life, I cannot recall so much frustration and anger at a road scheme. So many members of the public have described it as a total waste of public money. The huge tailbacks are hurting the people of Ballykelly, Greysteel, Londonderry and everywhere in between. With recent news indicating that the scheme had been extended into early 2026, it is incumbent on the Department to act now to put measures in place to mitigate further daily delays for fed-up drivers.

I ask the Sinn Féin Minister why the completion of the Clooney Road active travel scheme cannot be done in the evenings. Unlike other traffic schemes carried out in the evenings that subsequently met with objections due to late-night noise, the scheme does not impact on any populated residential areas and would therefore not face similar public anger. The public anger in the region is palpable. Public representatives are in post to act in the best interests of the public. The Minister's Department said recently that it will assess the traffic management: the Sinn Féin Minister needs to do more. She needs to listen to the people of the region and act urgently. Rather than have more active travel schemes, we need our potholes fixed.

Mr Donnelly: It really was a summer for sport on the Antrim coast. In my East Antrim constituency, Glenarm held the thirty-third All-Ireland Coastal Rowing Championships. The event returned to the North for the first time in 12 years and delivered one of the most successful weekends in memory. It was entirely volunteer-led, delivered by the Antrim Coast Rowing Association and the Irish Coastal Rowing Federation, both of which put in over a year of work to make it happen. Five hundred and fifty crews from 36 clubs travelled from across the island, bringing with them their families, supporters and spectators. Ten thousand people attended across the weekend. The impact was felt throughout the village and along the coast.

The scale of the event also drew significant media attention, with two featured pieces on BBC News; coverage across local and regional press; and pieces on Radio Foyle and Radio Ulster. The Department for Communities featured the occasion on social media and in two promotional videos that were full of positive reflections from members of the clubs who had travelled. They praised the organisation, the setting and the welcome that they had received, and they promised to return. Every local business felt it. Accommodation was booked out all along the coast, and there was a real buzz from the first race until the final medal.

The impact goes way beyond money and promotion and right to the heart of communities, not just in my constituency but across the island. Local clubs were central to that success. Castle Rowing Club made history this year as the largest club in the competition, entering a record number of crews and taking home 13 medals. The Whitehead Coastal Rowing Club crews added seven more medals, with Carnlough Rowing Club securing three and Glens Coastal Rowing Club and Glenarm Rowing Club getting two each. Clubs have already told me that the event has generated a huge increase in interest for next season, which is an amazingly positive result for our community.

This year's efforts were supported by a Mid and East Antrim Borough Council grant that made a real difference but did not cover all the costs. Ongoing support is essential, if we want to see such volunteer-led events, with real community impact, return. Locally, Castle, which is one of the biggest clubs on the island, has struggled to get facilities for years, and newer clubs such as Glens need support to get equipment. Clubs such as Carnlough, which has been around since the 1800s, need support to retain their legacy and heritage.

The success of this year should not be the exception, nor should it take another 12 years for the championships to come back. With the chance that it may come back in 2027, we need to use the time to invest in the sport and our clubs, especially when they can offer our communities so much and bring so much positive recognition to our coastline through such events. I thank everyone who made it happen. Our local community did us proud. I have no doubt that the legacy of the championships will last for many years.

Mr Gaston: I begin my remarks by reading into the record an open letter that Mr Paul Toombs sent to the Justice Minister last week:

lifted —

who was murdered —

words —

Doug Beattie called Mrs Long's words an "appalling contribution" that:

My North Antrim colleague, Mr Frew, described her position as "diabolical". I agree with both statements.

My question today is this: do the DUP and the Ulster Unionists still have confidence in the Justice Minister? I remind the House that Mrs Long is unique in the Executive. Mrs Long is Minister of Justice because the Assembly voted to make her Minister of Justice. The record shows that only Jim Allister opposed her appointment. What now?

Are the DUP and the Ulster Unionists happy to sustain a Justice Minister who cannot grasp the difference between a victim and a victim maker? Act or own it.

In championing Stormont, you own a First Minister who said that "there was no alternative" to IRA murder. You own an Irish Language Commissioner who was imposed upon unionists. You own a Justice Minister who equates terrorists with their victims. Own it or do something about it.

Yesterday, in the Business Office, I lodged a motion of no confidence in the Justice Minister. If colleagues agree that she should not hold office, go and sign my motion, or, indeed, table your own, and I will sign it. If you do nothing, you will own —

Mr Speaker: The Member's time is up.

Mr Gaston: — yet another failed feature of the Stormont Executive.

Mr Gildernew: Bhí Seachtain Deonaithe Orgán 2025 ar siúl an tseachtain seo caite; seachtain a dtugtar deis dúinn lena linn ár ndúthracht a athneartú do chinneadh a shábhálann beatha daoine.

Is mór agam cúis an deonaithe orgán, nó ó bhuail mé le Dáithí Mag Gabhann agus lena mhuintir sa bhliain 2020, is mór agus is rómhór a chuaigh sé i bhfeidhm orm. Gheall muid dóibh go ndéanfaimis gach a raibh ar ár gcumas leis an dlí nua a chur i bhfeidhm, agus tá mé bródúil go ndearna muid, chomh maith le daoine eile, an gealltanas sin a chomhlíonadh.

Cuireadh dlí Dháithí i bhfeidhm, agus is céim ollmhór chun tosaigh é. Ná bíodh aon amhras ann: tá dlí Dháithí ag sábháil beatha daoine.

Ní hé sin deireadh an scéil, áfach: tá 163 dhuine ar ár liosta feithimh ó bhí anuraidh ann. Ó chuir an Roinn Sláinte stad sealadach le feachtais feasachta poiblí faoi láthair, tá sé ríthábhachtach go n-úsáidimidne, mar ionadaithe poiblí, ár nglór agus ár ngléas cainte le cúiseanna a shábhálann beatha daoine a chur chun cinn.

Bhí dhá ghníomhphointe ann i Seachtain Deonaithe Orgán 2025: ní mór do dhaoine smaoineamh ar chlárú mar dheontóirí orgán; agus ní mór do dhaoine a mianta maidir lena n-orgáin a chur in iúl dá ngaolta.

Mr T Buchanan: The A5 has been the subject of much debate in the House in recent weeks and months, and it bears mentioning again today. The ongoing delay as we await the outcome of the appeal by the Minister and her Department against the court judgement is causing uncertainty for farm businesses and much concern for the families who have lost loved ones on the road.

We can never mention the A5 without, first and foremost, thinking of the families who, today, have a silent voice and an empty chair in their home. Every day, as we travel that road, we are reminded of the devastation caused to many families, and our sympathies are with them today. However, there is a second set of victims who are so often overlooked, and that is the farming community. The livelihoods of landowners and farm families have been placed in limbo for well over a decade, with third- and fourth-generation farming families facing great uncertainty for their future business. Their lands were vested and groundwork undertaken, which saw land left in such a state that it is unable to be farmed and disruption above measure caused to many of those businesses.

Driving through the constituency of West Tyrone, it is devastating to see the hundreds of acres of farmland that has been left in such a deplorable condition. No one can deny that the A5 project is a key economic driver for the west, bringing with it regional balance, better connectivity and employment. However, our farmers, our businesses, our victims and our local people need clarity on the future of the project. Millions of pounds have already been spent, and all that we see for it is the devastation to hundreds of acres of farmland.

That is not good enough and is totally unacceptable.

It has to be recognised that the handling of the scheme by the Minister and her Department has been deeply flawed, and seeking information from the Department that will provide clarity for the farming community is like trying to take blood from a stone. That is totally unacceptable. The Minister must come to the House, step up to the plate and provide clarity on the issue.

Of course, we also have the Agriculture Minister, and there has been little engagement by him with farm businesses. He has been so keen to set net zero targets, supported by Sinn Féin and the SDLP, that the project has been brought to a halt. When will they come back to the House with proposals to reduce those targets so that such projects can proceed? If it happened in any other business —

Mr Speaker: The Member's time is up.

Mr T Buchanan: — or any other political jurisdiction, heads would roll.

Mr Speaker: Ms Armstrong, will you confine your remarks to two minutes, please? Thank you.

Ms K Armstrong: Due to the state of my voice today, I will not take too long.

Tomorrow is 1 October. It is amazing how quickly the years pass by, but starting tomorrow is Baby Loss Awareness Month. I talk about it, because, as others have heard in the House, it is important to recognise the number of children who are born asleep or too early. It is important to break the silence about baby loss. I have been open about my history and my 14 children. Sadly, 13 have not made it to be with us, but I have one very special daughter, and I hold her close to my heart. However, for all the families and all those mums and dads who do not get to hold their children to their hearts but hold them in their hearts because they are not with them, it is important that, this month, we take the time to recognise the hurt and pain and the one in four pregnancies that end without a baby.

It is sad that October is the month in which this happens. It is when the dark nights start to roll in and we start to think about wrapping up warm. It is the time when we want to be with family, but, for some of us who have been through baby loss, not being able to talk about that loss means that there is a silent grief that causes a lot of pain and anguish. This month, I ask you all to look to your loved ones and ask them how they are. How long has it been? What would their name be? Tell them that you are sorry for their loss. We are not alone. There are many of us out there, and we share the grief together.

Mr O'Toole (The Chairperson of the Committee for Finance): I beg to move

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

Mr O'Toole: The Committee welcomes the fact that the Bill has been published, as we did when it was introduced and at Second Stage. In tabling the motion, the Committee sees the new date of 27 March 2026 as a limit rather than a target, and I underline that point for both Bills that we will discuss. I am keen for the Committee not only to do its scrutiny rigorously and to have the time to do that but to do it expeditiously. The Committee aims to complete its report on the Bill without any undue delay prior to that date.

I will not set out the provisions of the Bill, beyond noting that the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council was established on a non-statutory basis in March 2021 as part of the New Decade, New Approach agreement. The rationale behind the council is that it:

our public finances. It was:

The Bill was introduced to the Assembly on 23 June 2025. It completed Second Stage on Tuesday 1 July, with the Committee Stage beginning the day after, on Wednesday 2 July, immediately prior to the summer recess.

As Members are aware, Standing Order 33(2) states:

Without an extension to the Committee Stage of the Fiscal Council Bill, the last day of Committee Stage will be Tuesday 7 October. That is next Tuesday, when the Committee would be required to lay its report on the Bill. To meet that deadline, the Committee would be likely to have to forgo the appropriate level of scrutiny of the Bill, which may well result in the Committee receiving criticism for not sufficiently scrutinising the Bill.

On the establishment of the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council in 2021, its chair and members developed a communications and engagement plan to clearly articulate the remit of the Fiscal Council and engage with relevant stakeholders, including through consultations with the Minister of Finance, the Finance Committee, other Members of the Assembly, government officials and economic commentators. The council had its third or fourth — I do not know which — annual conference the week before last. I encourage any Members who want to attend one of those conferences to get in touch. There will not be another one for some time, obviously, but it is doing good work in communicating its work and its role.

As the policy consultation carried out by the Fiscal Council was extensive, no further consultation was carried out. It is imperative, therefore, that key stakeholders be approached to give evidence on the Bill. The stakeholders are time-constrained individuals and organisations, so the Committee must offer them a level of flexibility in giving evidence and appearing in front of it. That represents a certain risk, as the Committee must have scope to consider responses to the call for evidence, and there may be a need to call further witnesses.

Additionally, to allow the Committee to deal with any issues raised, the extension to the Committee Stage must recognise the Halloween and Christmas recesses. It is also important to reflect the Committee's wider work programme, which includes, we hope, scrutiny of the first multi-year Budget in a decade and supporting other Committees in their scrutiny of the five-year business plans; the Administrative and Financial Provisions Bill, which we will talk about next; an inquiry into Civil Service reform; and several other bits of pressing scrutiny. The calculation of a Bill's scrutiny timetable generally includes an eight-week call for evidence with, hopefully, written submissions and survey responses being received and a number of in-person evidence sessions at Committee meetings. Sufficient time needs to be built into the timetable, particularly given issues that may arise in oral evidence that require further investigation. As well as thorough consideration of the Bill, the other business of the Committee needs to be progressed in a timely manner.

Members will be aware that the Committee will be scrutinising simultaneously the Administrative and Financial Provisions Bill, so, by requesting that the Assembly support the extension, the Committee is asking that Members give the Committee the flexibility that we need to discharge our statutory scrutiny role with respect to the Bill. At its meeting on 17 September, the Committee agreed the motion to extend the Committee Stage along with a revised Committee timetable. We believe that the extension is necessary in order to give the Bill the time and scrutiny that it deserves, but I underline that, in my role as Committee Chair, I am strongly of the view that it is a limit, not a target. Rather than seeking any further extension, I do not expect or want to come anywhere near the Chamber again to do anything but debate amendments. We commend the motion to the House and seek Members' approval.

Mr O'Toole (The Chairperson of the Committee for Finance): I beg to move

Mr Speaker: The Business Committee has agreed that there should be no time limit on the debate. I call the Chairperson to open the debate on the motion.

Mr O'Toole: The Committee welcomes the Administrative and Financial Provisions Bill. Such Bills come along once in a while, but we have not had one here for more than a decade. For that reason, this is a more substantial one than most. The Committee sees the proposed new date of 27 March 2026 to end the Committee Stage as a limit rather than a target, as we did with the Fiscal Council Bill. We aim to complete our report on the Administrative and Financial Provisions Bill without any undue delay prior to that date.

I will not go through the provisions of the Bill beyond noting that, as I have just said, financial provisions Bills, which deal with administrative matters or give Departments powers to spend money or levy fees in certain ways, come along at semi-regular intervals to deal with routine financial matters that require amendment to governing legislation. During debates on Estimates documents, many of you will have heard complaints about the use of the black box, which is a device to use Budget Acts to authorise spending where no free-standing legislative provision exists. These Bills are designed to tidy up those anomalies and to minimise the use of what is called the "sole authority" of the Budget Act.

In developing the Bill, the Department of Finance sought inputs from other Departments. A number of Departments indicated miscellaneous administrative matters that they wished to have included in the Bill. Therefore, the Bill gives effect — this is where it is different from the Fiscal Council Bill — to policy proposals from DAERA, DFC, DFE, DFI, TEO and DE, as well as policy proposals from DOF itself. The Bill was introduced in the Assembly on Monday 23 June 2025. It completed its Second Stage, as with the Fiscal Council Bill, on Tuesday 1 July 2025 and moved to Committee Stage on 2 July 2025, just before recess.

I will not read Standing Order 33(2) into the record again, because I did it for the Fiscal Council Bill and I am sure that Members can refer back to what Standing Orders say about Committee extensions. As I said, however, without extending this Committee Stage too, it would end next Tuesday, 7 October, and we would not have enough time to scrutinise the Bill in detail. We would have to forgo oral evidence sessions, and neither I nor the Committee thinks that we would have sufficient time to scrutinise all of the substantial measures in the Bill. Many are technical, but they still require further detailed scrutiny, while some are not that technical. Not seeking an extension to Committee Stage would, quite possibly, result in criticism of the Committee and, indeed, the broader Assembly for not sufficiently scrutinising the Bill.

It has already become apparent to the Committee that the clause that deals with the transfer of the procurement and management of external auditors for the Audit Office from the Department of Finance to the Assembly's Audit Committee is a subject of live dispute between the Audit Committee and the Department of Finance. That is just one issue on which further evidence needs to be taken. We need to understand exactly the appropriateness of that power. The Audit Committee does not believe that it has the capacity or, indeed, the vires to undertake that role — the Bill would give it the vires — while the Department believes that the Audit Committee does or should have the capacity. The Audit Committee has sought legal advice on the matter, and the Committee for Finance will do the same. Part of the purpose of our extended Committee Stage will be to allow us to consider that advice and work towards a resolution. Additionally, the extension will allow the Committee to deal with any issues raised by other Committees. We have written to all of the other relevant Statutory Committees to ask them for their views on the issues raised by the Administrative and Financial Provisions Bill.

As with the Fiscal Council Bill, an extension would recognise the Halloween and Christmas recesses and the Committee's broader work programme, which includes the Fiscal Council Bill; Budget scrutiny, including, we hope, a multi-year Budget; and work on Civil Service reform; as well as all the ongoing other work that Statutory Committees have to deal with. We have a busy schedule.

I listed the calculations for Bill scrutiny that Committees include in their schedule in the previous motion, so I will not list them all again. While requesting that the Assembly supports the extension, however, the Committee asks that Members give us the flexibility that we need to discharge our statutory scrutiny role in respect of the Bill.

At our meeting on 7 September, the Committee agreed the motion to extend Committee Stage. We believe that it is necessary, but I reiterate and underline that the extension date is a deadline and a limit rather than a target. As Chair, I am very much committed to that. The Committee commends the motion and asks the House to approve it.

I will now make a couple of brief comments in a party capacity. The Administrative and Financial Provisions Bill is extremely important. We passed it at Second Reading because it is important that we look at some of the powers being taken here. There is a range of things that the public will expect us to have scrutinised. I will say gently to members of other Committees that they should not expect the Finance Committee either to simply wave the Bill through or to do their job of scrutiny for them.

I will pick a few aspects out of the Bill. The Minister happens to be in the Chamber for another item of business, but I am not going to ask her to respond. The Bill, however, gives her Department the power to grade tourist facilities and to levy certain charges on tourism providers for training. It gives TEO sweeping powers to spend money to end violence against women and girls. That is a huge and important subject, but we need to understand what those powers are. The Bill contains powers to address housing association fraud. It also gives the Department for Infrastructure the power to levy charges on SmartPasses, which is somewhat interesting for Members and people who are over the age of 60.

Those are really big powers, so it is really important that we scrutinise them. We know that we have had a lot of people criticise the Assembly's capacity and ability to scrutinise — I say that diplomatically — so we need to get this one right. I therefore say gently to members of all Committees and Members from all parties that the Bill needs to be scrutinised properly and that it is not just the Committee for Finance's job to do so. I beg the indulgence of the Speaker to make that point. I ask the Assembly to pass the motion.

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

Mr Honeyford: 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 in which to propose and 10 minutes in which to make a winding-up speech. An amendment has been selected and is published on the Marshalled List, so the Business Committee has agreed that 15 minutes will be added to the total time for the debate. David, please open the debate on the motion.

Mr Honeyford: Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. The latest figures, released this week, show that almost 25,000, or 10%, of our young people between the ages of 16 and 24 are not in education, employment or training (NEET). They are without hope and have had their futures put on hold. Rather than table one on culture wars or the constitutional battles that we have week in, week out in this place, Alliance tabled this motion, which speaks to our core values of social justice, reconciliation, building a shared society, working to share this island and just making life better for everyone. To do that, we cannot leave 25,000 young people behind. It is an issue that the Assembly must tackle.

It is fundamentally wrong to complain that our young people are lazy. We heard that narrative earlier this morning. If, however, we are not going to give them the help and the hand up that they need in order to align their skills with the requirements of business and industry to get opportunities, we cannot move forward. From examples across the border — very close to us — we can see that far more people move into employment if the right connections are in place or built to enable them to do so.

I will provide some context for our economy here. Our economy is crying out for an additional 5,000 skilled workers each year just to stand still, yet we are failing our young people and our business community. Alliance therefore tabled this motion as the party of opportunities. We want to see the region flourish. We want people to have opportunities, skills and qualifications. Their not having them is a barrier that must be addressed. Prosperity must be shared. Everybody must be given opportunities to better themselves. Job opportunities, skills and social justice for all must be delivered.

As industry moves quickly with the advancement of AI and advanced manufacturing, it is becoming increasingly difficult for our young generation to secure training and employment opportunities, because opportunities are either limited or in high demand. No young person should be left without hope or have their future blocked by barriers, and no business should be held back by a broken skills system. Skills are the foundation of any economy, and an ever-growing skills base is vital if we are to deliver the economic and social transformation that Northern Ireland needs. We have to create opportunities, give hope and fundamentally ensure that we stop leaving young people behind. We must make sure that delivery opens up pathways for young people from disadvantaged backgrounds, empowering them and offering them a better future. We have to remove barriers for people who did not pass GSCE maths and English at the age of 16 to give them a future and enable them to hope for better. This must include people with additional needs. I commend Alma White on the work that she has done with Caleb's Cause to help a generation of young people who also need our support.

That is why Alliance is calling for the extension of what already exists in the South and what our local business organisations have been calling for. Let us learn from what works and implement it here. Alliance wants to see the Skillnet Ireland model implemented in Northern Ireland, working together North/South as needed. That is a flexible model that links business and industry with colleges, universities and schools. It is based around a sector or a geographical area. Having a Skillnet Ireland model would enable cross-border, all-island economic cooperation, and, as I said, we should work on a North/South basis to help remove some of the mobility and skills issues that we hear about repeatedly in the Economy Committee and that arise when somebody lives on one side of the border and the business is on the other side, whichever way round it is. We must focus on making sure that we put the appropriate training courses in place to match what industry needs, thus creating opportunities and empowering people.

I must note that I am concerned about the approach of the Department for the Economy and the Department of Education to working together in this area. That concern comes from a recent Public Accounts Committee (PAC) investigation into skills, which found complete breakdown in this area, with fragmentation and substantial amounts of money being wasted through duplication. One of the recommendations was about ensuring that funding for further and higher education bodies is directed towards the provision of courses that address the skills need and adapt quickly to provide the growth areas in our economy. By further working with the Department of Education, the Department for the Economy must do more to raise awareness and incentivise the uptake of those courses to reduce the skills gap. What the motion calls for would deliver that specific action and join the work of the two Departments so that we are not wasting money and resources by duplicating different courses at different times for the same people. Local business organisations are calling for that. NI Chamber has been leading the shouts and campaigning for that, and we are calling for it to be implemented right now.

I want to give an example of how this would work. I recently met a large IT company in Belfast that employs graduates. Once they are employed, the company has to put them on an intense internal training course for 12 weeks. Why is that? It is because their degree does not cover what the business needs. There are other examples. Businesses tell me all the time that they want to create apprenticeships but do not have a link to a training course in a technical college to enable students to get the qualification that the business needs. What is currently being done needs to be adapted to meet what businesses need. Doing what we have always done will not cut it. The skills gap must be addressed urgently. Businesses are calling for that, and our young people deserve it.

Alliance is calling on the Minister for the Economy to establish a talent-developing agency that is modelled on Skillnet Ireland and other proven European approaches. By doing so — this is at the heart of the motion — we will create better opportunities for young people that deliver prosperity and give hope and, ultimately, deliver for our workforce and local employers and raise standards of living for our population.

