Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I welcome to the meeting Minister Lyons and the following officials: Mr Colum Boyle, permanent secretary; Emer Morelli, deputy secretary of engaged communities group; Mark O'Donnell, housing sustainability group; and John Greer, deputy secretary of corporate services group.

Minister, you are very welcome to the Committee. I invite you to make a brief opening statement before we move to questions from members. Members have indicated that they wish to ask questions on the themes of strategies; housing; sport; and culture and heritage, and we hope to get an update on the legislative programme towards the end.

I remind members that the Committee will receive a briefing on the June monitoring round immediately after the session with the Minister. That is very welcome as well.

Minister, over to you. Go ahead, please.

Mr Lyons (The Minister for Communities): Mr Chairman, I know that we have limited time today, and I am guessing that members would like to get straight to questions, so I am happy to do that.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): OK. Thank you, Minister. That is much appreciated.

My first question under our first agreed theme is on the anti-poverty strategy. In recent days, a number of groups have expressed their concern about the draft strategy that is out for consultation at present. I think that you will agree, Minister, that they are significant and credible groups with huge amounts of expertise. I note that the framing of their open letter is very positive in the sense that they said that they are very keen to work with you and others to ensure that the strategy is effective, and that is what we all want. What are your plans to engage with that sector on its concerns and to ensure that the positive attitude and expertise that it has brought to this for a long period are levered into the strategy going forward?

Mr Lyons: Thank you. First, I believe that those who signed the letter are sincere and genuine in their attempts to tackle poverty right across Northern Ireland. They have an important contribution to make and have made an important contribution already through some of the work that they have been involved in. I welcome that intervention, because the consultation is a process. I do not know how other Ministers handle consultations, but I am genuine and sincere about wanting the process to be open and transparent and people to have the opportunity to give their view. I will very much take on board what has been said so far and the other concrete proposals or suggestions that they bring forward.

Look, I disagree with some of the things that have been said. For example, I believe that we will have targets that come forward as part of the action plan. We will be able to benchmark and measure those and use them to hold ourselves to account. I do not agree with their statement that there is nothing new in the strategy. A number of things in it are new. I also believe that it is right that we attach funding to some of the measures that are in place, and that is what we will do. I note the fact that they said that the consultation should be removed altogether. I disagree with that. I also disagree with their statement that the strategy will be harmful overall.

I want to listen. Many of the concerns that have been raised can be addressed. Let us hear what people have to say during the consultation and see what else they want to put in. I will certainly share that with other members of the Executive. Having reviewed some of the suggestions that they highlighted in their work that was not part of the process, I am happy to raise those with Executive colleagues. You will be aware that considerable work went on in the cross-departmental working group. It was up to Departments to come back with areas for inclusion. I would have had no issue with putting in some of those, but those Ministers had not brought them forward at that time.

I have a particular interest in community wealth-building. We see that in the north-west and Larne. I have done considerable work on broadband issues, especially during my time in the Department for the Economy, and access to affordable transport services. There are things that we can add in. Some of those may be for the strategy, and some of the ideas can be put into the action plan. Considerable work has been done. It would not be right for us to scrap the consultation, because other people will want to have their say. I want to make it very clear that I will listen to all views that are presented during the consultation.

To finish, there is lots that I could have put in the strategy. There are lots of additional measures that I could have included, but I need to make sure that what we have is credible. As Minister, I am not prepared to put everything that we might like to do into a strategy if I am in the full knowledge that I am not able to deliver that or that the Executive do not have the funding for it. I want us to be able to say, "We can get on with this; we can do it; and we can deliver it". I have no intention of producing a strategy for the Executive to agree if we do not have the necessary resource or ability to deliver it.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Do you agree that it also needs to be ambitious?

Mr Lyons: Absolutely. When you look at what we are trying to achieve, you see that we have ambition in here. I hope that you will be able to see that when it comes to the action plans, in particular. I encourage people to read the document as a whole. For me, the important thing is that we try to tackle the root causes of poverty. We do not need a sticking-plaster approach or to tackle the problem at the end. We need to prevent the problems from happening in the first place. What we have in front of us is where we need to be. That does not mean that I will not listen to suggestions about what can make it better.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): OK. Thank you, Minister.