This is about putting more money into people's pockets, giving them opportunities and allowing them to work in jobs in which they can thrive and grow; a shared future; a reconciled and practical example of a shared island, delivering social justice — integration that delivers better.

I cannot support the SDLP amendment, as it changes the call of the motion by removing the extension of Skillnet Ireland to Northern Ireland. I have addressed how it would and should work on an all-island basis. The same system should work, but the amendment simply says that the Minister should pass responsibility to a new body that does not exist. Importantly, there are no plans in the South even to make that body exist, and so the amendment puts ideology in front of the betterment of the people. Alliance wants that betterment right now.

Sharing this island is fundamental to me and to Alliance, but it means providing leadership and government here and now to deliver what our young people and business community need right now. That cannot be ignored or bypassed.

Ms McLaughlin: I beg to move the following amendment:

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Sinéad. You have 10 minutes to propose and five minutes to wind. All other Members who are called to speak will have five minutes. Please open the debate on the amendment.

Ms McLaughlin: I thank the Member for proposing the motion, and I welcome the opportunity to speak on this important issue, which goes to the heart of Northern Ireland's economic future: how do we equip our young people with the skills that they need to succeed in a changing economy?

We should begin by recognising that, in recent years, investment has delivered important job creation in Northern Ireland. That is welcome, but, if we are also honest, it is not enough. Too many opportunities are still being missed; too many people are left behind; and too often investment is not regionally balanced. If we are serious about delivering not only prosperity but social justice and reconciliation, every community in Northern Ireland must share in the benefits of growth. Opportunity cannot be confined to the few, and investment cannot be concentrated in one corner of our region.

Invest NI has an important role to play in securing investment for the North, but it must also be accountable for delivering it to all our regions. That is why the resignation of Kieran Kennedy from its board should concern all of us. He has made it clear that he felt that the north-west was being discriminated against and that the organisation was not committed to achieving regional balance.

Our higher education institutions are central to that mission. Across the island, in Derry, Belfast, Coleraine, Jordanstown, Donegal and Galway, our university colleges are not just centres of learning but economic engines, hubs of research and innovation and drivers of social progress. However, they are under enormous strain, and they are being asked to do more with less. The Department for the Economy too often skirts round its responsibilities, and the crisis of funding is real.

That cannot and must not be solved by raising tuition fees and shifting the burden to our students. The SDLP led the charge against those proposals, and we continue to oppose them. Instead, the Minister must bring forward a sustainable funding model that supports our universities, protects access and allows our young people to thrive. The ongoing review of higher education is critical and must be used to set out a bold vision, not to manage decline. Yet, as we debate this, 19,000 of our young people in Northern Ireland are not in education, employment or training. That is 19,000 lives and futures. It is not just a statistic; it is a moral and social failure of this place.

We need urgent action to expand apprenticeships, strengthen pathways into further education and break down the barriers that stop so many of our young people reaching their potential. Alongside that, we urgently need progress on the careers portal, which is being designed to link education, skills and employment. It must be delivered as soon as possible so that young people can see clear pathways from study to work and so that employers can have the confidence that their skill needs will be met. That is why the expansion of Magee university to 10,000 students remains a priority for us. It is not simply about numbers; it is about transforming the economy and society of the north-west. It is about saying that young people's future does not have to be elsewhere but can be built at home.

Every day in my constituency and throughout Northern Ireland I see businesses and higher education working together. In my city, Alchemy Technology Services is creating meaningful careers that power economic and social recovery. Allstate's future innovators competition has given 3,500 young people in Derry and Strabane a chance to build vital digital skills. That is exactly the collaboration that we need. We must also be clear, however, that individual businesses cannot do it alone. That is where government must step up. The SDLP agrees with the Member who moved the motion that the best way forward is to establish a talent development agency. Mr Honeyford highlighted the work of Skillnet Ireland, and I agree with him. It is an exemplar organisation that steers and supports skills training programmes in partnership with the education sector and industry. Skillnet has a really good record of improving competitiveness, productivity and innovation in Irish businesses.

Our amendment:

and with higher education institutions "across the island of Ireland" to create:

That could be Skillnet Ireland; we are not prescriptive about it. It is important that that happen, because the challenges that we face as an economy do not stop at the border. Skills gaps and business needs do not stop at the border. We already have economic corridors that need to be unlocked. It is time that we created educational corridors too. In the north-west, there is no reason why Ulster University at Magee and Atlantic Technological University (ATU) in Donegal cannot work hand in hand to develop the skills of the future workforce; in fact, they do, and they do it effectively.

Mr Honeyford: I appreciate your giving way. I agree with everything that you have said to this point, Sinéad, but was there anything in what I said or any part of the motion that says that we would not work together to deliver for people on a cross-border basis?

Ms McLaughlin: No, but your motion refers to creating:

but we are saying that we need:

That could be Skillnet, because it is there, it is an exemplar, and it delivers best practice. There are other talent agencies throughout Europe that do really good work and work across jurisdictions in order to meet the needs of businesses in those countries.

That kind of cooperation is not really a luxury or even an aspiration; it is a necessity. Our businesses are crying out for workers. Our hospitality sector is struggling. Brexit has made recruitment even harder, particularly for the skilled labour workforce. If we fail to invest in our people through, for example, apprenticeships, further education, higher education and cross-border collaboration, we will continue to hold ourselves back. The truth is that the island of Ireland has extraordinary potential, but, too often, we choose to neglect the opportunities that lie right here at our back door and across the border. That has been a fatal mistake and one that we can no longer afford to make.

By creating an all-island talent development agency — you can call it "Skillnet Ireland" if you want — we can ensure that skills development is aligned with what businesses need and give our young people the best chance of building a career here at home. We can send a clear message that regional balance and cross-border partnerships are not optional extras but essential elements of our future success.

I urge colleagues to support our amendment and to see it as an enhancement of the substantive motion. Let us commit not just to more investment and more apprenticeships and to funding our universities properly but to doing those things in a way that works across the island, supports every region and ensures that no young person is left behind. Now is not the time to fail the 19,000 young people who are waiting for us to act. It is time to unlock the full potential of Magee campus, to protect our universities and colleges and to ensure that investment is fair and regionally balanced. It is time to deliver a careers portal and to seize the opportunities presented by an all-island approach to skills, education and the economy. That is the vision that the SDLP offers through the amendment.

Mr Delargy: I thank the proposers of the motion and of the amendment. The conversation has been good so far. The keyword that has jumped out at me from it is "collaboration". That is collaboration in the North between the Department for the Economy and the Department of Education; collaboration with employers, schools and colleges; and collaboration across the country on making sure that there is a role for the Government in the South and for agencies. We know that there are regional disparities, particularly in border communities such as mine.

A few months ago, the Assembly passed a motion calling on the Department of Education to reform its funding model for sixth-form colleges. That is the crux of the issue, because, fundamentally, if students in schools do not have the same access to further education and other opportunities as they do to staying in school, skills gaps are created and the skills gaps that are already there are enhanced. That issue needs to be progressed. We need to continue to work on that, and I appreciate that the Committee has been working on that as well. Schools are compelled to keep students because of the current funding model. If we were to change that, it would enhance schools' ability to offer more focused courses and enhance our further education colleges' offering and ability to enhance the skill sets that are there. The Committee has also heard from colleges and employers who have difficulty accessing schools. As a Committee, we need to do a lot of work on that, because we know that a lot of the new, emerging jobs come from outside the traditional routes. Engagement with employers and innovators is key to building on that.

Further education was omitted from the motion. That was probably unintentional. The motion focuses more on higher education than on further education. We need to be cognisant of that, going forward, because we all recognise the role that colleges play in our communities, particularly in addressing skill gaps. Skills academies build on and bring that as well. I speak from my experience with FinTrU, Alchemy Technology — which Sinéad mentioned — and other companies in Derry that have benefited from the responsiveness of the colleges in bringing forward those academies to address the skills gaps.

As many of you know, I completed a SKILL UP course on productivity, because, when I came into this role, that is something that I was not sure of. That proves that SKILL UP can be useful for people across all sectors and of all ages: young people, people who are in part-time employment, people who are in full-time employment and, as has been said, people who are yet to be employed and are on that journey. It is important to recognise that there are opportunities for people across our society but particularly for those who are struggling and are outside that system at the moment. That is one piece of work that has been brought forward to address that skills gap, but another piece that has been working really well is higher-level apprenticeships. I regularly meet businesses and students who tell me how well they are getting on with those. I totally understand and appreciate what the motion and amendment bring forward, but we have to appreciate that a huge amount of work already goes on in our schools, colleges, communities and universities.

Recently, we have seen the launch of quite a few tech clusters in the north-west. Huge amounts of work have been ongoing between ATU, North West Regional College, Education and Training Boards (ETBs) and Ulster University. We need to foster and encourage that, and that speaks to the motion. The digital hubs will increasingly become a part of that as we move forward.

Members will know — it is in the motion — about the all-Ireland work that Sinn Féin already does as a party. I have worked extensively on trying to get alignment with Central Applications Office (CAO) result dates and ensure easier access to the South for students from the North and vice versa. The reality is that we have an all-Ireland economy. We have similar skill gaps, and we need to address those on an all-Ireland basis. I will support the motion and the amendment, because it is important that we look at this in an all-Ireland context and at the skills gaps that we have across the bases here.

Mr Brett: I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this important debate. The manner in which Members have contributed so far reflects the consensus that exists on our Committee. We want to see the best possible opportunities for all our young people in every corner of Northern Ireland. Yes, that includes the north-west, Sinéad: 100%.

As Mr Honeyford said, at the heart of the motion is the simple truth that, if we want to continue to grow our economy, we must invest in our people. Northern Ireland has been fortunate in attracting significant investment in recent years, ranging from advanced manufacturing to fintech and from aerospace to the creative industries. New jobs and opportunities have come to every corner of Northern Ireland, but opportunities are too often missed by our young people because the skills are not in place.

The statistics that have been outlined by all previous contributors are stark. According to the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA), 25,000 young people in Northern Ireland are not in education, employment or training. That is more than one in eight young people between the ages of 16 and 24. That is not a sustainable position, because behind those figures are lives on hold and the potential of those young people being wasted. They are not feeling their actual value and are unable to utilise their full potential. At the same time, nearly 40,000 job vacancies were reported here in 2022, with more than a third left unfilled due to a lack of skills or qualifications among applicants. That mishmash must be addressed urgently.

It was the DUP Minister who delivered the 10X skill strategy, which set out a road map for how we could upskill and retain our workforce to meet the demands of the modern economy. Already, some contributors have articulated some of the outworkings of that strategy. It recognised the need to rebalance education towards STEM — the Minister of Education continued that through last week's announcement of additional bursaries for teachers who are in prime and important subjects — expand technical and professional pathways and embed a culture of lifelong learning. I encourage everyone, be they as young as Mr Delargy or older, to take advantage of the SKILL UP programme. The Member for East Antrim who will speak later also engaged in one of those courses, which are supported by the Department for the Economy and are an excellent resource.

Regrettably, however, the Northern Ireland Audit Office (NIAO) and the Public Accounts Committee have highlighted the slow pace of delivery of that strategy and pointed to a lack of alignment between Departments, which Mr Delargy has articulated in this debate and regularly at Committee. The issue needs to be fixed, but, in our view, the answer is not to abandon the 10X strategy or create another new layer of agencies and structures in an already crowded landscape; instead, we should focus on implementing the strategy properly and coming forward with additional support mechanisms for how we can do that. That is why we support the Alliance motion.

We also need to look at our apprenticeship scheme in Northern Ireland. Madam Principal Deputy Speaker, I am sure that you, like me, are contacted almost weekly by young people who are unable to secure an apprenticeship place. It is now a case of it being not what you know but who you know. Apprentices tend to be those who have family connections or know someone in that trade. As a Committee, we need to continue to focus on how we ensure that all young people have the opportunity to get the apprenticeship that they deserve, and I know that the Minister is committed to that.

We will support the motion. That is how we build a stronger economy and a fairer society and ensure that Northern Ireland works for everyone.

Ms D Armstrong: The Ulster Unionist Party wants to see a prosperous Northern Ireland where the economy works for everyone by providing access to good jobs, fair wages and opportunities that are extended to all. Skills development is key. It is a natural conduit between potential and opportunity. When skills match business needs, everyone benefits: the individual, the employer and Northern Ireland as a whole.

It is right to acknowledge the success of Invest NI, which has made significant progress in the past year. Invest NI has invested £631 million in our economy across over 2,000 projects, exceeding its targets by 20%. Those projects are expected to create 3,020 new high-quality jobs across Northern Ireland. In 2024-25, 73% of those jobs paid above the Northern Ireland private-sector median wage. Yes, many of the jobs stem from existing linkages between further and higher education and industry, but that is tangible evidence of the valuable collaborative work that is being done between our education institutions and the business sector.

According to the UK employer skills survey 2024, however, about 33,400 employees in Northern Ireland have skills gaps. Employers have told me that graduates often lack sufficient practical skills for the roles that they enter and therefore require significant induction training. That suggests a clear gap in identifying and developing on-the-job aptitudes, even among our graduates. We have also heard that 25,000 young people, which is equivalent to 12·4% of all 16- to 24-year-olds in Northern Ireland, are not in education, employment or training. We want to see that potential developed.

The Ulster Unionist Party can see merit in the motion, but we cannot support the amendment, because what it proposes would add yet another layer of unnecessary bureaucracy. Are we not in danger of diverting scarce resources in order to create yet more agencies that would replace local enterprise partnerships and the labour market partnerships that were established under the previous Minister's subregional economic plan? Any new learning or initiatives to support skills development in Northern Ireland should feed into those established local partnerships and build on local knowledge and collaboration.

We already have the Northern Ireland Skills Council (NISC) in further education and the Hospitality and Tourism Skills (HATS) initiative in tourism. We call for collaboration between the Department for the Economy and the Department of Education to develop the careers portal and take that work forward.

A quick search of the Shared Prosperity Fund for Northern Ireland reveals that at least 18 agencies or programmes across the Province support skills development for the economically inactive: 16- to 24-year-olds from disadvantaged backgrounds; women; the over-50s; and those with disabilities or health conditions. The programmes offer flexible upskilling and training. That is not to say that we cannot learn from the outworkings of Skillnet Ireland, which supports over 18,000 businesses in the Republic, but why deviate from our largest jobs market, which is the United Kingdom?

We must support those who are disconnected from work or education. We cannot accept persistent skills gaps when employers are crying out for talent. We must use the resources that are already in place and build a skills ecosystem that is rooted in local engagement and that targets those most in need.

Ms Sheerin: Like others, I support the motion and welcome its coming before the House. It is on an issue that we all deal with when we are contacted by constituents, and it is important that we highlight the role of Alma White's campaign for support for young people with special and additional educational needs, because that support often falls between two stools.

My colleague Mr Delargy outlined how the Department is working on that, and we want to see progress made. Change is needed to the Department of Education funding models under which our schools are almost pressured into keeping on for A levels students who perhaps know that doing A levels is not the right fit for them. I commend schools, particularly those in my constituency, that think outside the box and engage with local businesses to show our young people opportunities beyond the traditional academic route. I think particularly of St Colm's High School in Ballinascreen, which, last year, held a job fair. It invited local employers and got young people talking to people whom they will potentially work with in future. It was about showing young people that there are different routes to success and different career paths open to them and that it is not always about following the GCSE, A-level and university route, which often does not work for people.

I also highlight the work of South West College (SWC) in the Mid Ulster District Council area. It does a lot of work on apprenticeships. I was delighted to attend its open day back in the spring, and meet so many really inspiring young people who are refreshing in their outlook, taking the bull by the horns, learning new trades and getting into fields of work that were not even in existence when I was at school, such as robotics, AI and different technologies, and learning how to adapt and develop their skills in all that.

I will not repeat everything that has already been said. This has been a collegial debate. We are all on the same page. We all want to see our young people afforded more opportunities and improve their skills. In that regard, I support the motion and the amendment.

Ms Brownlee: I am delighted to speak on the motion. Whilst I am not a member of the Committee for the Economy, the Public Accounts Committee discussed the issue and had an inquiry. It was extremely interesting. Recently, we got the memoranda of reply (MOR), which was also very interesting.

Obviously, we really want to build a thriving society in Northern Ireland. Addressing the skills gap for our young people and businesses is, of course, at the heart of that. We have had significant investment into Northern Ireland. Despite that, opportunities continue to be missed. The skills gap remains wide and, in many cases, is not closing. As part of the Public Accounts Committee inquiry into skills, we heard very powerful and concerning evidence from the Youth Assembly. One of the things that really stuck out for me was the fact that the young people did not know what skills the Northern Ireland economy needs, and that the careers advice that they receive, whilst it is clearly well intentioned, is inconsistent across the region. Whilst some schools offer really good careers advice, we saw that others really lack the capacity and resources to do that. That will have a massive impact on the economy further down the line, and especially on those young people.

We also discovered that there is a clear mismatch between supply and demand, with many young people applying for courses that are already oversaturated whilst the critical skills areas, where jobs are waiting, remain short of applicants. Another really clear takeaway struck me. After the discussion with the Youth Assembly, we sat down as a Committee and talked. We could not clearly define the skills that Northern Ireland needs to thrive. That was a real wake-up call for us all. Regardless of how many strategies that we have or action plans that we write, the simple question is this: how do we communicate what skills are needed to build our future here and for Northern Ireland to thrive?

I have been a huge advocate of the Skill Up programme. I took part in the women in leadership course. I was provided with professional coaching. I would not have been able to access that otherwise. I was shocked at what courses are available, the level of those courses and the fact that they are all free and accessible for everyone. I am aware of that and tell everyone whom I speak to how amazing it is, but how do we get the message out? I have seen billboards and social media advertisements, but how do we target it so that everybody has access to that incredible resource that Northern Ireland offers?

I am really pleased that special educational needs and disabilities were mentioned at the start of the debate. One of the figures that we looked at in the Committee's work was the number of young people with SEN who are not in education, employment or training, which is almost five times higher than the figure for the general population. Too often, the voice of those young people is forgotten in debates like this. I am really glad that, today, it has not been forgotten and that we are talking about them. There is enormous talent within that community. Children with autism have incredible strengths in pattern recognition, attention to detail, logical reasoning and other skills for which many employers are crying out. Those are skills that employers need. I have looked at companies, such as Microsoft and JPMorganChase in America, that have built autism-at-work programmes, not just because it is the right thing to do but because they have seen employees with autism outperforming their peers. We should lead on that and tap into that incredible talent, and give businesses the tools and confidence to do the same. It is also about a mindset shift: it is not an add-on or an addition but an incredible skill that we already have in Northern Ireland.

The Committee also recommended that the Department establish a data-sharing agreement, and we have discussed data today. We really need to get a grip on that. It is not just about what we are discussing in the motion; we need quality data across everything that we are discussing, and we need a timetable and transparency as we move forward. We have discussed the figure of 19,000 young people who are not in education, employment or training. That is not just a societal problem but a crisis.

I will finish with this: I was given the opportunity of an internship, and I think that it is absolutely critical that we support our young people with internships and apprenticeships and that we value every single skill that is available and that we help them to ensure that Northern Ireland continues to lead the way.

Mrs Guy: I really love this motion. It has ambition, it seeks to emulate best practice, and it is focused on giving young people hope and opportunity and, in some circumstances, a reason to stay in Northern Ireland. That speaks to me both as a parent and as an elected representative. When asked what motivates me to be in politics, my answer is often that I want Northern Ireland to be a place that my kids do not have to leave to be successful. To realise that ambition, we need exciting, dynamic and innovative educational and training opportunities that cater for different aptitudes and interests of learners, matched to the needs of businesses and critical public services, such as healthcare. Right now, those opportunities simply are not there in the way that we would like, and I caution against anyone seeking to demonise young people as lazy or unmotivated when the pathways to succeed simply are so limited.

I especially want to highlight, as others have done, young people with special educational needs and disabilities, who often need extra support to realise their potential. Right now, they have limited opportunities available. Northern Ireland continues to have the largest disability employment gap of all the regions across the United Kingdom. The latest figures report that the employment rate for disabled people in Northern Ireland is 38·3%, while the rate for those without a disability is 85·9%. Addressing the needs of those young people must be central to any approach, and I echo the recognition of Alma White and her work on Caleb's Cause, which highlights the neglect of our post-19 SEN young people.

The motion recognises that some great work has happened in linking business investment with skills development. We have seen that through the skills academies, for example. However, every Member, when we go into local businesses, will hear that we have huge skills gaps that are stifling growth. When we take that fact and set it beside the fact that we have 25,000 16- to 24-year-olds not in education, employment or training, we have to see that for what it is, a red flag telling us that we need to do something different if we are to meet this challenge.

It has never been more important to get the structures right around skills development. Things are changing so fundamentally with AI that it is impossible for government, which reacts slowly, to respond quickly enough to the needs of businesses and other industries. That is why the motion proposes a talent development agency to emulate Skillnet in the South. We have a huge number of innovative businesses that want to develop staff. They want to build skills and expand, however they need support to link with our training providers. We have also, time and again, talked about the need for parity of esteem between schools, further education and higher education. We need collaboration, not siloed working as we have now. That vision is driven by the top at ministerial level.

The independent review of education provided clear recommendations for how that could be done and a vision of what could be achieved. For example, that report spoke of young people from the age of 14 onwards being able to participate in a wide range of education pathways, including vocational and technical education, and work-based learning. That requires collaboration between education providers and workplaces of all kinds. There are examples of that happening across Northern Ireland. Recently, David and I visited local manufacturing company Leprino in Magheralin, and we saw how it is bringing together young people through vocational opportunities, such as apprenticeships, as well as offering placements to university undergraduates and upskilling existing staff members to ensure that they have right mix of skills and experience to meet its business need.

Not all businesses are at the scale to provide such a range of opportunities, so our version of the Skillnet model can provide a vital role, matching the needs of SMEs with trainees seeking employment opportunities or opportunities to learn. Seeking to leverage opportunities across the island of Ireland is a no-brainer, and we have spoken repeatedly about the need to work on a cross-border basis, especially in further and higher education. That will continue.

The SDLP amendment effectively removes the central tenet of the motion, which is a call on our Economy Minister to take focused action and establish a local agency here. There is nothing in our motion that would stop a talent development agency working in partnership with Skillnet Ireland. We would, of course, expect nothing else. We would also expect the talent development agency to work in partnership with similar organisations in Scotland, Wales and England.