Ms Mulholland: Thanks very much, Minister. It is good to see you at the Committee.

The British Government have already announced that they will roll out things such as school breakfast clubs and free school meals to all families who are in receipt of universal credit. They have said that those will

in England.

Have you considered whether there is any way that we can contribute through such schemes or replicate some of them? Hopefully, Barnett consequentials will come from some of those child poverty measures. Is there any indication that those could be put towards a programme that is along those lines in Northern Ireland?

Mr Lyons: As it will be a 10-year strategy, I want it to be agile and flexible. What I put in place now will not be what we have forever. When we are in a constrained budgetary environment, we should look at those measures that are most effective. For example, if we see some of the things that you just mentioned, such as free school meals and other issues, having an impact and being effective, we will absolutely consider those and bring them in. I will speak to the Education Minister about that after the consultation process is over, just as I intend to speak to all Ministers. We will look at the suggestions that have been raised, and I will ask them whether they find those to be affordable or whether we need the Executive to allocate additional funding specifically for them.

The other value in having the strategy is that we are working in a joined-up way. We can say, "We have agreed to do this, so how do we find the resource?". Again, we need to make sure that every pound that we spend is spent wisely and has the most effect. We can do lots of good things, but, in the limited budgetary situation that we find ourselves in, we need to make sure that we do the very best that we can and invest in those areas that will have maximum impact. The approach that we took for the anti-poverty strategy was to bring together the cross-departmental working group, and then Ministers brought their individual actions. If additional actions are suggested, we can absolutely look at those.

Ms Mulholland: Do we have a timeline for when the action plan will come before us? What will the action plan that you envision look like? You said that it will have targets, but will those be measurable? I am looking to understand what the action plan that you envision will look like.

Mr Lyons: We find that action plans follow most of the strategies that the Executive produce. I want it to be done as quickly as possible. I want to make sure that we have the plans in place for a set time so that we can measure progress against those. I want to make sure that we put targets in place that can properly measure what we are trying to achieve. If we set a goal for something to come into place, that needs to be time-bound. We need to have a time in which to do that and a level at which we want to achieve. We need to make sure that those goals are credible and deliverable.

I do not know whether you have any specific view on that, Emer.

Ms Emer Morelli (Department for Communities): I assure the Committee that work is continuing on the action plan. We are not waiting until the consultation closes or the final strategy is available. We are working in tandem. We will, obviously, be informed by the consultation responses. We are very mindful of the recommendations from the Public Accounts Committee and the Northern Ireland Audit Office (NIAO) on targets, measures and indicators. Those will all be brought into play across the action plan. As the Minister said, the action plan is part of the strategy's agility. Through the monitoring process, if an action is deemed to be not working, it will be stopped, and a new action will be brought in to help us turn the curve. The indicators are very important in the monitoring framework in that space. Work on that is ongoing. We are not at a standstill. All Departments are engaged.

Ms Mulholland: The biggest worry that has been brought up with me is the lack of real, tangible, measurable outcomes.

The other thing that has been brought up is the specific actions. You said that a number of things are new. It is really difficult, because, when I look at the strategy, I do not see very many new initiatives or innovative approaches. I understand that a lot of it came from different Departments, but, when you look at the strategy, you see that a lot of the things are already ongoing. It is a genuine worry that we are putting together a strategy that does not have a budget attached to it and that is just telling us what is already going on.

Mr Lyons: That was one of the criticisms in the letter from the group. New measures will be put in place, and budgets will be allocated to those. For example, I hope to announce soon what I want to do through the employability programmes. I will set aside a considerable sum of money for those, because I have seen the difference that they make. I have said to the Committee before that one of the standout memories that I have from my time in office so far is meeting a young man who has autism and who had struggled to get employment. His parents thought that he would never get a job, but, through the help of our employability programmes, we got him a job in the Civil Service that he has excelled at, resulting in a promotion. New programmes will be put in place, as will some of the other things that I have mentioned previously. That was one of the criticisms that I have received, but it is important that we put in the strategy the things that we currently do, because it is important to keep those going as well.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I ask everyone to keep their questions as succinct and tight as possible, please.

Miss Brogan: Thank you, Minister and your officials, for attending this morning. Apologies that I cannot be there in person. Minister, you mentioned that you want the draft strategy to be credible. With all due respect, given the tone of the letter that was received this week, some people do not deem the strategy credible. One commentator said that we would be better off with no strategy at all and that the draft strategy will set us back and deepen the poverty crisis. The consultation is open until September. Will you commit to listening to the views of those in the anti-poverty sector and doing what you can to strengthen what the strategy can deliver?

Mr Lyons: Yes, of course I will. I have already committed to listening to those not just in the anti-poverty sector but across society more widely. We will listen to everything that comes through the consultation process. I am sincere and genuine in wanting to make the strategy the best that it can be. We will listen to all the recommendations and find a way forward.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Nicola, do you want to come back in?

Miss Brogan: I was going to come back in on another strategy.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): We will come back to that. There are a number of questions on the anti-poverty strategy.

Mr Kingston: Welcome, Minister. We have limited time. Do you have any comment to make on the welfare reform changes at Westminster this week? Clearly, progress has been made on protecting existing claimants from the changes that have been made. Has any assessment been made of whether or not there will be overall savings to the public purse? Some are saying that there will not.

I would like to ask about two other things. Will Northern Ireland get a share of the billion pounds that has been committed to for employability support? Is there any update on the element of tackling fraud and error in the system?

Mr Lyons: Thanks for those questions. It is important to raise them, because we cannot tackle poverty alone. It will require help and assistance from others. That is why it is so important that the strategy be agile. We have seen over the last week the changes that can take place and the impacts that those will have.

We will get Barnett consequentials from the employability support, and I will do my best, working with the Finance Minister, to ensure that those are ring-fenced and that we can use them. There are a number of programmes that we can step up. We have seen already how important they are and the real change and difference that they can make.

The welfare system plays a really important role in dealing with poverty. It is important that I place on record how appalled I am by the Labour Government and how they have conducted themselves over the last number of months. Their approach has been shameful. It has caused significant stress for many in our society, including even those who, I believe, would never have been affected by the proposed changes and those who perhaps would have been. It has caused a huge amount of stress.

My initial estimates were that it would cost Northern Ireland about £150 million. After we did a full impact assessment, the estimate was £250 million. After the first set of changes that the Government proposed, which, I think, lasted only a matter of hours, the savings reduced to £83 million, and we believe that the changes that were made the other night, which we are at the early stages of assessing, will ultimately end up costing money and will not create any saving at all in Northern Ireland. It has been an incredible mess. They have made a real hames of it, if I am being honest. I have a team of around 40 people who worked on that over the last number of months, and all that work, whether on policy, analysis, finance or operational matters, has been for nothing. It has been handled absolutely appallingly, and I reassure you that I have made that clear, on behalf of myself, the Executive and, I hope, the wider Assembly, on many occasions when I have met the UK Government. I met Stephen Timms frequently and told him and other Ministers why it was wrong to go down that route. Unfortunately, we have been proven right, and that will come as an expense to people in Northern Ireland.

While we are on that subject, I will provide some information to the Committee on the winter fuel payment. There were concerns about how quickly we will have to rush that through the Assembly. We have now finished our analysis. There are 336,000 pensioners in Northern Ireland, and HMRC estimates that 86% — 288,000 — of them will receive the winter fuel payment in 2025-26, because they have an income of less than £35,000. In the UK as a whole, 20% of people will not receive it, but the figure is only 14% in Northern Ireland. That is another mess caused by the Government. It was inevitable that they would have to change course. I am pleased that we were able to provide £17 million of support to help those who would otherwise have missed out. It is certainly a very poor record for the Government.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Minister, will you send us a written summary of that, please?