I hope that Members across the Chamber embrace the vision of the motion today. I worked in the private sector here for years in the technology sector, and I know the talent and vision of our business leaders, who are capable and eager to expand our economy. However, government must act as an enabler. Developing skills is essential and must be a shared aspiration for us all.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Time is up, Michelle.

Mrs Guy: No problem. Thank you.

Mr Baker: I welcome the debate today, because it goes to the very heart of what we want for the next generation: opportunity, fairness and a future in which they can thrive — a future for all our young people.

When we talk about addressing skills gaps, we are not just talking about statistics or strategies; we are talking about the lived experience of our young people in our schools, colleges, apprenticeships and workplaces across the North. A significant step has been the ongoing review of the Careers Service. Too often, young people and parents have told us that careers advice can feel inconsistent or too narrow and does not reflect the opportunities in the modern economy. By carrying out that review, the Minister has ensured that the service is being reshaped, giving young people the best possible guidance grounded in the real needs of our economy and the ambitions of our communities and young people.

The Minister has also taken forward the 14-19 strategy, which is about creating clear and flexible pathways for young people as they move from school into further education, training and employment. That strategy recognises that not every young person takes the same route and that success should not be defined by a single path. Whether it be through A levels, apprenticeships, vocational courses or degrees, every young person deserves that support to follow their talents.

Skills are not the responsibility of the Department for the Economy alone. They are shaped in our schools, communities and the support services that are available to our young people. Young people are ambitious. They want to contribute and succeed, and they see a future here. It is our responsibility to ensure that the structures are in place to support them. That means having careers advice that is modern and relevant. It means that strategies such as the 14-19 strategy should give choice and flexibility and that Departments should work together and not in silos. That is the work that the Minister has been delivering on and the work that is already making a difference. It deserves our full support.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Minister, you have up to 15 minutes to respond to the debate.

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

I really welcome the opportunity to respond to the motion today, and I welcome any opportunity to speak about skills. I say this all the time because it is true: skills underpin and are critical to the delivery of all four of my economic objectives. Skills are a key driver of productivity, developing people's skills and helping people to take good jobs.

New skills will be needed to deliver on the transition to net zero, and, by ensuring that we invest in skills across the North, we can improve regional balance. That is why, last year, we invested £250 million in our universities, including £13 million specifically for the Magee expansion and £310 million for our colleges. I have continued, despite our challenging budgetary situation, to prioritise investment in skills development and to fight for as much funding as possible to put towards it.

My Department provides a range of skills programmes. Last year, £12 million from the skills fund supported 20 projects, including Step Up, which provides training, mentoring and careers advice for young people not in education, employment or training. We have committed a further £7 million this year to continue and expand that important work. I was also delighted to launch the apprenticeship inclusion challenge fund in October last year. Funding of up to £100,000 over 18 months will go to six successful applicant organisations from across the business, community and education sectors. Just last Friday, I was in Derry for the opening of the new WOMEN'STEC facility in the north-west, which is delivering on one of the challenge fund projects.

Significant investments are also being made to boost digital and cyber skills across the region. They include Allstate's £16 million upskilling initiative and Queen's University's new cybersecurity AI tech hub.

Apprenticeships have seen impressive growth, with a 39% increase since 2019, and higher-level apprenticeships having increased eightfold since 2017. In addition, new initiatives, such as the apprenticeship inclusion challenge fund and the apprenticeship action plan, ensure that apprenticeships are more accessible and inclusive.

In recent months, I published the green skills action plan, which provides a clear framework for collaboration on future green jobs. That approach will help to create clearer pathways into training and employment, particularly for young people currently not in education, employment or training. I am concerned, as other Members are, by the recent increases in the number of our young people not in education, employment or training. I have asked officials to look at the potential reasons behind that. We have increasingly seen that in our schools, with more young people facing challenges in going to school. There are more young people with anxiety and in the school-refuser category. There is a challenge for us across the board in addressing those issues.

Ensuring that we have pathways for people who face barriers, whatever those barriers may be, is a priority for me. It is important that we work not just across Departments but with community organisations, which often have people on the front line supporting individuals on their journeys. Members referred to the fact that there are challenges relating to our young people with special educational needs and people with disabilities particularly. Michelle talked about the fact that we perform poorly compared with other regions. I am keen to look at how we can address that, not just through ensuring that the pathways are there but through looking at whether there is work that we can do with employers to remove barriers, helping people into jobs. Cheryl mentioned the work that is being done by some companies in the States. We have companies here that do similar things in supporting people with neurodivergence and creating the right circumstances and environment for people to take up post. That is work that we can build on, ensuring that we mainstream good practice.

My Department will soon publish its skills action plan, which will outline the concrete steps that my Department will take, along with our partners, to continue to build the dynamic, innovative and highly skilled workforce that we need in the North. The social enterprise sector also plays a vital role in bridging skills gaps. Recent research indicates that 11% of social enterprises provide access to education and improve skills development and that over half are located in areas of high deprivation. Greater cross-departmental collaboration is also under way, with the Department for the Economy and the Department of Education working together on shared priorities such as careers, special educational needs and post-16 pathways. I assure the proposer and other Members that I see that as being absolutely vital, particularly in the financially constrained environment that we operate in and are likely to continue to operate in. I will meet the Education Minister in the coming weeks on that agenda and how we can work together. I believe that he, too, is committed to that work and to greater cross-departmental collaboration.

Despite the good work that we are doing, challenges remain. The proposer mentioned the skills barometer and the projections of job growth to a million by 2033. That is a good thing, obviously, but we face an annual shortfall of 5,400 workers and significant skills gaps, particularly in AI, digital, cybersecurity and green industries. The recent rise in the number of young people not in education, employment or training is a real concern. Such initiatives as the Open University and Libraries NI pilot help at-risk pupils develop study skills — a first step towards re-engaging in education — and programmes such as Skills for Life and Work, which is delivered flexibly by FE colleges, support those with low or no prior achievement in progress towards further education, employment or apprenticeships.

While higher education is not always a direct route for young people, I will launch a public consultation this autumn on a new widening participation strategy to make higher education more accessible. Supporting our young people to gain the skills and qualifications that they need is essential in widening our talent pool and ensuring equal access to quality employment.

The motion proposes establishing a talent development agency similar to Skillnet Ireland or other European models. The amendment suggests that I work with my counterparts in the Irish Government on the creation of an all-island talent development agency. My Department is already engaged in constructive dialogue with Irish Government counterparts through a range of cross-border initiatives. One great example of cross-border collaboration is the PEACE PLUS programme. Through that, my Department is working closely with colleagues in the South to build a stronger all-island skills system. Our further education colleges and universities are working closely with partners in the South to deliver training in key areas such as green skills and digital technologies. We have also seen strong engagement between the Northern Ireland Skills Council and the National Skills Council in the South, helping to shape shared priorities across the island. Green skills have been identified as a promising starting point, with further potential in areas such as AI. I am keen to explore additional collaborative approaches to skills development.

In the meantime, our current approach remains guided by the principle of sectoral alignment. The Skillnet model's strength lies in its sector-based collaboration, bringing together businesses and education providers to address evolving skills needs. It is worth saying that our colleagues in the South very much view the relationship as a mutually beneficial one. They take learning from us as well. They are keen to learn from initiatives that we have and to see whether they can be similarly delivered in the South. Skillnet Ireland's approach to sectoral collaboration closely aligns with the Department's sectoral action plans that were launched by my predecessor, Minister Murphy, last year to support seven of our most innovative sectors.

Addressing the skills gap, of course, is not a single intervention; it is a system-wide challenge. It requires collaboration, as my colleague said, across government, education, business and communities. Therefore, I am happy to look at what more we can learn from the Skillnet model.

I share the Assembly's ambition to make economic opportunity the foundation of social justice and reconciliation. That is why I will continue to prioritise investment in skills; support for young people and those with specific needs; and deeper collaboration with business. I look forward to working with Members, stakeholders and communities to build a skills system that is fit for the future and works for everyone.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Minister.

I call Cara Hunter to wind up on the amendment. Cara, you have five minutes.

Ms Hunter: Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.

The SDLP firmly believes that young people are the foundation of our future and must have access to the right skill sets to help them and our businesses to prosper. Upskilling the thousands of young people across NI is key to unlocking and creating a stronger and more resilient economy across the North. I welcome the opportunity to wind up on our amendment, which strikes at the heart of the future of our economy here and the urgent need to address the skills gap and uplift the lives and minds of our young people.

For years, I, like many, have watched family members, cousins, friends and school classmates move to Australia, America, Canada and beyond to seek opportunities, job vacancies, higher wages and easier access to upskilling and learning. Those people all love where they are from and are proud to be from the North, but they cannot see themselves building a life here for themselves or their families due to a number of contributing factors from rising childcare costs to the cost of living. For many, it is also about the challenge of accessing a university course that they desperately want to do here at home. Our young people face many challenges, and the duty is on us to figure out how we can keep them at home and help them prosper.

It is important to highlight the need for regional balance, which many Members in the House have mentioned. The benefits of growth belong to us all. I feel strongly, as does my colleague Sinéad McLaughlin, that not enough is being done to achieve regional balance, with a particular focus, of course, on the north-west, which is greatly felt by our constituents.

I will move quickly on to other Members' contributions. David Honeyford made an important point, which is that we must all look to our future and not back at our past to ensure that our young people have access to opportunities and, more importantly, that they feel empowered. Moreover, both he and the Minister mentioned AI, so I feel it necessary to declare an interest, as I do an hour a month of consultancy work on AI ethics.

Other comments from across the House included those from Pádraig Delargy, who said that it is vital that we acknowledge that work is being done by our schools and universities but that there is more left to do.

Phillip Brett detailed something very important, which is that many people feel that it is not what you know but who you know. I do not think that any of us in the House backs that kind of environment. It is not fair, and it is not what we want to see. We want our young people to feel empowered, to have the necessary skill set and to have access to opportunities based on merit and education.

Diana Armstrong from the UUP stated that greater collaboration is needed between the Minister of Education and the Minister for the Economy on these matters, and we wholeheartedly agree.

I will briefly touch on our amendment. We do not seek to be pedantic, but we feel that it really reinforces the need for collaboration and connection, given the mutual benefit on an all-island basis and given that our lives, our families, our employment and our opportunities do not recognise a border. For example, if people live in Newry, and there is access to jobs or opportunities in Drogheda or Dundalk, or if there is a skills gap, we feel that our approach through the amendment will assist in addressing such issues.

To conclude, the SDLP calls on the Economy Minister to work closely with her counterparts on the island to ensure that we close the skills gap and give each and every young person across the North the best opportunity to build a life for themselves right here at home, whether that is north or south of the border.

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

Ms K Armstrong: Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. It is not too often that we come to the Chamber to debate a motion on which we all agree. As a mum and someone who loves living here, I think that giving our young people opportunities to remain here, to have something that they can value, to earn money and to enjoy life is key. All of us in the Chamber want that for our young people.

As the motion indicates, we have already started off well. Employment is going well, but 25,000 young people in Northern Ireland are currently not in education, employment or training. What are we going to do about that? The work on skills that the Minister is doing will pay dividends, but there are a few things that we need to look for.

I thank David Honeyford, Michelle Guy and Kate Nicholl, all of whom have been working on skills issues for the past while. I also thank those Members around the Chamber who have spoken today on the issue. Our young people are key to our economy, and we need to give them hope, opportunities and chances in life.

I am very concerned about what Labour is doing. It is talking about young people who are not in employment having their benefits taken away from them if they do not find work within 18 months. That is concerning. As somebody who sits on the Committee for Communities, I say, "Really?". We should be looking to support those young people rather than talking about taking benefits away from them.

The Minister of Education is consulting on keeping children in school until they are 18. That will require them to participate in education, training or an apprenticeship. We look forward to hearing the outcome of the consultation, because it is another step forward. It cannot, however, result in what the Chancellor of the Exchequer has talked about, which is the youth guarantee that young people will be put into work. That work could involve doing nothing in which they are interested and not be related to their skills. It might also be for the most minimum wage possible. That would take the heart out of any young person. Let us therefore think about the opportunities. Skillnet Ireland is a good model to follow, but we need to work hard not just North/South but east-west. We also need to look to Europe and other places to see what models we can work towards having in order to deliver better for those 25,000 young people.

As Sinéad McLaughlin said, skills gaps do not stop at the border. We need to think about the successes of others and move forward. There needs to be greater alignment between skills development and further and higher education. What skills does Northern Ireland need? As we heard from Cheryl Brownlee, the Youth Assembly said that it did not know what skills Northern Ireland needs. That goes back to the cooperative partnerships that we need to see established between Departments. Why are we allowing young people to choose GCSEs without telling them what they will get from those GCSEs? Instead of giving them career advice when they are 15 or 16, we should talk to children and their families as soon as they start big school. We should advise 12-, 13- and 14-year-olds before they pick their GCSEs. I was delighted to be involved with a number of schools that had started to bring employers in before the GCSEs were picked in order to give young people ideas about what the future could hold, what jobs pay and what might be an option for them.

For some young people, especially vulnerable young people who live in disadvantaged communities, we need to grow their ability to see beyond the present. We need to give those young people opportunities. When we ask what skills Northern Ireland needs, it is over to the Department for the Economy. Where are the businesses that are coming forward? What do they tell us that they need now and will need for the jobs that will come in the future? When I was at school, every Tom, Dick and Harry wanted to be a nurse, and then it was, "Nobody become a nurse. We have far too many nurses". Today, there is AI, cryptocurrency, cybersecurity and all of that stuff — my goodness, we did not really have computers when I was at school — and our young people need to know about the jobs of the future. The careers services in our schools need to take a big step up. Careers teachers are not necessarily the right people to tell children about the careers that are out there. If you have been to school, university and teacher training colleges and then gone to work in a school, you have not experienced the outside world. I would love to hear more about businesses coming forward to help with careers advice by going into schools to talk about the options that are available.

There was news about apprenticeships on the radio this morning. I have had plenty of emails from my constituents on the issue. Some young people are accepted by further education colleges, but they do not have a business to give them a placement. We need to identify placements to ensure that the young people are trained for a job for the future, potentially in the business with which they have their placement. We need to provide a talent pool for businesses, but we also need businesses to be part of the development process for apprenticeships to ensure that apprentices are trained with the skills that they will need for their jobs.

As regards children with physical or special educational needs, we have far too many young people who do not see work as an opportunity for them because of their disability. From my prior life, I know that most of the barriers to work for such young people are not their skills; they are transport. The Department for Infrastructure needs to be included in the debate. Look at any of the surveys of young people that are done. The all-party group on disability visited Fleming Fulton School. The young people talked about work placements and told us that they need to get a bus, for instance from school to the centre of town, but, because they are wheelchair users, only one of them could use the bus at a time. It is very isolating. We need to think more about the whole-life experience of young people with special educational needs or physical disabilities and about how we can help them get to work.

We need to ask ourselves whether the qualifications that we provide for young people through schools, further education colleges and higher education will provide the skills that our employers need. I admit that I am the one and only Byzantine studies graduate from Queen's University in 1993. Something that I share with Simon Hamilton is that we were both ancient history students. What job was I going to get with that? My postgraduate training in the graduate management development programme is the qualification that took me into sales and marketing, because, let us face it, I was not going to get a job in Byzantine studies. Some people may say that I am still talking about ancient history. We need to look at our skills. I remember sitting in a room with a lot of people from the transport sector — because I ended up working in transport, as you do with a Byzantine studies qualification — and a person at the front asked, "What do you get if you have a degree in ancient history?". I said, "Well, I am sitting beside you giving legal advice to the Department". Learning for learning's sake is important, but training for a job is equally important. We need to see whether our qualifications are providing the skills that we need, and whether we are supporting children and their families to think about the choices that will provide them with the best opportunities. My education in Latin was handy for doing legal work, but are we teaching the right languages? Are schools teaching the right IT skills, AI skills and all of that?

I am glad to hear that the Minister is talking about a skills action plan and that she has included social enterprises in that. I had the absolute pleasure of talking to Edith and the guys at Mind the Gap about the cross-border work that they do for people with disabilities. That includes looking at how businesses can improve their understanding of the needs of people with disabilities, and making sure that those people's skills align with potential work opportunities. A skills action plan that ties all that together is important if we are to achieve social justice. No young person in Northern Ireland should be let behind. We do not want to hear that Protestant boys or disadvantaged communities have been left behind; we want opportunities for all.

The motion calls on the Minister:

and to identify what businesses here require. I would love to keep as many of our young people here as possible, earning, working and spending their money here in Northern Ireland. When Northern Ireland is busy and at peace with itself, we do much better. We have seen that before. Of course, we want to work with the South, but we also want to work east-west and with Europe. We want to work with anybody who will help us to bring forward the jobs that our young people will need.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Members should take their ease before the next item of business.

Ms Flynn: I beg to move

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

Please open the debate on the motion.

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

At the heart of the motion in my name and those of my Sinn Féin colleagues is a simple but powerful principle: harm reduction saves lives. We are here today to discuss an issue that is not abstract but real, immediate and deeply human.

Each year, young people across these islands attend festivals and concerts to celebrate music, community and joy, yet, too often, those events are overshadowed by tragedy, with lives being cut short due to the consumption of unregulated and dangerous drugs. Harm reduction initiatives, particularly rapid drug-checking services, have been shown to save lives. The question that is before us is not whether those schemes work, because they do, but whether we are willing to act with the urgency and compassion that are needed to bring them here.

Too many families across the North know only too well the devastation of losing a loved one to drugs. As Sinn Féin's spokesperson on suicide prevention, alcohol and addiction issues, I regularly meet families and community organisations who can see and feel the crisis up close. Their message is always the same: many of these tragedies are preventable if we are willing to act.

In previous debates in the Chamber, we have discussed the Jack's Promise campaign by the Brennan family from Lenadoon in west Belfast and the specific issue of residential rehabilitation and providing services for people who are battling with addiction issues. We can pick that up in another conversation with the Minister of Health and his officials following today's debate. It is important, however, to illustrate that the scale of the crisis goes wider than people accidentally dying as a result of taking harmful drugs but encompasses wider drug use and addiction issues and the need for rehabilitation. The point is that we cannot underestimate the scale of the crisis.

The Department of Health's figures show that, in 2022-23, nearly 3,000 people across the North sought help for problems with drug or alcohol use. The detail is stark. More than a third were struggling with drugs alone, and over half were using drugs daily. They were not occasional users but people who were caught in the grip of addiction, living with risk every single day. That is why harm reduction measures, such as rapid drug testing and drug checking, are urgently needed. It is important to be clear about what we mean. Drug checking allows people to anonymously surrender substances at festivals or concerts for on-site analysis. Dangerous or contaminated pills can then be identified, and public warnings can be issued within hours. Rapid drug testing is lab-based, confirms what is circulating more broadly in society and enables health authorities to issue alerts quickly across the community. Both are essential. One protects individuals in the moment, while the other protects the wider public.

In recent correspondence that we shared, the Minister acknowledged the issues and the difficult situation that we are faced with. Even as far back as the launch of the new substance use strategic plan last November, I think that it was, the Minister pointed out that deaths from drugs misuse are almost six times higher in the most deprived communities than in the least deprived areas. He pointed out that really important fact and described it as unacceptable, and he was completely right. However, if we accept that as the unacceptable reality, we must also accept our collective responsibility to act. We need to try to do more and put more measures in place that might save lives. That is the context of the motion. We are calling for the introduction of rapid drug-testing and drug-checking services across the North. We do not need to look too far to see the benefits of such schemes.

The Health Service Executive's Safer Nightlife programme has been running successfully at the Electric Picnic festival in County Laois for four years. Festivalgoers can surrender substances for testing in a health-led, non-judgemental space. Last year, the system identified MDMA pills that contained three times the adult dose. Those were pills that were already causing seizures and admissions to hospitals. Within hours, an alert was issued through the festival app to all attendees, preventing critical harm. That is the point of our motion: to try to prevent deaths by introducing some of those schemes.

That form of testing is referred to as back-of-house testing, where people can drop the drugs off anonymously. It enables the medical experts to see what is circulating and to act quickly, without exposing festivalgoers to criminal risk. That is what a public health intervention is, but the safest choice is not to take drugs. That is why I warmly welcome the DUP 's amendment, especially its first line. It is the most important amendment that could have been made to our motion, and I thank you for that. It points out how harmful and dangerous drugs are. That is an important message that we need to get out to the members of the public who may be watching the debate.

The reality for those who choose to take a drug, at whatever stage in their life or in whatever circumstance, is that we are basically trying to provide a safety net that might mean the difference between life and death. Scotland has established a rapid action —.

Mr Buckley: I thank the Member for giving way. One of the key points that she raised is the desire to ensure that we prevent deaths. Just this morning, I spoke to a mother who lost her young son at a concert in Belfast due to drugs. She talked about the qualifications of those who were employed on-site to monitor the drug overdose, which were wholly inadequate — in fact, some training was lacking. Also, the transportation from the festival to the hospital was so bad that she believes that it contributed to her son's death. Does the Member believe that that issue should also be looked into with urgency?

Ms Flynn: Yes, I do, and I thank the Member for that intervention. It is important that we pick up on that type of feedback, such as from that family, who, sadly, have already gone through that devastation. We absolutely need to put in place all the measures that we can to try to prevent those deaths. It was worrying to hear about that young person possibly not being transported to hospital in a timely manner. Training is critical. When we talk about introducing such schemes, we need to introduce them in the right way, and whoever is involved in that work needs to be required to have sufficient skills to deal with such a situation. Thank you very much for providing that wee bit of feedback, Jonathan.

We know that those models are already in place across Britain and in the South. I have spoken to the Minister and to his predecessor about the Queen's University pilot model that was put in place by the university, Forensic Science NI and the PSNI, all of which have been part of the discussions up to this point. Queen's University indicated that equipment for the rapid drug-testing pilot and the testing facility could be procured for a relatively modest capital investment of £220,000. Comparing that with hospital beds makes it clear that that investment is feasible. Some positive steps have been taken. Critically, the Public Health Agency has rolled out a nitazene testing-strip programme across all needle exchange sites and, more recently, it introduced fentanyl strips in areas where those drugs are most prevalent. In response to a question recently, the Minister gave an update on NSPdirect, which is the confidential postal service that is now available. Those are all very important initiatives, and all those measures show what can be done and the difference that we can make to try to protect people.

Basically, the motion calls for additional drug-testing and drug-checking schemes. The important thing is to get real-time analysis, particularly at large scale-events where substances can circulate very quickly and the risk therefore increases. The motion also calls for a joined-up system that can identify dangerous substances within hours and issue alerts to protect the public. It is not about condoning drug use but facing the reality that people will take drugs in certain circumstances and that we need to make their doing that as safe as possible.

The Minister has often spoken about tackling stigma, and I completely agree with him on that. He is totally right that stigma will drive people into further harm, making it harder for families to get support. If we are serious about moving beyond stigma —

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

Ms Flynn: — we need to embrace evidence-based, public health approaches.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Thank you.

Mr Frew: I beg to move the following amendment:

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Thank you. You have 10 minutes to propose the amendment and five 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 amendment.

Mr Frew: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, for allowing that time. I applaud the proposers of the motion on drug-testing schemes.

This is a vital issue that affects so many families and puts families into absolute despair. Families are in despair when are dealing with addiction; families are in despair when they get involved in the criminal justice system; families are in despair when they are involved in health emergencies; and families are in absolute despair when they lose a loved one. We all know someone who has been affected in some way by drug abuse, so it is really important that the Assembly and the Executive tackle this very important and critical issue. We should be here to save lives, and this is one topic on which we could do something good.

We in the DUP think that the issue is so important that we had it in our manifesto:

We also thought it important to build on the motion. I appreciate the kind words from the proposer of the motion about what we have done to add to the motion through our amendment. The first line of the amendment changes the motion to make it read that the Assembly:

and that any:

There was a wee bit of uproar in my constituency a number of weeks ago when the Public Health Agency (PHA) put out its drug-taking advice. In one way, I can understand why the PHA felt that it needed to offer that advice. It used the words:

I suppose that it is important that that message gets out there, but there are so many people in my community who thought that that was irresponsible, because those are words that you would imagine a drug addict using to advise a fellow drug addict on how to take drugs. That may well be something that they would say to a fellow addict. There is a very fine balance, and I am not sure that the PHA got it right. It caused a lot of alarm in my community. It illustrated to the public out there that, in some quarters of governance, there is nearly an admission of defeat when it comes to law enforcement addressing drug taking and drug abuse.

Mr Buckley: I thank the Member for giving way. I share the concern about encouraging anybody to take drugs, no matter whether it is one type or another. I raised the example earlier of the death of my young constituent. The mother described to me how the police action has been limited due to lack of resource and how authorisation is pending from a senior officer on whether to allocate funds to take on the case. Does the Member agree that that is a wholly inadequate approach for a mother who is grieving the loss of a son?

Mr Frew: Yes, I do agree, for one simple reason: when you speak to the police commanders and officers, no matter in what guise, whether through the district policing partnerships, as they were known in my time, or the policing and community safety partnerships, they always talk about going to the market and to the place where they believe that criminals are active or where a police presence is needed. I cannot think of anywhere more important than at a festival. There should be a police presence at that festival to investigate, detect and remove drugs.

Let us be under no illusion: the people who the criminal justice system should target are the drug dealers.

They peddle that poison in our communities, destroying lives and people, because, inevitably, people die because they take drugs.

The harm caused by drugs is very real for individuals, families, communities and public services. There were 1,771 drug-related deaths in Northern Ireland between 2013 and 2023, including 169 in 2023 alone. Furthermore, in the 12 months ending on 30 June 2025, there were 6,769 drug seizures and 3,049 drug-related arrests. Behind each of those statistics is a personal story: the pain of the families left bereaved; the grief that never ends; and the endless lives ruined by addiction or by involvement in criminality. We accept that there is a role for taking a harm-reduction approach, but that must not cross a line or be perceived to be condoning or normalising illicit drug use in any setting, let alone settings in which children or young people are found. Drugs that are seized must not be returned, and in no circumstances should advice be issued on the so-called safe use of drugs. That is where such approaches cross the line.

A strong police response, targeting the sources of supply, disrupting drug trafficking, prosecuting those responsible and ensuring that the courts have the tools and guidance to hand down appropriate custodial sentences, must also be a priority. Arrangements for testing must not fetter police investigations or, indeed, be viewed as cause for police visibility to be reduced in concert spaces. I raise that point following the intervention from my colleague Jonny Buckley earlier. The police should not leave the scene because there are medical experts on-site. Rather, the two must work hand in hand, complementing each other in order to keep people safe.

Moreover, we need to see a prevention-first response from the Executive. The motion deals with the final stage of the journey. It assumes that illicit drugs are in circulation. We know that they are. That should not be the extent of our ambition, however. It is simply not good enough to say, "There are drugs out there, and people will always take drugs illegally, so what can we do about it?". The truth is that we can do a lot more. We can do a lot more to keep people safe through police enforcement, but we can also do more in a medical context.

Mr Buckley: I thank the Member for giving way. I totally agree with him on the point about having a police presence, but, after concerts, they often fail to follow up on evidence for prosecuting those who peddle drugs to vulnerable individuals.

Mr Frew: That absolutely needs to be addressed. We know that there are multitudes of young people at festivals at which drugs are in circulation. From time to time, there are really dangerous substances out there that are stronger than other drugs. Although we must get the message out that all drug taking is wrong, irresponsible and dangerous, there are occasions on which lethal batches of drugs are out there that will do massive damage to our young people and even kill them. More intelligence gathering has to be done. There therefore should be collaborative working undertaken between medical and education experts and the police enforcement agencies. At no time should anyone surrender drugs and then be given them back. Once we get drugs out of circulation, we should keep them out of circulation. Every pill that is taken out of circulation could save one person's life, so it is worth it.

We support the motion and hope to see real progress made in future. It would be good to save a family from going through the pain that we have all witnessed families go through. It is awful for them to watch a family member experience addiction. Support is then needed. A criminal sanction may be required, so —

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

Mr Frew: — that young person then enters the criminal justice system. They may even die.

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

Mr Donnelly: I thank Órlaithí and the other Sinn Féin MLAs for tabling this important motion. We have attended many events at which we have spoken to people who have lost loved ones to drugs and substance overdose. It is a serious issue across our society, so it is good that we are debating it today and thinking about what we can do about it. I also thank the DUP for tabling its amendment, which we will support as well.

We all know that illegal drugs should be condemned. I unequivocally believe that the first approach should be to recognise their harm and not partake. That is the ideal. The reality, however, is that drug use happens no matter how much we disagree with it. We cannot deny that, so, if we want to save lives, we need to give serious consideration to how models such as drug checking can be adapted and introduced in Northern Ireland in a meaningful way to tackle the crisis that we face.

We need to face facts. Northern Ireland has the second-highest rate of drug-related deaths in the UK after Scotland. Young adults aged 25 to 34 account for the largest share of drug-related deaths in Northern Ireland, and the death rate in that age group has more than doubled in the past decade. We cannot ignore the fact that that is happening. While I agree that there is no safe way of taking drugs, and I urge anyone who is considering taking drugs never to do so, I recognise that it is easy for us to say those words and consider our moral slate clean without taking real and holistic steps to address the wider issues in society.

Without testing, you can never be sure of what is in a substance or be sure of its strength. That is the point of testing: it is done so that people can make an informed decision. No one deserves to die because they have made a mistake or a bad decision. This is not about international drug gangs and the mass supply of illegal drugs; it is about young people at festivals who are not educated on the harm of drug use and who, if they spoke to someone in a safe environment, free from judgement and harm, may make a more informed decision.

Research by Queen's University has made it clear that there is an urgent need for enhanced services, including immediate access to drug testing. Preventative measures such as that are health-centred rather than punishment-centred and are based on evidence rather than fear. In a survey of nearly 1,200 Irish festivalgoers that was conducted by the Irish Journal of Medical Science, 87% admitted to using more than one substance. Strikingly, 93% said that they would be willing to use independent drug-checking services. That willingness tells us something important, which is that people are open to making safer choices when they are given the tools and the information to do so.

Drug checking acknowledges the reality that people take drugs and that young people will experiment. It provides people, especially young people, with the chance to make informed decisions. Education about risks will always be vital, but so, too, is empathy and honesty. Drugs are easily available across all our communities, whether rural or urban. They are imported into Northern Ireland in huge amounts every week and are taken by many people across our society. There is a huge black market industry here; ultimately, if there were no market for drugs, that would not exist. I encourage young people in particular to seek out reliable information on drugs, and I highlight Talk to Frank as a confidential website on which to do so. Initiatives such as The Loop, the UK's first systematic drug-checking service, have shown what can be achieved by analysing substances and providing tailored advice. That service not only helps individuals to avoid immediate harm but collects intelligence that can inform wider public health responses. Even the police, who are experienced in drug crime, back that stance. Jason Kew, the former violence reduction unit, drugs, exploitation and harm reduction lead —

Miss McAllister: I thank the Member for taking a quick intervention. Does he agree that sharing such information is vital and that recent police initiatives to alert people when they get access to drug dealers' communications have been positive? Does he also agree that the police should be commended for taking a different approach because it is not always just a criminal justice matter and that it has to be done in conjunction with health?

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

Mr Donnelly: Thank you. Yes, I absolutely agree, and I will add that rapidly getting the alarms out and getting the information to the public can save lives. The quicker that those messages can be put into circulation, the quicker that people can be informed to avoid making the wrong decisions.

Jason Kew, from Thames Valley Police, said:

There is a lot to be said about that response. Essentially, it is not about morality; it is about protecting life. Drug checking is health-centred and evidence-based, and it deserves serious consideration here in Northern Ireland. If even one life can be saved, it is worth it.

Mr Chambers: From the outset, something that can never be overemphasised is the fact that there is no such thing as safe drug taking. Every illicit drug carries with it the potential to harm and devastate families. Too many lives in Northern Ireland have already been cut short by substances, for which society may have thought the risk was limited, but, in reality, are laced with danger. As a parent or grandparent, watching our loved ones excitedly leave the house to go to a festival is a common occurrence. For some people, it is a rite of passage. In that excitement, we also consider what would be any family's worst nightmare — young people whose promise will never be fulfilled because of a single pill swallowed in a field or a powder taken at a party; a moment's action with potentially life-changing consequences. As far as I am concerned, there is no such thing as too much awareness or too much focus placed on preventing those drugs from being consumed or brought to festivals in the first place.

Yet, as legislators, we are also confronted with the stark truth that drugs are present at concerts, festivals and a multitude of other social locations. They are circulating, and they are being taken. To pretend otherwise would be to close our eyes to the reality on the ground. That is why the debate matters. We have seen in the Republic of Ireland, through the Health Service Executive's drug-checking scheme, that rapid testing at festivals can identify highly potent or contaminated substances. Importantly, those warnings are not a green light for drug use; they are a red light flashing urgently to tell as many people as possible who might pick it up that this substance could kill you or at least cause you some serious harm. That is the distinction that we must grasp.

Instinctively, the call for a similar service in Northern Ireland is compelling, and I note the important work under way here between the PSNI, Forensic Science Northern Ireland and Queen's University. However, of course and understandably, any decision or process about a Northern Ireland testing scheme is likely to be much more complex than it may at first appear. We could do nothing without the necessary expert Home Office approval, and, again, I stress that our first and foremost priority should remain on the prevention of drug taking in the first place. The safest option is never to take drugs at all. That message must remain at the heart of our public health strategy. Alongside prevention, education and enforcement, we must be responsive to other steps that can demonstrably save lives. That is why my party and I are happy to support the motion and receive an update from the Minister.

In the meantime, I hope that the PSNI will continue to pursue those evil people who are making fortunes out of peddling a range of addictive poisons to our citizens.

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

Mr O'Dowd (The Minister of Finance): The £50 million of financial transactions capital to support the redevelopment of Casement Park has been provided to the Executive for the period from 2026-27 to 2029-2030 subject to sufficient finance being raised elsewhere to deliver the project. That £50 million was over and above what the Executive's allocation of FTC would have been in the spending review period, so it can be used only for Casement Park. The profile of funding is also to be agreed with the British Government. The additional £50 million of FTC has been provided on a net basis, which means that it does not need to be repaid to the Treasury. No further conditions are attached to the funding.

In my view, the GAA community has waited far too long for the reconstruction of Casement Park. I met the Communities Minister yesterday to discuss the next steps in the delivery of the project. I made it clear that I stand ready to offer whatever support my officials and I can to help make it happen.

Mr Frew: I thank the Minister for his answer to my question. Where does he think the other finance for Casement Park will come from? Does he think that that departure from the usual arrangements for financial transactions capital, meaning that we will not have to pay it back, could be explored further for other projects funded by financial transactions capital?

Mr O'Dowd: I will deal with those questions in reverse order. I am on record saying that I support investment in sport regardless of the size and shape of the ball or who does or does not play it. I will work with whomever to ensure that we get investment in sports and other areas in this place. However, I remind Members that Casement Park is the outstanding part of the jigsaw of the three stadia that were promised at that time. The other two have been built: Casement Park has not, so that is the starting point.

You asked where the rest of the money will come from. That is a matter for the GAA, the Communities Minister and others. You will be aware that the Irish Government have contributed and that the Executive have made a commitment, as has the GAA. If there are to be increases in those commitments, I stand ready to play my part.

Miss Dolan: Minister, will you join me in welcoming the investment in Casement Park?

Mr O'Dowd: It is a very welcome investment. It provides another piece of the jigsaw of getting Casement Park up and going. The investment from the British Government, the Irish Government, the Executive and the GAA is now bringing the project forward. It is now time to move forward with a definitive plan, and, as I said to the Communities Minister yesterday, I will play my part in that and offer whatever assistance I can to ensure that the project is delivered. As I have been on record saying many times, I will play my part with other sporting organisations as well.

Dr Aiken: Minister, the FTC is not to be repaid to the Treasury as a loan, so will it be treated as a loan in your accounting processes? How will we account for it?

Mr O'Dowd: I am of the view that the money is from the British Government. It is up to the British Government to account for it. The Executive will make their own contribution to Casement Park. The Secretary of State's announcement and, in fairness, the work that he has done — that part of the equation — were on British Government investment, so how the British Government treat that is a matter for them.

Mr O'Dowd: Good financial information is critical to informing public debate. It can support and guide the difficult decisions needed to manage a constrained Budget and, ultimately, to help shape a more sustainable future for all. The Executive's Budget sustainability plan committed us to the development of a future work plan in that area. One strand of that work plan was the Budget improvement plan road map, setting out short- and longer-term action on areas of improvement and further development. As part of that work, my officials published draft and final Budget 2025-26 fact sheets, providing stakeholders with user-friendly, high-level information and infographics outlining the Budget position.

NISRA has developed a new web page that sets out breakdowns of departmental expenditure over the period 2016-17 to 2024-25. I launched that new resource at the Fiscal Council conference on 12 September 2025. Its aim is to provide greater transparency on Departments' spending and make information on government spending more accessible. I believe that it is an important resource that will make information on government spending more accessible and provide the public with a clearer view of the cost of delivering public services here and where their money goes.

Mr McHugh: Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire.

Minister, why was the NI Executive spending web page developed?

Mr O'Dowd: It was developed to provide the public and others — I encourage MLAs and others to visit it — with easily accessible information, including a breakdown of how and where we use public expenditure. It is only right and proper that the public have as much information as possible about where their taxes go, and the web page is a great step in that direction. Before I came to the Chamber today, I went through it: it is a really useful source of information.

Mr Speaker: Ms McLaughlin is not in her place.

Mr O'Dowd: The public consultation on the baby loss certificate scheme closed on 12 September. I am extremely grateful that over 1,100 people and organisations took the time to respond to it. Every response received provided us with valuable insight and clarity to help us to develop a scheme that meets the needs of those who have been impacted by the devastating loss of a baby. My officials are working to analyse the responses. Once that work is complete, I will publish the consultation report setting out what we have learnt.

Once the Deaths, Still-Births and Baby Loss Bill completes its passage through the Assembly, I will bring forward the required secondary legislation to specify the details of the scheme as soon as possible.

Ms Ní Chuilín: Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as an fhreagra sin.

Minister, I thank you for that overview. You outlined the fact that you will need legislation. Bearing that in mind, when do you anticipate that the scheme will become operational?

Mr O'Dowd: I hope that the scheme will be operational within this financial year. It is important that we move forward as quickly as possible to respond to the demand for the scheme and recognise that many people came forward to respond to the consultation. I am sure that that was not easy for those who had experienced baby loss, and I want to ensure that we react and meet their needs as quickly as possible.

Miss McAllister: Minister, data collection is important to informing policy, particularly on women's health. Knowing how many miscarriages take place in our society is a way of understanding and helping the women affected. Will the Minister's proposals for recording miscarriage include data collection by the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA)?

Mr O'Dowd: Part of the consultation was on how we use the data that is collected. I am sure that the Member will agree that we need to understand the sensitivity in using terms such as "data" and "collection of information" when talking about families' personal stories. We have consulted on how we use that and how it would be best used to support and develop health policy etc. We will examine the consultation responses carefully and then decide on the most sensitive way forward in the use of that information.

Mr O'Dowd: On 31 August 2025, the unpaid rates carried forward from previous years had reduced to £145·4 million, a 20% reduction from the position at 31 March 2025. Of the amount remaining, £59 million is moving through legal recovery channels,; £73·6 million is being examined for potential legal action within the current rating year; and £12·8 million is the subject of an active payment plan.

Extensive work continues on further reductions to the amount outstanding. That includes issuing an additional reminder to ratepayers who may have genuinely overlooked payment but still have rates to pay. Cases of persistent non-payment or failure to engage constructively with Land and Property Services (LPS) will be considered for legal recovery actions. Land and Property Services has strengthened its approach on legal enforcement processes to increase efficiency in progressing cases that have already been subject to legal processes to the next stage of recovery. It is anticipated that more cases will progress through the Enforcement of Judgments Office and bankruptcy channels in 2025-26.

Mr K Buchanan: I thank the Minister for that answer. You mentioned, I think, £145·4 million: what is that figure like going back over a number of years? Has it increased, decreased or stayed the same effectively? What is the history on that figure, broadly?

Mr O'Dowd: I do not have the exact figures in front of me, but I understand that we are improving year-on-year in those matters. Over the past number of years, there has been specific focus in the rates collection agency on ensuring that we collect the maximum amount of rates possible and that, where we need to, we challenge those who are not paying their rates robustly, including through the courts, and work with those who are genuinely attempting to pay their rates but face difficulties for whatever reason.

Everybody has to make a fair contribution. The rates collection agency is working its way through that. I will provide the Member with the actual figures in writing, but I think that there has been an improvement over the past number of years.

Ms Bradshaw: Minister, can you give us the 2025-26 target for rates collection?

Mr O'Dowd: Well, the target is 100%, but, given the scale of collection and the amounts involved, that would not be achievable in any organisation. I will just see whether I have the target figure for rates collection. I just cannot spot the exact figure in front of me, but it is extremely high. As I said to the previous questioner, we are and the rates collection agency is achieving significant return on the collection of rates. It is worth pointing out that, while we do and will take legal action against those who are not paying their rates, it is no one's ambition to bankrupt any individual or business. It is never a nice position to be in. We will work with individuals and businesses, but, at times, we have to reach that position, and we will do that, unfortunately.

Mrs Dillon: Minister, can you tell us how much LPS collected in 2024-25?

Mr O'Dowd: In the 2024-25 financial year, Land and Property Services collected £1·63 billion in rates. That was the largest amount of rates ever collected in a single rating year. That money provides funding for essential public services etc. I commend the rates agency for its endeavours to collect that funding, which is used in front-line public services.

Mr O'Dowd: Work is under way on the development of the Executive's multi-year Budget. My officials are currently collating and considering departmental returns. It will be the Executive's first multi-year Budget in over a decade. It will provide funding certainty, enabling Departments to plan on a longer-term basis, and create the conditions to drive real transformation in our public services.

My officials are also supporting Departments to develop their five-year financial sustainability plans and are reviewing departmental returns to the multi-year Budget information-gathering exercise. That information will inform the recommendations that I will bring to the Executive later in the autumn for setting the multi-year Budget.

Mr O'Toole: Minister, will the multi-year Budget that you will bring forward, we hope, later this year be produced alongside an investment strategy? The Programme for Government (PFG), which was finalised earlier this year, promised an investment strategy. It is clear that we need one to sit alongside the Programme for Government and the multi-year Budget. When will it be published?

Mr O'Dowd: The Member will appreciate that the investment strategy does not necessarily fall within my Department's remit, although I do accept that it is the collective responsibility of the Executive. I hope that the strategy will be published as soon as possible, but my current focus is on delivering a multi-year Budget.

Miss Hargey: Minister, given that there are financial challenges ahead and that we will have to wait to see what the British Chancellor comes up with at the end of November, what will you be prioritising in the multi-annual Budget?

Mr O'Dowd: I thank the Member for her question. We await the Chancellor's Budget, which is scheduled for late November. It is probably wise for us to await the outcome of that Budget before I lay a final draft of my multi-year Budget before the Executive.

My priorities for the Budget are transformation so that we can ensure that we are delivering efficient, effective public services at the point of need and focus on what elements of delivery matter most out of the Programme for Government. We must focus on delivering improvements to public services for the citizens who rely on them and ensure that those public-sector workers who deliver public services are supported.

Mr Tennyson: Minister, what are the greatest pressures that you have identified ahead of the multi-year Budget, and will that multi-year Budget include any real revenue raising?

Mr O'Dowd: There are pressures across all our Departments. The growing demand for public services is significant. It is there for all to see. Matching that demand to a constrained comprehensive spending review over the three-year period for resource and the four-year period for capital is a challenge for all Departments and a collective challenge for the Executive. It is up to each Department to come forward with revenue-raising proposals. I will be making proposals on rates to the Executive, and I encourage Executive colleagues to look at their respective Departments to see where fair and progressive revenue-raising measures can be taken.

Mr O'Dowd: With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will answer questions 7 and 13 together. I may need some extra time, if that is possible.

I have serious concerns about the approach that the British Government are taking to local growth funding here. My officials have been advised that the £46 million announced in the spending review is mostly capital funding. The Secretary of State had previously assured me that there would be flexibility with the local growth fund, and I am deeply disappointed that that is not the case. If the British Government proceed with their approach, it will have serious implications for our community and voluntary sector.

I have been pressing British Government Ministers for clarity on the local growth fund for many months. The issue was raised when the deputy First Minister and I met the Chancellor in August. I raised my concerns and frustrations with the Secretary of State when I met him earlier this month. I was due to meet the Secretary of State and the then local growth Minister, Alex Norris MP, at the start of September. Owing to a Cabinet reshuffle, that meeting was postponed. On 16 September, I wrote to the new local growth Minister seeking an urgent meeting alongside the Secretary of State. Yesterday morning, I reiterated my request for an urgent meeting. My officials continue to press for urgent clarity on local growth and have urged Whitehall officials to consider contingency plans for organisations currently delivering Shared Prosperity Fund projects here. That the latest information is being drip-fed does not instil me with much confidence. I have serious concerns for the sector, for people’s jobs and for all the vulnerable people in our society who rely on the services daily. The Government must step up and make this right. There can be no more delay. They need to enter into meaningful engagement with the community and voluntary sector and the Executive to design a scheme that meets the needs of communities here. I will continue to push for that.

Ms Murphy: I thank the Minister for his substantive answer. Minister, you have, no doubt, acknowledged the important part that the community and voluntary sector plays in our rural communities. Can you update us on any engagement that you have had with the sector?

Mr O'Dowd: I had a positive meeting with leaders of the sector hosted by CO3 on 17 September, in which I provided an update to 41 representatives of the sector and listened to their many concerns. I hope to meet representatives of the sector tomorrow for further engagement on the matter. Engagement between the community and voluntary sector and me is not the problem; lack of engagement from the British Government is the problem. There is no point in it having the title of "local growth fund", when, from what I can see of it thus far, it is designed for the needs of constituencies in England and Wales. I do not know the needs of constituencies in England and Wales, but, collectively — around the Executive table, in this Chamber and elsewhere — we know the needs of constituencies here. The British Government need to start listening to us and to the community and voluntary sector here, rather than imposing on us a scheme that has no relevance to the needs of people here.

Mr Blair: I thank the Minister for the reply to my question. May I ask the Minister for some more specific information on his conversations with the UK Government? Will he outline whether there will be a transitional arrangement in moving from the UK Shared Prosperity Fund to the local growth fund?

Mr O'Dowd: At this stage, it does not appear that there will be. It appears to be the view of Whitehall that the social protection fund is coming to an end; that this is a completely new scheme; that everybody should be aware of that; and that they have made their position clear. I disagree completely. It has been handled in a shambolic fashion, which has been disrespectful to the sector and to the Executive. The Executive submitted proposals and a framework to Whitehall several months ago. I have sought meetings with Ministers since then, and I have received one lame excuse after another. It is time for them to listen to locally elected representatives here and to work with us to deliver a scheme that meets the needs of people here.

Mr Kingston: As the Minister is aware, among the projects currently receiving Shared Prosperity Fund funding are community-based employability projects, which formerly had European social fund funding. They face an uncertain future, yet we hear employability support being lauded as a key theme at the Labour Party conference. Has the Minister raised with the Westminster Government the needs of those projects and the uncertainty of their future funding?

Mr O'Dowd: Yes, I have, and I will continue to do so. The Member gives the example of a good scheme that is working well with people who need support in employment or in getting back into employment. That scheme is about bringing people back into the workplace, which is right and proper and beneficial not only to the individual but to the economy. I suspect that some of that support will be stripped away as a result of proposals designed for elsewhere being imposed here. It would be wrong of our Executive, including me, to design schemes for Birmingham, for instance, but it appears that schemes that are designed for Birmingham will be imposed on us, which is completely wrong.

Mr O'Dowd: The scoping report was commissioned for internal use in the first instance in order to determine the issues relating to shared property management and to consider various options for policy development and future reform. I can update the Members today by indicating that I have asked officials to take steps to put in place a small team with appropriate skills and expertise to carry out further work. I expect resources to be available and a team to be in place for the start of the new financial year. I further expect that considerable progress can be made during the mandate, and that legislative reform can take place early in the next mandate. Given that, I have asked officials to make the scoping paper available on the Department's website. That will be accessible shortly.

Mr Butler: I thank the Minister for his answer. That is work that was commissioned by Minister Archibald, when she held the position. Work in that space has been delayed for around 15 years, and there is advice from legal counsel on the need for us to do that work. In the interim, can the Minister offer any succour or recourse to the people who are being impacted on by those property management companies, notwithstanding the fact that he has put on the record today that legislation is possible and will be brought forward in the next mandate?

Mr O'Dowd: Some of these cases can be very complex and have their own unique issues, and some of them involve leases, which do not fall under the remit of my Department. I advise anyone who has concerns or is facing challenges in relation to their current shared property management arrangement to seek independent legal advice.

Mr Gildernew: What plans are there to involve stakeholders, including homeowners, as that work gets under way?

Mr O'Dowd: As further work begins on the issue, officials will liaise closely with a wide range of stakeholders, building on the initial engagement that took place as part of the scoping report. Homeowners, as well as other interested parties, will be able to engage with my Department, set out their concerns and raise relevant issues as it takes this work forward. That will inform an important part of the policy development process and help shape future legislation.

Mr O'Dowd: We all want health workers to get the pay rise that they deserve. They should not be in the position of having to consider strike action to get the pay awards that they are entitled to. I am acutely aware of the demands that are placed on our health and social care system and the financial pressures that it faces. Those financial challenges are not confined to one Department, and we cannot view the health pressures in isolation. I am committed to working collectively with my Executive colleagues to resolve the current issues. I have been working with the Health Minister, and my officials are actively engaging with senior officials in Health to look for ways of securing the pay uplift for health workers. The fundamental challenge remains that the British Government are failing to provide sufficient funding for public services, but health and social care workers here should not be the victims of that.

Mr McGrath: I felt like going, "Blah, blah, blah" with that answer, as we simply blame everybody else for not taking responsibility. You said that our healthcare workers "deserve" this money. It was promised to them. It is their pay uplift. It was due on 1 April, and tomorrow is 1 October. The Health Minister says that it is not up to him and that it is up to you as the Finance Minister. Do you have the money? Will our nurses get their pay rise?

Mr O'Dowd: The Member clearly had his piece for camera worked out before I read out my answer, because I did not blame anybody and I did not point the finger at anybody. I listened very carefully to the Health Minister when he responded to the Member at previous Question Times, and he did not point the finger at anybody. Ministers have to work together. That is what Ministers are doing on this issue. We are working together, and I have no doubt — this may come as a disappointment to you — that we will reach a successful conclusion to the issue, and health workers will get their pay rise.

Mr McGuigan: I completely welcome your last commentary, Minister, and the fact that you and the Health Minister are working together to, as you say, successfully resolve the issue for health workers. How have you, as Finance Minister, worked to ensure priority for the Health budget in the Executive?

Mr O'Dowd: The Health budget continues to take up a significant proportion of our overall Budget. It is sitting at around 47% of our overall spend. Undoubtedly, there is a growing demand due to healthcare needs as our population gets older, and, as new medicines and new treatments are introduced, we want to keep apace with those.

As Finance Minister, it is my duty to ensure that there is effective, efficient use of public funds. The work that I and the Health Minister have done and that my senior officials have done with the Health Department over the last period of time has proved beneficial. I will continue that work. As I said to the Member who asked the previous question, I have no doubt that the issue will be successfully resolved and that the pay rise for health workers will be delivered.

Mr O'Dowd: As one of the largest employers here, the Civil Service is committed to building an inclusive workforce that is reflective of the society that it serves and to increasing the representation of young people in our workforce. My Department has introduced a range of measures to recruit more young people, including the use of social media, radio and digital advertising to target younger audiences and the expansion of apprenticeships and traineeships as an entry route to the Civil Service, with 14 schemes launched during 2024 and a further 13 commenced or planned in 2025. An operational delivery apprenticeship scheme will launch soon, offering approximately 200 apprenticeships across Civil Service Departments. There will be the launch of a Civil Service skills academy for trainee civil engineering assistants in summer 2024, offering full-time and part-time pathways for participants, and the expansion of the Civil Service student 51-week placement programme.

I recently hosted an event to welcome the 2025-26 intake of students to the Civil Service placements, with almost 100 students being placed across the nine Civil Service Departments. The Civil Service has also participated in the JobStart programme, which offers young people aged between16 and 24 and at risk of long-term unemployment a nine-month paid placement in the Civil Service with the potential for a permanent appointment on successful completion of their placement.

Mr Speaker: It is time to move on to topical questions.

Mr O'Dowd: I am acutely aware of the fact that the A5 case is before the Court of Appeal and that there will be an appeal hearing on it. I look forward to the outcome of that appeal hearing, because the issues around the A5 deserve very careful scrutiny and require a legal determination by a court. I am more than satisfied that I acted in a responsible and reasonable manner on the basis of legal advice that I received from a barrister who is now a High Court judge. I do not know what decisions a High Court judge would come to now on the information presented to him and given the different arguments, but that was the level of legal advice that I received at the time.

As for expending £200 million, you cannot, on the one hand, criticise me for not delivering projects and then, on the other hand, criticise me for investing to move a project forward. Those two things do not balance. The A5 is a flagship programme for the Executive. Any moneys not used this year will have to be returned to the Executive, and the Executive will decide how those moneys are redistributed.

Mr O'Toole: Minister, you talk about careful scrutiny. There are people who wish that you, as Minister, and perhaps your officials had given more careful scrutiny to the planning application that went in. We and the people who want the A5 built would perhaps then not have been in this situation in the first place. Specifically on the money that could be handed back, you are the Finance Minister and are responsible for that reallocation and underspend. How much will that be, and what will be done with it? Please be specific.

Mr O'Dowd: I reject your comment about the lack of careful scrutiny. In my experience of being a Minister in three different Departments, no project has received more careful scrutiny and examination than the A5 at ministerial and official level. I commend the officials who are involved in it. They are dedicated public servants who want to do the best for the public and for the communities of which they are a part.

We have a judgement on a number of pieces of detailed law, and, as I said to you, the person who advised me on that law is now a High Court judge. Do you include him in your criticisms?

Mr O'Toole: You are the Minister. You are accountable.

Mr O'Dowd: I am accountable, and I am not shirking my responsibilities. Do not dismiss people who work diligently for the community just because you want a headline or your 15 minutes of fame or whatever you get on this evening's news.

Mr O'Toole: I am challenging you. You are the Minister.

Mr O'Dowd: I do not mind being challenged, but, if you are going to challenge me, leave the comments to me; do not expand them out.

As Chair of the Finance Committee, you know that the Executive have to decide on the future use of any returned funds. Those funds will be returned in the October monitoring round, and the Executive will decide how best to reallocate them.

Mr O'Dowd: The Civil Service has been going through an extensive rationalisation of its estate and rightly so. We have an expansive estate. My Department has been working through a plan to look at the viability of each building, its energy efficiency and its usage. My Department has been planning that estate management process. On a number of occasions, we have started to sell off buildings. The money from those sales goes back into the public purse and is reinvested in other public programmes.

Mr Blair: I thank the Minister for that answer. How does his Department intend to make any retained estate more energy-efficient and modern? After any review or rationalisation, there will still be a considerable estate, so is there an action plan or a programme to do that?

Mr O'Dowd: Yes. One reason why we are looking at our estate buildings is that some of them are outdated and to invest in them to make them energy-efficient would simply not be a good use of public funds. We are moving people out of some of those buildings for that reason and other reasons. We are attempting to invest in buildings that could be sustainable with good use of public funds.

Mr O'Dowd: The Minister for Infrastructure regularly engages with me — rightly so — as other Ministers do, lobbying me on their budgets so that they can invest in a wide range of areas, including repairs to the public highway network. I will continue to work with her to do what I can to ensure that investment is targeted in that direction.

Mr Irwin: Last year, over £5 million, I believe, was paid out in compensation to motorists whose vehicles were damaged as a result of defects on our road surfaces. Do you agree that the rising spend in compensation would be better directed to road repairs?

Mr O'Dowd: Using the simple equation of paying compensation or fixing the roads, yes, but, unfortunately, the Infrastructure Minister faces significant difficulties in making the budget go around, as did the previous Minister. Despite the increase in funding for road repairs that there has been, I think, in this financial year, there are still significant challenges. As I said, however, I will continue to work with the Minister for Infrastructure and other Ministers to ensure that we get the maximum amount of public funds out to where they are needed, including road repairs.

Mr O'Dowd: I have a paper with the Executive on the cap and the discount for early payment that I am looking for the Executive to endorse. Over the summer, my officials worked closely with key stakeholders on business rates relief and other issues. They are now preparing a paper for me that I hope to bring to the Executive for the next steps. Work is progressing on rates in a number of areas, and it is important to keep it under constant examination because it is our only major revenue-raising lever.

Mr Mathison: Does the Minister still intend to go to out to public consultation on small business rate relief and the non-domestic vacant rating in October?

Mr O'Dowd: Yes. I will bring proposals to the Executive with regard to the work to date on those matters, and I hope to go out to consultation.

Mr O'Dowd: It is not a deliberate attempt to row back. I would like to see the scheme delivered in this calendar year. There are a number of factors at play, and a lot of it lies in the hands of the Assembly. I note that the Committee has now completed its examination and report, and I thank the Committee for that. A lot of it rests in the hands of the Assembly and how quickly we can get the regulations through. It is not a deliberate intention to roll back the scheme. When I look at the work programme my Department is delivering, I think that the scheme will definitely be in place by the end of the calendar year, but, if I can get it in place earlier, I certainly will.

Mr Frew: I thank the Minister for his answer. Does what he has said mean that a further extension of the COVID regulations will be needed from March?

Mr O'Dowd: Let us not look that far ahead: we are only at the end of September. Let us work through the legislative process and not look that far ahead just yet.

Mr O'Dowd: In fairness, they are not Civil Service Departments. They are ministerial Departments, and, at the head of each Department, is a Minister who is responsible for managing the budget along with their senior civil servants. At this stage, we have a forecast overspend, with pressures across a number of Departments. However, the Ministers are there to make decisions. I always say that civil servants advise and Ministers decide, and the Ministers have decisions to make.

Ms Forsythe: I thank the Minister for his answer. At a recent briefing by your permanent secretary, he detailed that well over 70% of our public spending is administered through our arm's-length bodies. Is it time for a widespread financial review of our arm's-length bodies in terms of how many there are, the administrative cost and whether there is a real opportunity for public-sector transformation?

Mr O'Dowd: That is a definite "Yes".

Ms Ferguson: What impact is the 2025-26 Budget allocation having on our public services?

Mr O'Dowd: I am on the record as saying that all the Departments are dealing with a constrained budget, and, as I have just said, Ministers have difficult decisions in front of them. None of the Departments are easy at this time, and the forecast for the next three years is also challenging. However, we are making a difference. One only has to look at the recent welcome reduction in the waiting lists: that is a direct result of the Executive working together and investing in tackling waiting lists and putting a specific focus on them. We have invested £55 million in the early years childcare strategy, which is a new departure for the Executive. Again, we have worked together to push a positive agenda forward.

We have invested an additional £15 million in special educational needs, £15 million in building skill sets in our current and future workforce and £5 million in making communities safer. I have listed only a few, but there is a range of areas in which the Executive, working together, and Ministers, working individually, are making a positive difference.

Ms Ferguson: Will the Minister outline where we are currently at with the public-sector transformation initiatives?

Mr O'Dowd: The Member will be aware that the first round of funding has been distributed. The public-sector transformation board is now examining bids from Departments for the next round of funding. I hope to be in a position to bring the board's recommendations to the Executive later in the autumn.

Mr Speaker: That concludes questions to the Minister of Finance. I will not be in the Chair during the two plenary sittings next week. My deputies will be filling in for me. I ask Members to take their ease. [Inaudible.]

Mr Speaker: I should have said that I will be away on Assembly business.

Mr McGrath: I am glad to have the chance to speak to the motion today, because it is about something that really matters, which is keeping our young people safe. Over the summer, we witnessed some heartbreaking incidents in which young people went out to enjoy themselves at festivals and concerts and some did not come home. Families were left devastated and communities were left asking why more was not done.

The motion is about doing more. It is about putting in place harm reduction measures such as rapid drug testing at events so that, if dangerous substances are circulating, we can act fast. That has worked well at Electric Picnic and other festivals in the South, which have been able to test drugs on-site in order to warn people when something lethal is going around, and that ultimately saves lives. The motion is not about encouraging drug use but about facing reality and protecting people. Here in the North, we have that expertise, with the PSNI, Forensic Science NI and Queen's University working on a rapid testing scheme, but we remain the only part of these islands without the necessary infrastructure in place. That is not good enough. We need the Minister of Health to step up and tell us when that infrastructure will be rolled out. The health service and the Executive need to get it done.

I will speak directly to young people who had bad experiences over the summer. You deserve better. You deserve to feel safe when you go out with your friends. You deserve support, not stigma. Your lives are worth protecting.

The amendment takes a tougher line on drug use. I get it that nobody wants to see drugs at festivals, but just being tough does not always work. Sometimes, that pushes things underground and makes them more dangerous. We need to be smart; we need to be compassionate; and we need to meet people where they are.

I would like to see more joined-up work across this island and these islands, because drugs do not know borders, and they surface in all places. It is about sharing expertise and knowledge. If that little bit of sharing of expertise and knowledge can help one young person, it is worth doing.

The SDLP is happy to back the motion. We welcome it. We do not have any real issue with the amendment. All of us working collectively will, hopefully, help to make the community safer for our young people. Let us protect young people and give them the support that they need and, ultimately, the future that they deserve.

Ms Ferguson: I thank my colleagues for tabling the motion on harm reduction initiatives and the need for rapid drug-testing schemes at festivals and concerts. No drugs are safe in our communities, yet, sadly, too many lives are lost due to drug and alcohol misuse. Harm reduction initiatives such as rapid drug testing can help prevent families losing loved ones as a result of avoidable deaths.

We are the only part of these islands without such provisions. Citizens here deserve equal protection. As my colleague Órlaithí mentioned, the Health Service Executive Safer Nightlife harm reduction programme has been on-site at Electric Picnic for the past four years, offering free and confidential back-of-house drug checking. In many other European countries, drug checking can be made a condition of licensing for major events and festivals. I will be interested to hear from the Minister whether he has had any conversations with the Communities Minister or councillors about that issue.

Rapid drug-testing services save lives, identify emerging trends and enable alerts to be issued. We are all too aware that, sadly, the number of drug-related deaths has more than doubled over the past decade. Harm reduction initiatives are needed urgently alongside, as many colleagues have mentioned, investment in addiction services and compassionate, trauma-informed rehabilitation services, and the tackling of drug dealers with tougher sentencing in our criminal justice system.

Harm reductionists, academics, policy reform activists and people who are on the front line have repeatedly urged that action be taken. We cannot allow young people to play Russian roulette with their lives when there are practical steps that could prevent accidental poisoning. Inaction is unethical and unacceptable. Back in 2018, my party colleague in Dublin Fintan Warfield outlined that such measures are sensible and proactive and that, by responding to the realities of life, they have the potential to save a life.

In the Minister's response, it would also be welcome to hear whether any consideration has been given to securing funding opportunities, for example, and whether those could be achieved through the North/South Ministerial Council.

Saving lives must be our top priority. We need a humane and compassionate approach to addressing the issue. That should include concrete proposals for the roll-out of harm reduction initiatives to prevent avoidable and agonising drug-related deaths.

Mr Carroll: I thank the Members on the opposite Benches for tabling the motion. It is very important that we discuss the topic, as well as the fact that the state's current zero-tolerance approach to drugs is not working and that the war on drugs has categorically failed. Criminal penalties for drug possession are not working. There is no evidence that the small reduction in illegal drug use since the 90s is related to criminal penalties for personal drug possession. People who are suffering from poor mental health and addiction do not need our judgement, condemnation or criminalisation.

Drug-use deaths are almost six times higher in the areas of highest deprivation than in the areas of lowest deprivation. I commend my GP, Dr McKenna, who recently spoke out in 'The Irish News' about the links between deprivation, poverty and bad health outcomes. Too many people who are experiencing addiction are trapped in a chaotic cycle of imprisonment and release, often into homelessness, and the risk of overdose is hugely increased for prisoners when they are released.

I and many others believe that criminalisation and a zero-tolerance approach to drugs is harmful. It also deters people from coming forward for treatment if they want it. To put it mildly, there are therefore problems with the amendment, and I will not be supporting it for that reason. It also completely ignores the reality that people do take drugs, and many of them do so at events such as festivals and concerts — not just young people, but, in many cases, young people. Drug consumption is a fact of life, and lecturing people — young people in particular — will not work.

A public health harm reduction approach acknowledges that fact and operates in a different format. A harm reduction approach to drugs in our society would be transformative, especially for working-class communities. It would require formative change across the health service and broader society. If harm reduction was given proper attention and funding, which, unfortunately, it is not, front-line workers could proactively engage with known drug users to distribute essential items such as clean needles and other products. Health workers and volunteers could be trained in administering naloxone to temporarily reverse the effects of opioid overdose. Medically supervised injection facilities could be established in every trust area for everyone who needs them, but that is not the case.

Back-of-house drug testing should be available not just at festivals but at all hospitality venues where drugs are likely to be consumed. Somewhat connected to the debate, all venues should be commanded to provide anti-spiking facilities. They are not expensive, and responsibility for providing them should be put on the venues, nightclubs, bars and so forth, because we have seen an increase in spiking. Festivalgoers at the likes of Electric Picnic have access to free and confidential back-of-house drug checking. Those are non-monitored safe spaces where people can submit substances for analysis without any judgement. That is really important. Festivals have seen a 10% to 25% reduction in drug-related harm because people have come forward when voluntary drug-testing facilities have operated on-site.

Drug testing, despite the propaganda against it, saves lives. The Culture, Media and Sport Committee noted that, since 2016, there had been no drug-related deaths at festivals that had drug checking. That is really important. Plenty of other countries have moved further towards the legalisation of recreational drugs. Uruguay, Canada and Germany are just some examples. Portugal has employed the decriminalisation —

Ms Flynn: I thank the Member for giving way. He is giving examples from around the rest of the island and in other countries. Has he been following the work of the citizens' assembly in the South on drug use and the issues surrounding it, and does he agree that we should harmonise across the island the outcomes in the Twenty-six Counties on the harm-reduction approach?

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

Mr Carroll: Thank you. I thank the Member. I have not been following that as closely as she has, but if there is a citizens' assembly gathering evidence, undertaking research and making recommendations, the Health Minister and the Committee should absolutely look at that, so thanks for that intervention.

I think that the Minister challenged the Portuguese model in answer to a question that I asked him a few weeks ago about endometriosis. I am happy to give way if he wants, but Portugal employed a decriminalisation approach and saw a significant fall in drug deaths and infectious transmission. That is important stuff.

Mr Nesbitt (The Minister of Health): I thank the Member for giving way. I think that he is right to say that when Portugal introduced that regime, the number of deaths and medical incidents did drop significantly, but that was because the new policy was matched by very heavy investment in resources within the community. That investment has dried up, and the trend is now reversing. That is my understanding.

Mr Carroll: Thanks, Minister, for that. That is useful. That is an issue, but the policy obviously worked. It was not matched by the funding, and that is an issue for the Portuguese Government and other Governments who are not investing where it is required. It speaks more to the funding not being put where it is needed rather than the policy. I thank the Minister for that.

We need to look at the models that are working in reducing harm and deaths in Portugal and other countries.

The citizens' assembly talks about that. Anything less will mean that we will consign users of drugs to more decades of failure and misery. I support the motion —

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

Mr Carroll: — and the amendment.

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: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I thank those who tabled the motion and the amendment and everybody who has contributed to the debate.

Let us pause and think about the human cost of what we are talking about. Clearly, the debate was sparked by events at summer festivals such as Emerge. The investigations are ongoing, so it remains unhelpful to speculate, but all our thoughts should be with the families and friends of those who were most affected and the loved ones of those who tragically lost their lives, no matter what the cause may turn out to be.

I also acknowledge the pain of anyone who has lost a friend or family member to substance use. In 2023, we had 169 drug-related deaths and 341 alcohol-specific deaths. Those deaths were all preventable, and we need to recognise that they are driven by wider social, environmental and economic issues. To prove that point, here is a fact: substance use-related deaths are over five times higher in areas of greatest deprivation. That takes me to my passion of health inequalities. We have to work collectively across government to address not just the causes of health inequalities and substance use but their underlying drivers — in other words, the causes of the causes. It is not enough to say that substance use can cause severe physical and mental issues up to and including death. What causes people to use those substances in the first place? We have to do more to understand the causes of the causes.

The Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA) examined the personal, household and area characteristics associated with drug-related deaths. That NISRA report highlights the disproportionate impact of factors such as economic inactivity, poor housing, unemployment, disability, poor mental health and living alone on drug deaths. For example, unemployed males were more than twice as likely to die from drug-related deaths as employed males, and social housing residents accounted for 39·3% of deaths despite making up only 12·8% of the population.

I acknowledge that, given the legal position of many of the drugs, what we are talking about can be a sensitive and controversial area, so it might be helpful to provide a brief overview of how the issue sits in our substance use strategy, 'Preventing Harm, Empowering Recovery'. The strategy was agreed by the Executive and recognises the importance of reducing the availability of and access to illicit and illegal drugs. I acknowledge the strong collaborative work by the PSNI, the organised crime task force's drugs subgroup and the Department of Justice in that area.

Think about the phrase "preventing harm". If you move from the purist position of saying, "All these substances are illegal, so it is purely a criminal justice matter to be led by the Police Service of Northern Ireland", you get into an area in which you are making judgement calls. If you want to prevent harm, do you provide services for people who are taking illegal substances? I believe that that is the right approach, but it is ultimately subjective. It is a judgement call, as I say.

Harm reduction has become key to the Department's work. We deliver a number of harm reduction services including opioid substitution therapy; a needle and syringe exchange, which we are always seeking to expand and develop; take-home naloxone kits; low-threshold outreach services; and rapid drug disposal bins. The Public Health Agency also offers nitazene, fentanyl and xylazine testing strips at all needle exchange sites across Northern Ireland.

In addition, a number of years ago, as part of the needle and syringe exchange service (NSES) scheme, we worked with the UK Government to allow foil to be handed out, encouraging people to move away from injecting substances to inhaling them. That harm reduction method reduces the risk of blood-borne viruses or infections and discarded paraphernalia. From 1 April last year to 31 March this year, 3,829 packs of foil were dispensed across needle exchanges across Northern Ireland. At a recent four nations meeting on drugs held in Scotland, Scottish officials said, I believe, that, in one year, they handed out 400,000 foil dispensers to encourage people to smoke rather than to inject. That was about reducing harm.

Most pertinent to today's debate is the drug and alcohol monitoring and information system known as "DAMIS". The system, which is operated by the Public Health Agency but overseen by a cross-departmental steering group, allows individuals including service users, peers, the PSNI, Forensic Science Northern Ireland, prisons, probation, treatment and support services and homeless service providers to submit information to a central contact about substances of concern. The information is considered and noted for prevalence information, or further information is sought or, indeed, alerts issued to those likely to come into contact with substance users who may be at risk of harm. Importantly, through DAMIS, we have the ability to proactively seek the testing of substances that are seen to cause harm. That comes up through our partnership working with the PSNI and Forensic Science NI. That information is used to inform related advice and alerts to service users, vulnerable groups and those in key services.

I am aware of the outline proposal that has been put forward by Queen's University Belfast for a rapid drug-testing model, but I understand that there are still resourcing, licensing and operational queries with it and that further thought and consideration will be needed. It is important to note that, as it is currently set out, the proposal is not for a model for on-site testing at events such as festivals; instead, it is focused more on wider prevalence testing of drugs that are in circulation. The proposal is not just for my Department and the PHA to consider: there are enforcement issues for the PSNI and Justice colleagues, and conversations may also be required with local government colleagues. Operationally, any drug testing, be it on-site at festivals or off-site, would need to be subject to licensing by my Department. Any proposal and resulting application will need to demonstrate compliance with licensing requirements.

I want a review of DAMIS to begin shortly, and the intention is to build on the existing testing infrastructure and consider regional needs for enhanced testing possibilities as part of that work.

It is important that we understand the accuracy of any testing service. We do not want to give false positives or false negatives. In addition, any on-site testing would not address the issue of drugs that have been taken before people enter the sites. I understand that that has been an issue at such events. We have not properly acknowledged in the debate that on-site testing will not save the life of somebody who may have imbibed their substances before they got to the concert venue.

Mr Donnelly: I thank the Minister for giving way. Does he think that, if there were on-site testing facilities and people knew that they were going somewhere where they could get the substance tested and make an informed decision, that could encourage them not to imbibe substances before they went to a festival?

Mr Nesbitt: I thank the Member for his intervention. If he can bear with me, I will come to that later. It is a very important point.

Any alert system is only as useful as the advice that it generates. I know from Assembly questions that concerns have been raised about the harm reduction advice that the PHA has provided before and after festivals. Mr Frew mentioned that when moving the amendment. The PHA takes a public health approach to the prevention and reduction of harms that are associated with substance use, enabling it to work with partners across Northern Ireland to promote key prevention messages that are sent to individuals, families and communities so that the population is as aware as it can be of the inherent dangers of substance use and can make informed choices. The messaging notes the health and legal risks of taking any illegal or illicit drug. However, the PHA also acknowledges the fact that illegal substances are available and that a proportion of the population actively use them. Therefore, the PHA's social media substance use messaging, alongside harm reduction advice, plays a critical supporting role as part of the overall prevention approach, enhancing public understanding of substance use and related risks, encouraging safe behaviours and facilitating community-led prevention efforts. We know that stigma can stop people from seeking help, so it is vital that we provide evidence-based information that people can use and that can support them to engage with services. That can and does save lives.

The motion also calls for greater collaboration with the HSE in the Republic. We fully recognise that the issue knows no borders. What happens in Ireland, the UK, Europe and, indeed, around the world has clear implications for here. I therefore reassure Members that we work closely with our colleagues in Ireland, sharing information as appropriate; in fact, we will be meeting colleagues to get a better understanding of their Safer Nightlife programme, which includes testing at festivals in Ireland. PSNI colleagues also share information and take joint action with their counterparts through the joint task force. We also work closely with colleagues across the UK, and we share information and alerts where concerns exist. The Justice Minister and I recently met the four UK Ministers, as I said, and it was a helpful meeting to share learning and best practice and to look at where we can do more collectively.

It is also important to be clear about what is available in this area across the UK and Ireland. The approaches in England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland are different, and it is not fair to say that we are the only place across the UK and Ireland without a testing and alert system. As I have clearly set out, we can do that when required under DAMIS, and, while festival testing is undertaken in England and Ireland, I am not aware of it happening in Scotland or Wales. We can all learn, however, and we will continue to explore all available possibilities, including future cross-border and UK initiatives where they offer the potential to reduce harm. That will, of course, take resource.

As yet, the substance use strategy is not fully funded. That is important, as the wider budget position means that we cannot fund any such development. Any resources would have to come from existing services that already support people in need. I will make a commitment, however, to ensure that our precious resources are used to best effect. This is not an issue for my Department to lead on in isolation: we need to work with our partners in Justice, the community and voluntary sector and local government and with people with lived and living experience of substance use to make a real difference.

The question has arisen of whether, if testing were available on-site, that would encourage people not to indulge in substance use until they got there. That would depend very much on what type of testing we put in place. Are we talking about somebody giving a sample of their substance to be tested in real time and being given a result there and then? That is one thing, but it might be difficult to achieve. Alternatively, is it more about issuing a more general warning, perhaps on big screens, to concertgoers that a certain substance is in circulation and people need to be wary of it? We really need to tease that out. If it were the former, where you might be saying to somebody, "The substance that you had me test is OK for you to take", that would raise an ethical issue, a moral issue and a legal issue. It would also raise an issue about possible false negatives and false positives. There is a lot of consideration yet to be given to that issue.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Minister, thank you for that response.

I call Alan Robinson to make a winding-up speech on the amendment. You have up to five minutes.

Mr Robinson: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.

Every summer, thousands of people attend festivals and concerts. They go to enjoy music, have fun and make memories. Those events are fantastic and tend to be well run. I think of the Stendhal Festival in my constituency. People go for the music, the beer and the craic. I encourage anyone in the Chamber to attend at least once. We know, however, that, for some, the night at a concert or festival does not end safely; indeed, drug-related deaths and medical emergencies are becoming all too common. Paul Frew, who moved the amendment, laid bare the startling figures on drug seizures and deaths.

I will repeat the figures: in a 12-month period up until the end of June 2025, there were 6,769 drug seizures and 3,049 drug-related arrests.

I echo Paul Frew's comment that it is important to point out that there are no safe ways of taking illegal drugs. Although we recognise the role that harm reduction measures can play, such measures must always be complemented by the police identifying people who are involved in the supply of drugs, arresting them and bringing them before the courts.

Mr Carroll: Will the Member give way?

Mr Robinson: I will not today, because I am late for another event.

We must not normalise drug use, especially at events that so many young people attend. It is wrong for drugs to be returned or for advice to be given on their so-called safe usage. There are no safe illegal drugs. The motion, unfortunately, makes no reference to whether the expectation will be that those providing rapid on-site testing at festivals and concerts will have to procure a licence to operate in advance. That is why we tabled an amendment to the motion. The Home Office has governed the issuing of such licences in GB, and it would be an oversight for this part of the UK to go it alone and take a less stringent and less safe approach. The HSE in the Irish Republic, which operates such testing at concerts, has described its services as:

That begs the following questions. What issues can be discussed? What training do staff have? Does so-called confidentiality prevent onward referral to the police of information that is likely to lead to prosecutions?

The DUP supports protections for young people who attend concerts and wants there to be effective means of alerting concertgoers about dangerous substances that are in circulation. We have to be careful, however, not to compromise the integrity of taking a criminal justice approach to the supply and possession of illegal drugs in order to drive down the number of families left devastated, and, in some cases, with an empty chair. Again, that is why we sought to amend the motion. In doing so, we wanted to strengthen it.

I will not rehash Members' comments. I thank the proposer, Órlaithí Flynn. She referred to how harm reduction measures save lives, and I am glad that she also talked about how dangerous drugs are. I say again that we cannot normalise the taking of illegal drugs. I also thank Paul Frew, the proposer of the amendment. He pitched his comments at a level on which we can all agree: we need to save lives. He also focused on how taking illegal drugs is wrong. No one should have drugs returned, and I will repeat that there are no safe illegal drugs.

Before I conclude, I thank the Minister for acknowledging the pain of families. It is always important to inject a human touch into what sometimes can be very stale debates in the Chamber, and he certainly did that today.

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

Miss Hargey: Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. I thank my party colleagues for tabling this important motion and, indeed, those Members who tabled the amendment. I also thank Members from all parties for their contributions and the Minister for taking the time to come along to the debate.

Unfortunately, I have seen at first hand in my constituency of South Belfast the impact of illegal drugs and, indeed, other substances, including legal drugs, and the effect that their use can have on families, communities and society as a whole. I am sure that other Members can say the same thing, and they have. Sadly, too many people, especially younger people, have lost their lives recently as a result of drug and alcohol misuse.

Over the summer, along with other Sinn Féin representatives in South Belfast, I joined Ógra Shinn Féin on the Boucher Road, where concerts were taking place. On one night, over 40,000 people were out to enjoy a night out. The atmosphere was amazing. The sun was out, and there was a great buzz in South Belfast. People were ultimately going to enjoy their night, but we were there to hand out anti-spiking kits in order to raise awareness of the dangers of drugs, of how they can be misused and also of how spiking can be done maliciously. We were there to warn those concertgoers to be alert and to keep safe. That was a great initiative from a group of young people in our party. I am sure that it can be replicated by other young people throughout the city and beyond. It really highlights what agencies could do at events such as concerts. If Ógra Shinn Féin can hand out a couple of thousand anti-spiking kits at one event, I am sure that all our agencies and Departments, including Health, Justice and Communities, could work together to do so much more and have a huge impact. On that night, the response from the concertgoers was really positive. People were glad to see somebody there who was making some type of intervention. Whilst they might not have thought about spiking as they were going out, just handing them the kit made them think and might have sparked something in their heads. We are not saying that it will be the panacea, but, if any mitigation or intervention saves one life, it is ultimately worth doing.

Sinn Féin is absolutely committed to tackling drug use through an evidence-based and public health-led approach. We want to ensure that we reduce the harm, and, from what we heard in the debate, I think that everybody wants that. We recognise that criminalisation alone does not save lives. What saves lives are interventions that are rooted in harm reduction, education and practical support and help on the ground. Many of the contributors spoke of that today.

I will highlight the example of the Market community where I live. The Market Development Association is working with Queen's University Belfast on its QCAP — Queen's Communities and Place — initiative. That is a community initiative that looks at substance misuse and the health inequalities that the Minister touched on. It is looking at how it can break the stigma in that community; the impact of addiction, suicide, trauma, mental health issues and inequality; and the importance of working-class communities coming together, having a sense of pride in those communities and showing their resilience. Importantly, it is about showing that communities coming together can be an important driver in mitigating and reducing harm.

Mr Carroll: I appreciate the Member's giving way. She is much more courteous with giving her time than the previous contributor. She mentioned the fact that the criminalisation approach alone does not work, and I agree with that. Does she have concerns about the amendment, which mentions:

If that approach were to be adopted, we would never be able to locate particularly toxic and dangerous drugs. Do she and her party have concerns about that approach?

Miss Hargey: We are pushing for a health-led harm reduction approach. That is what we want to see, which is why we tabled the motion. From listening to all the contributions, I think that we have a broad unity of purpose. There may be some areas in which we want clarity or in which we may not fully agree, but I sense that there is a broad unity of purpose in the Chamber. That is the important message that we want to send out from the Chamber.

We need to break the stigma and silence. I commend to the Minister a play called 'The Black Dog', which was produced by the Market community that I spoke about. That piece of theatre was shown over the summer in the Waterfront Hall, which was packed out on the four nights. The play talked about these very issues and the impact of health inequalities on working-class communities, particularly the Market. However, it could also have been about communities in the Shankill, Donegall Pass, the New Lodge, Derry and other places. That production will be shown again, so I commend it to the Minister so that, when he gets the invite, he goes along. It is a really powerful piece of theatre that shows how the arts can be used to break the stigma and to build a sense of community, connection and resilience.

When we look internationally to areas such as Portugal and the Netherlands, which were touched on, we see that other Governments have introduced models of on-site drug testing, pill checking and drug information services, particularly at musical events. Many contributors touched on the Electric Picnic event and how its organisers introduced drug testing on-site this year. We in the North are the only part of these islands that does not have such a scheme in place. The Minister has not said that he intends to introduce such a scheme here, but I implore him to make sure that there is unity of purpose across the islands. Colm and others touched on the need to see greater collaboration across the island and these islands. We need to see more joined-up working not only in our Departments but across jurisdictions.

With ours being the only jurisdiction to lag behind in a scheme or initiative such as that, again, I recommend that the Minister look seriously at the issue. Minister, you touched on DAMIS and said that there already is testing, but we hear from those who work in the field that that is too slow. It takes days to get results from DAMIS, and not every service user feeds into it, which is another issue. We support the Queen's pilot and its partnership work, because we need more rapid drug testing. Communities such as the Market also call for that, because they know that the quicker that we can get results, the quicker that we can alert the public and, potentially, save lives and mitigate future harms.

The Minister talked about giving the model careful thought and consideration. Is there a timeline for that? Will it be part of the review of DAMIS? The practitioners and the communities on the ground do not want to just hear our words about a unity of purpose. They want timelines and firmer commitments. I am keen, if the information is not available today, to know when firmer commitments will be realised.

The PSNI needs to be part of any harm reduction framework — one that involves community outreach and collaboration. That is important in working with event organisers to ensure that visible safeguarding and other measures are in place. Paul and Jonny touched on that. Of course, there must be training for the on-site staff to ensure that emergency services and infrastructure are in place so that, if something goes wrong, there is quick and easy access to medical assistance. That reinforces and highlights the fact that we need to see community-led policing: policing with the community and in the interests of the community. Let us be clear, however: policing alone will not prevent drug-related deaths. That is not a criticism but a statement of fact.

It is clear that on-site testing at all major music events and festivals, with protections for those who use it, should be introduced, and we urge the Health Minister to do so as a matter of urgency. I take your point, Minister, that investigations into the incidents in the summer are ongoing, but, in the commentary that emerged from them, the Public Health Agency said that it is open to exploring that. We urge you to look at the expansion of rapid drug testing and to look again at initiatives such as the anti-spiking initiative, because they prompt the public to think about the issues and maybe take interventions and mitigations into their own hands. In supporting such initiatives, we are empowering our local citizens.

It is not about condoning drug use; it is about facing reality. Young people and, indeed, many adults in our communities will continue to attend festivals and events. Some will experiment, and some will make mistakes, but our duty is to —

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

Miss Hargey: — ensure that those mistakes are not fatal and that we prevent harm.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Thank you for concluding the debate.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Members, take your ease before the ministerial statement.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): I have received notice from the Minister for Communities that he wishes to make a statement. Before I call the Minister, I remind Members that they must be concise in asking their questions. This is not an opportunity for debate, and long introductions will not be allowed. Minister, over to you.

Mr Lyons (The Minister for Communities): Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. I wish to make a statement on the launch of the Northern Ireland community infrastructure fund, which is a major new investment supporting the refurbishment and improvement of community buildings and facilities right across Northern Ireland. In June, I provided a written ministerial statement to the Assembly setting out my intention to launch a scheme in support of the halls, hubs and centres that rarely make headlines but that make an enormous difference in sustaining local life across Northern Ireland.

I have moved at pace, so tomorrow, the Northern Ireland community infrastructure fund will open. Last Wednesday night, at an event in Pomeroy, I was pleased to be joined by fellow elected representatives, voluntary and community leaders and other funders to launch the fund. It was great to see the energy in the room and recognition of the importance of halls and community buildings and of sustaining them, and, importantly, it was great to get feedback from sectoral leaders endorsing this timely intervention that responds to need in our communities.

My vision for the fund is not just about bricks and mortar; it is about people, places and potential. In my role as Communities Minister, I have seen at first hand how vital community buildings and local halls are — they could be church halls, Orange halls, sports clubs or village halls — as the beating heart of our cities, towns and villages. They are the places where children learn, where people gather and where faith, sport, culture and heritage are celebrated. Across Northern Ireland, from Strabane to Strangford and Portrush to Pomeroy, they bring people together not because they are grand or state of the art but because they are the thread that weaves our communities together. They are where communities gather, grow and support one another, where a teenager discovers confidence, where those who are isolated find friendship, where neighbours become volunteers and where the fabric of our communities is knitted together.

Many of those buildings are under strain. They are ageing and tired. I have seen that at first hand in my visits across Northern Ireland. Many Members have told me of the importance and constraints of those facilities in their constituencies. In too many cases, they are no longer fit for purpose. They are cold in winter, inaccessible for some people, outdated and inefficient. Volunteers and trustees are stretching themselves to keep the lights on or to make the most of spaces that are inadequate or limiting. I think that we can all agree that that is not good enough.

Those experiences have convinced me that the Government need to step in with practical support. I have chosen to act with urgency and ambition in establishing the Northern Ireland community infrastructure fund, which will disburse £4·3 million to our grassroots and local communities. That is a direct response to the challenges that face our communities. It is a significant and timely investment and is proof of me delivering, not just discussing. The fund will provide grants of up to £40,000 for over 100 individual projects. That is more than 100 opportunities for local communities to improve, adapt and flourish.

I know that the funding will not meet every need. Demand will undoubtedly outstrip what is available. This is a pilot that will provide an opportunity to build understanding of need and impact and learn lessons. To help to deliver the fund effectively and with impact, we have partnered with Co-operation Ireland to administer the scheme in partnership with my officials. That is a voluntary organisation with a proven track record of expertise, networks and trusted relationships. My aim is that the Northern Ireland community infrastructure fund will support voluntary and community organisations to sustain their buildings and ensure that they are ready to serve for years to come. However, it is also about the potential to better serve their community. That could be the church hall that has upgraded its kitchen and now runs a weekly community cafe that brings people — young parents, pensioners and newcomers to the area — together. Such examples are not just upgrades; they are transformations.

There is another vital part of the story: local suppliers. My fund will allow community groups to work with local SMEs and microenterprises. By using experienced local tradespeople, builders and service providers, we will support small businesses and maintain jobs. This investment will not just improve buildings but multiply its impact by supporting livelihoods and building pride. It will be social value in action.

The fund will be open to voluntary and community groups, including faith-based organisations, sports clubs, church halls, village halls, Orange halls and other centres that provide a wide range of community activities. I will take a moment to highlight the role of faith-based organisations. Church halls have long served as more than places of worship. For generations, they have provided an inclusive space for many, from parent-and-toddler groups to lunch clubs and Scouting and Guide groups. One of the real strengths of the fund is the fact that it is open to a wide spectrum of community spaces across Northern Ireland, whether that be a community centre in Londonderry, a faith-based group in Portadown, a sporting club in Omagh or an Orange hall in Carrickfergus. Those buildings may look different, serve different purposes and be rooted in different traditions, but they can all play a vital role in community life in which they are open to and used by the wider community.

The scheme will provide funding towards repairs to existing community buildings. That could include refurbishment or structural repairs; small-scale refurbishment or renovation works to improve communal facilities such as kitchens and toilets, or changes to enable multiple uses for premises; capital works for accessibility improvements, including upgrades such as ramps or lifts; and energy-efficiency measures such as boiler replacement, window upgrades and solar panels.

The first stage of the application process opens tomorrow. The fund will award successful applicants up to 95% of the cost of their capital project, to a maximum value of £40,000. We are asking organisations to contribute 5% of the project cost, whether that is through fundraising, reserves or loans. That is not a barrier but a way to strengthen ownership and sustainability. That modest contribution ensures that groups are actively invested in their projects, encourages local fundraising and partnership and helps to stretch public funding further. Over the next fortnight, we will hold a range of information sessions, including in-person events in Belfast, Larne, Newry, Enniskillen, Dungannon and Londonderry, as well as online events, to help groups to learn more about eligibility for the fund and about the application process. The application process will be clear and transparent, with robust criteria to ensure fairness and value for money. Stage 1 of the process is an expression of interest. That will open tomorrow and run until 29 October 2025. Stage 2 of the application process will begin on 19 November and run until 9 January 2026. I encourage all Members to engage with the guidance, which is now on my Department’s website, and to signpost prospective applicants to the support that is available.

Change does not always begin with sweeping reforms. Sometimes, it begins with a new roof, a new boiler or a new kitchen, but those changes unlock so much more. With the fund, we are investing not just in buildings but in our communities — community capital and infrastructure. I look forward to seeing the fund deliver for communities across Northern Ireland. I commend the statement to the House.

Mr Durkan: I thank the Minister for the statement. It is vital that we maximise the uptake and impact of any available funding across all our constituencies and communities. What measures will be put in place to ensure fair geographical distribution of the funding — you will not be surprised to hear me raise that, Minister — and fair distribution by community background? What checks and balances will be in place to ensure value for money as well?

Mr Lyons: The fund is open to all eligible voluntary and community organisations across Northern Ireland, regardless of geography, tradition or type of activity. There are no predetermined targets or preferential criteria. We have developed clear eligibility and assessment criteria, as set out in the guidance notes. Grant applications will be assessed on the basis of evidence, need, capacity, readiness, impact, sustainability and, yes, value for money as well.

Mr Gildernew (The Chairperson of the Committee for Communities): I thank the Minister for his statement. I welcome the fact that the scheme will assist communities and I welcome the spread of areas that are being engaged with through information sessions. That is really useful. However, Minister, this has not come the length of the Communities Committee. Therefore, given that there have been recent concerns around the soccer funding that was announced, what can you tell us about the qualifying process? Who will have the final say on who does or does not get funding? Will it be Co-operation Ireland or you? What due diligence was done in relation to the process that Co-operation Ireland will use in distributing the money?

Mr Lyons: First of all, a written ministerial statement was provided in June. On the back of that, the Committee asked for more information. I was happy to get that briefing organised, and it will happen shortly. However, I highlight the fact that all members of the Committee — indeed, all MLAs — were invited to the launch last week, where they would have been able to hear more about the fund. Unfortunately, the Committee Chairman did not make it. In fact, none of the Members on the other side of the House were able to make it to that information event. It would have been useful to have heard more about the fund. Ultimately, it is not the role of the Committee to decide policy; it is the role of the Committee to scrutinise and to assist me in the development of policy. There will be an opportunity as we assess the evaluation of the uptake, and you will have the opportunity to ask those questions at Committee.

As for his other question about how the assessment will be carried out, that will be done by Co-operation Ireland because of the experience that it has in those matters. That, of course, will be done against the assessment criteria. My advice to him and everyone else is this: instead of quibbling about the process, to make sure that you are aware of the process and can help to provide the necessary support to those who apply so that we can maximise our understanding of the need. I would like to see the fund rolled out further in the future, and that information will be useful.

Ms Brownlee: I am delighted to see more delivery for our grassroots organisations, but, Minister, I understand that the funding will be paid out retrospectively. How will the Department address the worries of smaller organisations, which may struggle with cash flow if they have to pay up front?

Mr Lyons: There will be flexibility, because we understand that some applicants may not have the capital available to be able to draw that down immediately, so we can work on a case-by-case basis with those who need additional help, and we will be happy to provide that at a further stage of the process.

Ms K Armstrong: Minister, I am interested to find out, as the previous Member mentioned, that it will be a retrospective grant. That was not included in the statement today. Minister, may I ask you about the works going forward? You talked about future-proofing, which is very welcome, but will any criteria be provided for groups to ensure that they do not, for instance, replace an oil boiler with an oil boiler, when we are actually looking to reduce emissions?

Mr Lyons: First of all, I hope that the Member listened to the answer that I gave to Ms Brownlee, where I made it clear that there would be flexibility. More information on that will be available.

We are trying to make sure that we help people and facilitate improvements in a number of areas, such as the physical condition, accessibility and usage buildings. Applications will also be scored on energy efficiency and reduced maintenance costs, so, of course, those things will be taken into consideration as well. However, let us be aware that, in many rural areas, it is simply not an option to have any other form of heating system in place. All that needs to be taken into consideration. The Member specifically mentioned oil. Sometimes, oil is the only option that is available.

Mr Butler: I thank the Minister for his statement. He will be aware, as will many MLAs, that there are groups that are proficient in the application process. Often, however, there are groups, particularly in rural areas, that do not have the capacity and knowledge to fill out their applications in such a way as to score highly enough. Has the Minister anything in place to encourage groups that have been on the fringes previously to avail themselves of funds that have been closed to them in the past?

Mr Lyons: Yes, we are doing a number of things. First, we are putting the screening process in place at the beginning. That means that those who are not eligible, because they do not meet the basic criteria to start off with, will not then spend a lot of time and energy filling out an application form. Secondly, information sessions will be available online, during the day and in the evenings, and there will be sessions that people can go to in person, again during the day and in the evenings, to make sure that they have all the information that they need. Officials will be on hand to answer any additional questions that people may have.

We are not trying to exclude anybody. Rather, we are trying to help everybody. I say this to all groups and organisations: answer the questions that are in front of you and provide as much information and evidence as you can. We are ensuring that the process is as simple and straightforward as possible. We are not trying to exclude anybody or trip anybody up. Rather, we are trying to make sure that people have the ability to articulate their needs, and the criteria of need will then be applied to assess the applications.

Mr McHugh: Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a ráiteas.

He will be well aware of the vital role that the GAA plays in communities, particularly in rural communities. Across the North, GAA clubs are often the hub for other cultural activities, over and above just our Gaelic games. They are used for dance events, our music and so on. They fulfil another role, however. For instance, when it comes to a bereavement, and visitors to a community have to be accommodated for, say, tea after a funeral, the GAA club will be used, as it is perhaps the only facility available in certain rural communities. Will the Minister confirm that GAA clubs and halls will not be excluded from the fund?

Mr Lyons: As I have stated, any community buildings that are operated by sporting organisations and are available as community venues for non-sporting activities will be eligible for funding. That is set out clearly in the guidance. It will be up to all organisations to demonstrate their need, meet all the criteria, explain why the funding is necessary and show that there is no other funding in place of which they can avail themselves.

Mr Brooks: I thank the Minister for his statement. The Member who spoke previously talked about exclusion. I am delighted to see that this is a scheme that can offer support from which, for the first time on many an occasion, churches are not excluded. What is the Minister's assessment of the impact that the fund will have on our many churches and faith-based groups, considering the money that they save the Government through the services that they offer to our local communities?

Mr Lyons: I am grateful to the Member for raising that issue. It is difficult for me to answer the question, because the community, social and economic benefits that churches and faith-based organisations bring to Northern Ireland are almost unquantifiable. They are often the unsung heroes. They put on events, run clubs and host youth groups that young people attend and at which their characters and futures are shaped. I am grateful to the Member for having raised in the past with me the approach taken by some organisations. The way in which they are prepared to exclude and discriminate against those who operate in faith-based environments is absolutely disgraceful. That will never happen when I am in this Department.

Mr Brooks: Hear, hear.

Mr Lyons: I will ensure that those from faith-based organisations are able not only to continue their work but to avail themselves of government support and funding where that is appropriate. I look forward to faith-based organisations being able to apply to, and take advantage of, a scheme that will help build community infrastructure so that they can continue to have an impact on the lives of young and old across Northern Ireland.

Ms Mulholland: I thank the Minister for his statement. I am interested in the local economic impact that the fund may have. I am particularly interested in the reference that was made to the benefits for local SMEs and tradespeople. How will the Department monitor whether contracts are awarded locally? Will there be safeguards in place to ensure that individual tradespeople and smaller companies will be able to compete fairly with the larger companies that we so often see tender for such work?

Mr Lyons: Ultimately, it will be down to the organisations that apply to source the quotes and source the people who will do the work. Given the small nature of some of the works that will be required in the grand scheme of things, local organisations and local employers will be able to benefit. Of course, we expect all projects to be costed appropriately and all project costs to be within an appropriate cost range for the type of works that are proposed.

Any works must be properly procured, and we need to make sure that the procurement exercises are fair, open and transparent, because public funds are at stake, and we need to make sure that there is value for money. There will be £4·3 million going into local communities across Northern Ireland, and that will be of benefit. Of course, we will look at that issue when it comes to the monitoring and reporting of the scheme overall. We will want to keep an eye on that, because I hope that we can bring forward the scheme on a rolling, permanent basis, and that information will be useful to demonstrate its positivity.

Mr Martin: I thank the Minister for his statement. Minister, I note that you mentioned sports clubs in your statement. At this point, I should thank you for coming to my constituency to see Bangor Swifts Juniors in training. What funding can sports clubs apply for under the fund?

Mr Lyons: I am grateful to the Member for inviting me to see the work that goes on there. Sporting organisations are able to apply for funding for the community buildings that they operate, but they must be able to demonstrate the work that they do for non-sporting activities. I draw the Member's attention to the Olympic legacy fund that I announced last week. It is also there to help sports clubs that are in need of funding. I am sure that the Member will help the people in his constituency who need it. He should be aware of both of those funds that I have made available to clubs in his and, indeed, all constituencies.

Ms D Armstrong: I thank the Minister for his statement, which will be welcomed in the many small, rural community halls that span Fermanagh and South Tyrone. Minister, you mentioned that you have partnered with Co-operation Ireland. Will you detail any engagement that your Department has had with Co-operation Ireland on the Northern Ireland community infrastructure fund?

Mr Lyons: Yes, of course. We engaged with Co-operation Ireland throughout the process. We appointed it because of its expertise, the established systems that it has in place and the trusted relationships that it has with the sector more widely. It is well positioned to provide the additional support that is available. Another reason is that it is the most cost-effective and efficient delivery route. That means that we can invest more in the community sector itself.

Mr Harvey: I welcome the Minister's statement. Will he expand on the social value piece and the impact that that will have on local communities?

Mr Lyons: Yes. Again, that is almost unquantifiable, because, yes, we are releasing £4·3 million into local communities across Northern Ireland, but the impact of that will go on and on, not only through the extra work that the community facilities will be able to provide but in the stability that that will bring for many jobs, employers and employees and in the additional money that we will invest in our economy. In short, it is very difficult to give a precise figure, but there is no doubt that it will continue to have a ripple effect across communities.

Mr Bradley: I thank the Minister for his statement. He has partly answered my question already. People who run halls for faith-based organisations have been unwilling or unable to apply for funding that is attached to lottery sources, because of their faith. Can the Minister confirm that this is government funding through his Department and is not lottery supported? The fund will be highly beneficial to faith-based communities and faith-based organisations.

Mr Lyons: I appreciate the fact that that point has been raised, because it seems that some in our society today think that the last acceptable form of discrimination is that against faith-based organisations. Many feel that that is OK and that faith-based organisations can be discriminated against. However, I can confirm for him that there is no lottery-sourced funding for the project. It is coming entirely out of the capital budget of my Department.

Mr K Buchanan: Obviously, the scheme will cover rural and urban halls. In the past, a previous AERA Minister supported 113 rural halls. I questioned the Minister yesterday in the Chamber, and he indicated that he was having conversations with you about supporting the fund. Do you see the AERA Minister putting his hand in his pocket and supporting you when you step in to support rural communities? Will he support you financially to cover more halls than you have talked about with the figure that you referred to?

Mr Lyons: Well, I certainly hope so, and I am very grateful to the Member for asking that question in the Chamber yesterday. When the Agriculture Minister left the Chamber, I bumped into him. I did not do it on purpose, but I just happened to bump into him as he came out, and I hope that he will not mind me saying that we had a brief conversation about it, and he committed, as he did in the Chamber, to working with me on it. It is important that proper support is provided in rural and urban areas. He clearly has a direct responsibility for rural communities, and I would be more than happy if he could assist me in what we are trying to do because it would benefit rural communities across Northern Ireland. I look forward to his support, and, in particular, I look forward to some financial support from him so that we can deliver even more.

Mrs Cameron: I thank the Minister for his statement to the House. It is a really important programme, and I am sure that my constituents in South Antrim and those great organisations will be keen to avail themselves of it. Will the Minister consider making it a rolling programme so that community assets can be maintained well into the future?

Mr Lyons: What a good idea. Absolutely. We need to wait to see the evidence of need. We need to see exactly how much is needed, where that need is and how many applications we get etc. However, from the conversations that I have had already, from the response in the Chamber and from the numbers that have signed up — significant numbers of organisations are coming along to the information sessions right across Northern Ireland — I know that there is a huge demand for it. Those community halls, church halls, Orange halls and village halls right across Northern Ireland make a huge impact but are in huge need.

It is a pilot. We are testing it. I am doing what I can with what I have right now, but I would very much like to see it become a rolling programme. We will take lessons from the pilot scheme, and, hopefully, we will be able to extend that out. I would appreciate Members' support in that.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Ladies and gentlemen, that concludes questions on the statement. Take your ease for a few moments before we move to the Adjournment debate.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): In conjunction with the Business Committee, the Speaker has given Phillip Brett leave to raise the matter of the lack of development of Tribeca, Belfast. Phillip, you have up to 15 minutes.

Mr Brett: Like Members on all sides of the House, I got involved in politics because I love my community and the city that I am honoured to represent. It would be churlish of me not to recognise the massive progress that has been made in our city, particularly in North Belfast, over many years. A constituency that was once blighted by sectarian violence has been transformed, and, while we in that constituency face unique pressures, we continue to build back in the positive image that we all want to see. North Belfast now leads the way in our city's night-time economy offering. It is a cultural capital part of our city, and it has an offering for tourists and those who call North Belfast "home" alike. In recent years, Crumlin Road Gaol has been redeveloped, and there is ongoing investment at Clifton Street Orange Hall, the forthcoming development of Belfast Stories, as well as the MAC, the Oh Yeah centre and the Cathedral Quarter. I could go on and on. Those places are the result of the dedication of the business men and women who have taken the lead and rebuilt our city.

The actions of government since the return of this place have also been welcome. I massively welcomed the huge progress that has been made on providing year-round, late-night public transport, which will be a massive regeneration for our part of North Belfast. When the Minister speaks, he might wish to say a little about his support for that initiative. The pedestrianisation of Hill Street next month, while a small step forward, shows the ambition of all sides and that, when we work together, we can deliver.

Although all that progress has been made, there is a glaring omission. The once bustling heart of inner-city North Belfast — North Street and the surrounding streets — now looks like a bomb site. It is a stain on our capital city, and I am, frankly, embarrassed by the current condition of what is now called the "Tribeca" site. Such blight would not be accepted in any other part of Belfast. I am not saying it just because the leader of the Opposition is here, but, if that site were on the Malone Road, it would have been dealt with a long time ago. The clear message from those who are honoured to represent North Belfast is that the issue now needs to be tackled. It is a citywide interest, and I thank those from other constituencies who are present.

Progress has clearly been achieved in some aspects with Belfast City Council's decision to purchase the Assembly Rooms. That is a welcome step forward, but we need more details on it. If we are providing £2 million of ratepayers' money in Belfast to Tribeca's owners, Castlebrooke Investments, what conditions has Belfast City Council placed on it to develop the rest of the site? Handing over £2 million to a development company that clearly has no interest in taking the rest of the development forward is yet another waste of ratepayers' money.

Other businesses in that area deserve a medal for how they have managed to continue operating, trading and investing in that part of the city despite the horrendous conditions in which they work. At the weekend, I walked up Lower Garfield Street. I know that the Deer's Head has spent hundreds of thousands of pounds to ensure that it has a great offering for locals and tourists. Yet, when people walk out of its doors, they are hit in the face with scaffolding, falling bricks and a disgraceful sight. The businesses in the area pay tens of thousands of pounds in rates every year. They employ our constituents, and the conditions in which they operate would not be accepted in any other part of our city.

They say that success has many mothers and fathers, but, on this occasion, maybe failure does as well. I pay tribute to all political parties for their work on the issue. It is not an issue of my or my party's making, but there is genuine interest, from all sides of the House, in trying to move the situation forward. I pay tribute to our group leader on Belfast City Council, Sarah Bunting, who organised a number of meetings between me and Castlebrooke, so that I could make the need for development clear. Séamas de Faoite, Brian Smyth and Sinn Féin have all been involved in trying to move the situation forward, as has Michael Long from the Alliance Party. I give credit to all political parties for that. I think that we will hear colleagues say that that cross-party message is the strength of the case as we try to move it forward and have it delivered.

I also pay tribute to some of the business organisations that continue to raise this vital issue daily: the Belfast One business improvement district (BID) and Martina Connolly, who continues to champion the need for the redevelopment; the Cathedral Quarter Trust; Save CQ; and the Cathedral Quarter BID, led by Damien Corr.

As I said, progress has been made on the redevelopment of that part of North Belfast, but we need to see strong leadership from central government and the council. A clear message needs to be sent to Castlebrooke that it must use its development rights and planning permission, or it will lose them. As I have continually said, in no other part of the city would such a situation be allowed to drag on. I perfectly understand that market conditions have changed since the initial planning permissions were granted, but people can be expected to wait for only so long for the development to take place. We were told that it would be retail-led, but that changed to it being office space. The newest incarnation may be a housing-led development. All those uses are important and welcome, but the redevelopment needs to be delivered.

People, frankly, are fed up. It is not my job to make excuses for Castlebrooke; my job is to stand up for the people who elected me. They want to see action taken on the site. We should send a strong message from the Chamber today so that Castlebrooke is put on notice. It needs to get on with developing the site and stop expecting the people of North Belfast and our wider city to accept second best.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): All other Members who are called to speak will now have approximately five minutes. Members should not accept any interventions, because that will cut down their time.

Ms Ní Chuilín: I thank Phillip for bringing forward the Adjournment topic today. I am from the area. I still occasionally call over and go for a walk with my friends and their dogs around there. I do not stray into the Deer's Head, but I have seen some of you at the Duke of York when we have walked up there with the dogs. Those are great establishments, by the way. Phillip is 100% right that all that you are met with around there is dereliction and scaffolding. No attention or care is paid, and that sends out a message to residents, and, potentially, to developers. One of the most iconic parts of the city, including its architecture, is being lost.

I remember — this is not a dig at the SDLP, Matthew — the announcement in 2003 about Royal Exchange. It was really ambitious. Phillip is right: it was retail, and then it became office space. Hopefully, it will end up as a mixture of both. Following the awful fire in North Street Arcade in 2004, there has been mission creep. Royal Avenue used to be bustling, from Lower Donegall Street through to Donegall Place, but now it is not. As someone who has been there in the evening, on dark nights, I can say that it is a scary place; even the businesses there say that.

I completely agree with everything that Phillip said about Castlebrooke. Deirdre and I, along with our team, have been involved. Phillip is right about the cross-party team in Belfast City Council that has led the charge on that. Our party is adamant about the Assembly Rooms. The cross-party support to try to get the whole thing done is sustaining us all, to be frank.

Castlebrooke need to be put on notice. I am not getting stuck into South Belfast, but this would not be allowed to happen in BT9 or elsewhere. It should not be allowed to happen anywhere, regardless of postcode.

I would like the Department to use its regeneration powers and act as the leadership on the matter. I know that businesses pay a lot of money in rates, but Belfast ratepayers have coughed up more than anyone else. The developers have led us all a merry dance. We have all been clear about what we want and what we do not want. Every time you think you are getting somewhere, they come back. I would go as far as to say that, in my experience, they have been very disingenuous. I can only imagine the frustration felt by potential developers.

We have had meetings with housing associations and other housing providers, as well as developers, to look at using the 80:20 social/private ratio. Everybody has stretched themselves and then some, and it is still sitting there. The engagement all depends on correspondence from Belfast City Council's planning committee, which reminds the developers that they need to engage. Engagement and communication should be a constant. We know that in this place. Even if it is good — we have good days and bad days — most people know exactly where they stand. We thought that we knew where we stood with Castlebrooke. I hate the name "Tribeca"; it is just rubbish. That whole development needs lifted, and we would all welcome the opportunity to do that. The only body that has the ability, the authority and, indeed, the credibility to do this is the Department for Infrastructure. It can bring other agencies to a round-table discussion to bring everyone together. It has regeneration powers, with the kudos of acting on behalf of the Assembly and the Executive, even just to lever other Departments.

I am glad that Hill Street is to be pedestrianised. It has taken too long. If developers are watching how we do things, they will do nothing in haste. We all need to be honest about that.

There is an opportunity for us all to come together and put Castlebrooke and others on notice, along with our community, business and statutory partners. I am up for that. Thank you. Phillip, for securing the Adjournment debate today.

Miss McAllister: Thank you, Phil, for securing the debate. There is nothing that we disagree on. It is really important to note the cross-party working, particularly on Belfast City Council. Since I moved on to the Assembly, our party group leader, despite being an East Belfast elected rep, has been very invested in the Assembly Rooms in particular. Cross-party working is important in moving forward.

Much of what you said, Phil, at the start of your speech I had in mine: the MAC, Crumlin Road Gaol, Duncairn arts centre and Ulster University. North Belfast is thriving, and there is redevelopment going on. When you go into the city centre and then beyond the Cathedral Quarter into North Street and the Tribeca site, it is absolutely depressing. I get a wee bit scundered too when I call it by that name, but that is what everyone knows it as. There was supposed to have been a £500 million investment in the area, but, so far, what has it achieved? Tumbleweed, dilapidation and disrepair. It is an absolute disgrace that it has been allowed to remain like that for so long.

It is really important to note that, whenever any of us have a meeting or any correspondence with Castlebrooke, I question where it is moving to in future and what the area will look like. We have to be honest about that, because we do not really have the full picture. I know that there are planning proposals on the table at the moment and there are a lot of changes, but forgive me for remaining sceptical as to what it will look like. We need to learn from those lessons. We cannot allow developers to come in and buy up land but not do anything with it or perhaps get planning permission and sell it on in a constant "rinse and repeat" cycle.

The area is steeped in history. It has one of the oldest churches in Belfast. It has a small congregation, but it has a lot of history — the United Irishmen, the Belfast Harpers' Assembly. There is lot to be proud of that we can sell not only to Belfast but to wider Northern Ireland and tourism. If it had not been for a handful of local businesses that remained, saying, "No, I'm not shutting up shop and moving on" and "I'm staying here", the area would be in a much worse state.

When the university was relocating, we had a massive opportunity for Castlebrooke to play ball and get on board with the community and change the area for the better, but that opportunity was missed. We should get back on track. Hopefully, the Minister, who will respond to the debate, can think about working with Andrew Muir, the AERA Minister, on the Dilapidation Bill. We should use whatever powers will come from that to force developers, in particular, and property owners to look after sites so that they do not fall into further disrepair.

I welcome the council's move to take over the Assembly Rooms. I welcome the pedestrianisation of Hill Street, but, as Carál said, that took too long, and we cannot wait any longer. What can that part of North Belfast look like? It can be lively and bustling. It should be a mix of private, public and retail businesses. It should have more pubs and restaurants. It should be a hub to bring people together. All parties, led by the Government and Belfast City Council, should be working towards achieving that. My party is prepared to work with every party in the Assembly, with every party on Belfast City Council and with any Minister who is involved to get what we need, which is the thriving redevelopment of the Tribeca area in North Belfast.

I again thank the Member who secured the debate. I am grateful to have been able to contribute, and I look forward to hearing what the Minister has to say.

Mr Kelly: Consensus has broken out, so I will keep this short. There were a couple of points that I really wanted to make, but some of them have already been made.

I thank Phillip Brett for bringing the topic to the Chamber. It is opportune. Planning permission was granted in 2020 for what was sold as a £500 million regeneration scheme of the Cathedral Quarter, whereby 12 acres of the city centre were meant to be brought back to life with homes, offices and shops. Five years on, however, nothing has happened, as other Members have said; in fact, planning applications have only been withdrawn. No real step forward has been taken; promises have not been kept; and the site lies idle.

I agree with all that has been said about Castlebrooke Investments. Unfortunately, that probably goes for a lot of huge investment companies. Nuala mentioned — she did not use the term — land banking, and that is what Tribeca appears to be. Land banking does not only happen here, but the Tribeca site is a huge example of it. Companies will flip the land when the price goes up, after which somebody else will hold on to it for a long time, waiting for the right opportunity to make the most money from selling it on. We have to look at that and see what we can do about it.

I read some of Castlebrooke's stuff. The company said that it was frustrated: it is not as frustrated as the people of Belfast. Who pays the price for the delay? It is not the developers in London but the people of the Belfast. As has been mentioned, small businesses have been pushed out of the area. Others have been brave enough to stay, and fair play to them for doing so. The area is a site of absolute dereliction.

The Assembly Rooms is one of the most historic buildings in the city, and it was left abandoned while developers chased profit. The building is where Henry Joy McCracken was sentenced in 1798, and it should be restored and respected as an important part of our history, whatever our view of history is, not left to fall into disrepair. Belfast City Council, as I understand it, is at the contract stage of purchasing the building and bringing it back into the ownership of the people of Belfast, which is what we should see done with the entire area, at least where that is possible. We expect completion soon. That is the leadership that we need.

Community groups have also stepped up where developers have failed. Save CQ has sent thousands of letters objecting to the wrong type of development. The group is advocating for social homes and safe play areas to be included in any development and for developers to engage with artists and with the culture sector, which is essential to our city. Save CQ is rightly calling on developers to develop, not demolish, a lot of our heritage.

The Department for Communities and the Minister have the vesting powers and the regeneration powers. I think that the Minister spoke about that earlier. I agree that the matter is not just for the Assembly and the Minister; it is also for the council, which has showed leadership on all of it. If the developer cannot develop what it promised, those powers should be used.

The failed Tribeca — I hate the name as well, just for the record — development is a lesson in what can happen when development is handed over to private businesses without accountability. The people of this city deserve better. We deserve a city centre that belongs to us. It will have a snowball effect. It is a huge site of 12 acres that will spread out and attract tourism, nightlife and all the rest of it. I think that everybody is united in arguing for that.

Mr Kingston: I thank my colleague Phillip Brett for bringing the debate to the Assembly Floor. I note the high level of agreement from all parties about the frustration at the lack of progress with the development.

North Belfast has the highest level of dereliction in the city centre area. I acknowledge that we have had investment and progress, particularly with the new Ulster University campus. It is a pleasure to see the young people and the new student accommodation in that area. We will see the new Belfast Stories visitor attraction, which the council will bring forward. As others have done, I acknowledge the progress at Hill Street, the MAC, St Anne's Square and the work of the Cathedral Quarter Trust and BID. Moving towards the river, there is the impressive City Quays development by Belfast harbour. However, the derelict sites are very evident when you come into the city centre from the Shankill, Clifton Street, Donegall Street and York Street/York Road.

The non-development of the Tribeca site has been a huge blight and cause of frustration. It did not progress when it was known as "Royal Exchange", and, when Castlebrooke bought it, we expected rapid progress. I understand that the name "Tribeca" comes from New York, where it means "Triangle below Canal Street". I do not know about Belfast: I think that I once heard that, here, it is an abbreviation of "Triangle beside the cathedral" or "Triangle below the cathedral". Castlebrooke has expanded the site by buying up more land and property on the other side of North Street between Rosemary Street and Lower Garfield Street. It has created a 12-acre site — a significant chunk of the city centre. That would be good news, if it was progressing, but, instead, we have seen frustrating years of delay and a lack of physical progress.

Castlebrooke points to wider circumstances that have impacted on its plans. Originally, the site was meant to be retail-led and a John Lewis store was touted, but the growth of online and out-of-town shopping seems to have damaged that prospect. Likewise, Castlebrooke thought about creating a more office-led development, but COVID and the growth of homeworking impacted on those plans. We are told that it is now meant to be residential-led, including some student accommodation and possibly still a hotel, but we hope that there will still be retail uses and public spaces, especially on the ground floor.

We welcome the move by Belfast City Council to purchase the historic Assembly Rooms and other buildings in the car park behind it. We trust that that will come to fruition and kick-start the redevelopment of the wider site. Castlebrooke tells us that a new planning application is being prepared and that it plans to carry out briefings around the end of next month. North Belfast DUP representatives — Phillip Brett and I and our councillors — will continue to push for progress and for early actual progress, not land banking, which is what it seems to be currently.

There have been changes in the economic landscape, but this is prime real estate that connects the city centre to the North Belfast and greater Shankill area. The university campus and Belfast Stories attraction lead the way to a brighter future for this city-centre quarter. Let us see Castlebrooke and Tribeca adding to that regeneration, not holding it back.

Ms D Armstrong: I thank Mr Brett for securing the Adjournment debate. I have certainly learnt a lot about the area and the problems with Tribeca in North Belfast. I hope that Members will not mind if, coming from Fermanagh and South Tyrone, I contribute to the debate. Belfast's dereliction and lack of development affects every part of Northern Ireland, and Tribeca, unfortunately, has become a symbol of delay and, possibly, missed opportunities. Having heard Members speak today, I am encouraged that the resolve is here, and, with the work and the consensus of Belfast City Council, that is positive. I hear good notes on that subject.

Dereliction in Belfast city centre and the lack of development, particularly around the Tribeca site, demands urgent attention. What should have been a symbol of regeneration, as others have pointed out, became and has remained a site of neglect, impacting on the city's appearance and affecting the economy in the retail and tourism sectors. Community pride, in particular, has been affected, and Members have spoken movingly about the impact on the communities living there.

Derelict properties and vacant land result in lost revenue from unpaid rates, which are funds that could support essential local services. That impacts on footfall, harming businesses and undermining Belfast's potential as a vibrant hub of activity for the entirety of Northern Ireland. A proactive approach to tackling the issues is essential, and it is encouraging, as I have said, to see that consensus. Progress is needed in Tribeca. I have seen the plans: it is a promising development that can unlock further massive opportunity for Belfast.

On the wider issue of dereliction, we should continue to press for greater mechanisms to tackle it, such as introducing a vacant land tax that may incentivise property owners to develop or release unused sites, unlocking opportunities for investment and growth. However, such proposals must be examined in detail to avoid any adverse impacts or unintended consequences that could cause a chill factor. We are seeing progress in the long-overdue Dilapidation Bill, which I am keen to see progressed, and there is an expectation that it will become a catalyst for growth in our communities.

I commend Belfast City Council for the Vacant to Vibrant programme. From what I hear, it has been broadly welcomed across the city and perhaps could be a model for elsewhere in Northern Ireland.

We must see progress on Tribeca. For too long the site has seen little or no progress, but, with determination and vision, it can become a reality. My friend Mr Brett wants the development over the line, and, if he puts as much passion into it as he put into getting Hill Street pedestrianised, he will see progress.

Some Members: Hear, hear.

Mr O'Toole: I am pleased to speak on the subject. It is one that Mr Brett and I have talked about a lot, and we share some of the same priorities on the city centre. I am glad that he has proposed the debate. The pedestrianisation of Hill Street and the introduction of night buses are all things that we need in order to maximise the amazing potential of our city centre as a cultural, historic, economic driver not just of this city but of the region and the entire northern part of the island.

The further development of what is shamefully and irritatingly known as "Tribeca" is one of those things. I agree with basically everyone that that is an ahistorical, vulgar and preposterous title to give such a brilliant and historic part of Belfast. However, given that I am the leader of the Opposition as well as a representative of Belfast — I want to talk about the Belfast context — I will inject a little bit of dissent. That is important because dissent is that great, radical, Presbyterian quality that we associate with the Assembly Rooms in that part of Belfast.

I will inject dissent into the consensus in the debate because, while we agree that something must be done, someone watching this debate from outside might think that we are a bit like Mark Twain talking about the weather:

Nearly a year ago, on an Opposition day, the Opposition brought a motion to the Assembly about Tribeca and the preposterous failure to deliver on ending the dereliction there.

That motion asked the Minister of Finance to look at city centre dereliction and at a vacant land tax, which Ms Armstrong just referenced. It also referred to doing something about the historic significance of the Assembly Rooms, and I am glad to say that some progress has been made and that the council is moving towards acquiring that site. We called on the Minister of Finance to do a full rates review of what was happening across the site, because responses to questions for written answer from me revealed the fact that widespread and apparently inappropriate rates reliefs were being given to properties that were falling into dereliction on that site. That was discovered because I asked questions about it. We also called on the Minister for Communities and the Minister for the Economy to work with the Finance Minister and Belfast City Council to further proposals for the site.

I want to see all that happen, but it is important to say that the Assembly passed a motion last November to do all those things. The public out there do not want us just to show up and talk about these things again and again; they want something to happen. I am therefore glad that we have consensus today. Whether it comes from an Adjournment debate today or an Opposition day debate last year, let us see some progress being made. I hope to hear from the Minister. I welcome the fact that he is here to talk about it, because, in May and June 2024, I asked him two questions for written answer about the meetings that he was having about Tribeca and potential regeneration work. He said that he had not had meetings but that he planned to have meetings with the chief executive of Belfast City Council. I would like to hear an update on what happened in those meetings and whether there have been any further meetings, because not only is the site full of potential but we have wasted two decades of potential. As politicians and political parties, we have all had some hand in that, but we all now have responsibility, and some of us have more than others, because some of us do not hold ministerial office to deliver on it. It will require a joined-up effort.

One option that we, as the Opposition, put forward last year was that the Executive, working with Belfast City Council, should create something like the Laganside Corporation. There were some objections to the way in which Laganside worked, and I am not saying that it was perfect, but it was a company that vested land and delivered a regeneration project. It is perfectly within the Executive's legal powers to do that. Why not? We could use financial transactions capital (FTC). FTC is already being used — I hope — to deliver Casement Park, and I think that the Minister wants to use it to deliver other football stadia. I have no problem with that. Why not use it for this purpose? That is something that we could explore. If not that, what? We cannot go on like this. We cannot have any more debates, whether they be Opposition debates or Adjournment debates, or questions in which we talk about something being done only for nothing to happen. I see people looking around the room and thinking, "This guy is being annoying again. He is standing up and making a nuisance of himself", but I do not care, because that is my job. For too long in this place, we have stood up and all agreed with one another, and then — guess what? — nothing has happened.

On the question of whether we are talking about North or South Belfast, here is the point: it is Belfast. Most people who walk down Hill Street, have a pint of Beamish or Murphys in the brilliant Duke of York and then walk round to Donegall Street and North Street say, "Why is this like this? We are in the middle of one of the most happening cities in Ireland and one of the most interesting cities in Europe. Why is there this block of derelict land?" To be honest, guys, we are all worried about where our constituency boundaries lie, but people are not aware of whether they are in North, South, West or East Belfast; they just know that it is Belfast and that it is brilliant and full of potential. As public representatives, we need to get behind it, deliver on it and not let it fall into more dereliction.

I commend the Cathedral Quarter BID. Save CQ has been amazing at campaigning on the issue. Individual reps from a load of parties have worked hard on it. Let us do right by them. Let us deliver it, let us be specific and let us have no more debates in which we all agree with one another. Let us actually do this and make the project and that part of the city thrive again.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Thank you, Matthew. Just before I call Deirdre Hargey, I will say that I find it very upsetting that nobody has mentioned my favourite pub, the John Hewitt. Deirdre, over to you.

Mr O'Toole: I had my 40th birthday there.

Ms Ní Chuilín: Twenty years ago.

Miss Hargey: I probably will not mention it either.

I welcome the debate and thank Phillip for securing it. I had it in my notes that we debated the topic last year. I was here talking about it. When we look at the city centre, we see it as one city centre that impacts on all the communities, but, whilst the Tribeca site is, to be fair, probably the largest in the city that is lying in dereliction, other derelict parts of the city centre border various communities. In South Belfast, areas such as Ormeau Avenue and Cromac Street have large swathes of land just like those in the Tribeca scheme that have been lying derelict for decades. We need to look at those.

Obviously, we have had the impact of conflict. That is one of the reasons why our city centres and cores do not have people living in them in the way that other cities do. We also have a legacy of defensive planning that segregated communities and severed them from the city and from one another. I see that when I look at maps of Belfast. Before the 1960s, Belfast worked on a grid system, but from the 1960s and 1970s, it started to become segregated and communities were severed from the city centre and from one another. I live in the Market, and we are segregated from Donegall Pass, which is segregated from Sandy Row. That continues around the city centre.

Belfast city centre is unique in that it is surrounded by inner-city working-class communities that have been there for generations, staying there through even the worst days and contributing to building our city with its unique aspects. Whatever development happens on the site and on other derelict sites, we need to make sure that it happens alongside those communities, so that they are at the heart of the engagement and consultation, and that we build up greater community and public ownership of land and assets.

Matthew O'Toole mentioned the Laganside Corporation. Looking at it broadly, good things were done on the regeneration of the river — new footways and all of that — but Laganside did not engage with communities. It actually cut off communities. In one of the Laganside reports, a red line was drawn around all the communities. The multimillion-pound investment did not touch the working-class communities that needed it the most: Laganside drew a red line around them. There is one regeneration project in South Belfast, which is the reopening of the old traditional tunnels. A report by Laganside said that the tunnels were bricked up in the '90s to stop people from the Market community from coming over and breaking into cars.

Whatever the way forward is, we have to make sure that communities are at the heart and that there is no class severance or segregation. That is what we saw happen in New York. Tribeca in New York was gentrified. Low-income and working-class families were pushed out of the Tribeca area, and we need to make sure that whatever scheme takes place here integrates the communities. The developer here tried to do the same thing: it tried to put the social housing in Academy Street, away from the overall development, and to have only higher-end housing options at the centre. We need to make sure that we do not segregate on the basis of social class, or have any other type of segregation. We need to make sure that we build places that are inclusive of all our communities.

Developer-led regeneration on its own is not working. It has clearly failed here. We need a people-centred and people-focused approach to regeneration. It is not just down to the Communities Minister to do that; the Economy Minister, the Finance Minister, the Infrastructure Minister, the AERA Minister and others need to be involved. I would much prefer that there was a Minister-led approach to taking this forward. That could be a few Ministers taking the lead, but I would like to see some form of ministerial group being established. We did that in the city a number of years ago in the case of the Holylands intervention, and I think that something similar could be done in this case. We need to include the communities, the arts groups, the cultural groups, the universities and, obviously, the businesses in the area, because we need to make sure that the local economy, people and communities benefit. This is a huge opportunity for that to happen.

We have the business improvement districts, but there is a democratic deficit to those, which I ask the Minister to look at. No communities are involved in those BIDs, yet huge swathes of public money go into them. Communities that live in and around those BIDs, and which are part of the BIDs, are not part of the decision-making processes. I ask the Minister to work in partnership with others when taking the scheme forward.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): I call the Minister for Communities. You have up to 10 minutes.

Mr Lyons (The Minister for Communities): Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. I thank Mr Brett for bringing the issue for an Adjournment debate, for his passion for his constituency and the city centre, and for outlining, clearly, what needs to be done.

He mentioned the extension of late-night public transport services. I am happy to confirm to him and the House that I have committed funding to that. I know that other parties are being asked for that as well. He can be assured of my support and the support of my party to ensure that the funding is made available, so that we can continue to ensure that the city centre is supported. I look forward to making a further, more detailed announcement on that in the time ahead.

The site, which I am scared to call the Tribeca site, because of the disapproval across the Chamber, is situated in the heart of our capital and represents a significant opportunity for economic, cultural and social regeneration. However, as Members around the Chamber and the wider community have rightly observed, progress has been disappointingly slow.

As Minister for Communities, with responsibility for regeneration and heritage, I must express my concern at the lack of meaningful advancement by the developer. The continued stagnation of the site is not just a missed opportunity; it actively contributes to the deterioration of a key part of the city. That blight is undermining the physical and socio-economic recovery of the city centre and, by extension, the wider city.

The Tribeca scheme, led by Castlebrooke Investments, was originally heralded as a transformative £500 million regeneration project, spanning approximately 12 acres. Planning permission was granted in 2020 for a vibrant mixed-use development incorporating residential, office, retail, leisure and cultural spaces alongside the conservation and regeneration of listed buildings. However, despite early momentum and public anticipation, we are yet to see any meaningful construction activity on the ground. In recent months, Castlebrooke has withdrawn several planning applications for the wider site, citing concerns around commercial viability. That development, or lack thereof, has understandably led to growing frustration among key stakeholders, including Belfast City Council, local businesses and residents. The site remains largely derelict, and its current condition contributes to a growing sense of stagnation in the city centre.

Belfast City Council has publicly voiced its concerns and is actively exploring a range of options, including vesting or acquisition by agreement, either in whole or in part. The Assembly Rooms and adjoining properties, for example, have been a focus for such intervention. Therefore, I have instructed officials in my Department to engage constructively with the council to help to identify and deliver a viable plan for the regeneration of the Tribeca area. However, let me be clear that it is a complex issue and will require time, resources and input from a wide range of professional disciplines and stakeholders in order to develop a fully costed and deliverable alternative.

Belfast City Council is preparing a paper for submission to my Department, seeking support for what is envisaged to be a regeneration and planning framework for the Tribeca site. That framework will aim to provide the basis for statutory intervention, be that through purchase or the vesting of lands in part or in full. It will set out clear steps for the delivery of a viable regeneration scheme. Crucially, the framework must also address the financial realities of any proposed intervention. It must present viable delivery routes, whether led by the public sector, the private sector or a combination of both.

Let me be clear: the status quo is not acceptable. I fully share the concerns that have been expressed by Members and the public. The current impasse cannot be allowed to persist. We are committed to working in partnership with all stakeholders to unlock the potential of this strategically important site. We are also open to exploring innovative and practical solutions. One such avenue is the potential use of financial transactions capital to support partial public ownership or partnership models. The precedent that was set by the Laganside Corporation offers a valuable reference point for how targeted public intervention can act as a catalyst for urban renewal and bring together public ambition and private enterprise to deliver real change.

In the coming weeks, my Department will continue its dialogue with Belfast City Council on the proposed regeneration and planning framework. We will also continue our engagement with Castlebrooke Investments to seek clarity on its intentions and timelines for the site. Importantly, as we move forward, we will work to ensure that any future development reflects the unique character and heritage of the Cathedral Quarter and surrounding areas. It is essential that regeneration delivers not only physical transformation but real and lasting benefits for the city and its communities.

Ms Ní Chuilín: Minister, I really appreciate your giving way. Can we make sure that the regeneration is not developer-led and that the Departments, communities and residents are at the heart of it? We have had development companies for a long time, but we have had nothing back, and communities have been shut out again.

Mr Lyons: I will address that in my closing remarks.

North Belfast deserves better. The Tribeca site must not remain a symbol of missed opportunity and stalled ambition. My Department is firmly committed to playing its part in delivering a vibrant, inclusive and sustainable city centre that reflects the pride, potential and resilience of the city.

I have listened to Members' comments and heard the passion with which many expressed them tonight. With that in mind, I can confirm that some meetings have taken place in the past number of days. It is now my intention to bring together all interested parties and make sure that we can sit down in the same room and find a way forward. I want those parties to include political representatives, Belfast City Council, other Ministers and the developers. It is important that we all get together so that the matter can be thrashed out. I do not pretend that it is exclusively my responsibility, but I am prepared to step up and make sure that the meeting happens. I am willing to stand up now, just as I have done in the past. I did so with the issue of defective premises when no one else was willing to take it on. I am willing to get everybody in the room so that we can find a way forward. I will do that as quickly as I can, because I know that people have been waiting for far too long. At the very least, we need to get together to plot a way forward. That is my commitment to the House this afternoon.