Mr Lyons: I am more than happy to do that.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): There may be some other items on which we have questions where it may be more useful, timewise, for you to provide us with something in writing following the Committee meeting.

Mr Lyons: That is the information that we have. We can send that through. Yes, that is no problem.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): That information is useful to know. Thank you.

Mr Lyons: This is useful. You raised the issue of welfare fraud. I am happy to announce to the Committee that, this morning, we received confirmation from the Chief Secretary to the Treasury that the Executive can submit a business case ahead of the autumn Budget and that, if there are savings through our tackling welfare fraud and error that are certified by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), the Treasury will consider providing us with a share of them. Those savings are massive. By putting in a small amount of money, we can get incredible savings. That could be a net benefit to Northern Ireland, so we will progress that business case. I have a paper with the Executive, and I hope that it will get on to the agenda, because it could be important.

Those are some items of good news. I appreciate your latitude, Mr Chairman.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): We may pick that up with the officials who will come in next. We can follow up on that. I am conscious that other members wish to ask questions on the anti-poverty stuff.

Ms K Armstrong: Chair, I promise that I will be quick. Thank you, Minister, for coming along today, and thanks to all your officers.

Minister, you said that your ears are open and that you want to listen to the solutions that are put forward in the consultation on the anti-poverty strategy. During the consultation period, will the Department review the work that was done behind the anti-poverty strategy and update the evidence?

Mr Lyons: We have an extensive evidence base that was built on not only the information that the different groups produced but extensive additional information. If any of that needs to be updated or if changes need to be made, we will be cognisant of that.

Ms K Armstrong: Thank you. I will try to be quick with my questions.

Mr Lyons: I will try to be quick with the answers.

Ms K Armstrong: The anti-poverty strategy is a long-term ambition reaching over a number of years. I appreciate that there is financial restraint at this stage, but we want to be ambitious. I am a little concerned that the anti-poverty strategy seems to be curtailed by the current financial situation. Is there any intention to add a longer-term ambition, if you hear that from the consultation, that is not so curtailed by current financial difficulties?

Mr Lyons: The anti-poverty strategy is about where we want to go and what we want to do. It does not include every single action or measure that we may put in place to do that. Of course, that can change depending on the finances. We will never have all the money to do all the things that we want to do, but we can make sure that we put the money where it needs to be. We will absolutely keep that under review.

Ms K Armstrong: I have one more question about the financing. We are, hopefully, moving to a multi-year Budget period. The consultation is ongoing; the report will be out in autumn; and then, hopefully, the final strategy will be available in time for the multi-year Budget. Can you see any difficulty with that? I am worried that, unless all the strategies are in place prior to the multi-year Budgets starting, we may not be able to add those into the Budgets.

Ms Morelli: Work on the action plan will continue with Departments over the summer period to ensure that, when Departments look at the actions that they can deliver, they are cognisant of the budgetary issues to come. I will defer to John.

Mr John Greer (Department for Communities): On the multi-year budgeting exercise, the very initial returns are due with Department of Finance colleagues towards the end of August, but the Budget will not be set by the Executive until November or possibly January, so there is ample time, as Emer referenced, for the action plan to be considered in the three-year budgeting cycle that we are working on.

Ms K Armstrong: I asked the Minister of Finance in the Chamber the other day about that cross-departmental budgeting planning. It is not currently happening. It would be good to see what money the other Departments are setting aside to achieve the aims of the anti-poverty strategy.

This is my last question, Minister. The chief executive of the Bank of England said that what Labour is doing at the minute is putting the cart before the horse and that he is more interested in seeing employment support come forward before sanctions are even considered. Do we know when your disability and work strategy will come out? That will be quite an important lead-in.

Mr Lyons: Absolutely. That is the approach that I have taken. I have emphasised throughout my conversations that I want to see a reduction in the welfare bill, because I want more people to be in work, and many of those people want to be in work. That is why we have invested, and I will make an announcement on that soon.

The disability and work strategy is in a good place. We have had good engagement on that. I sent that to the Executive last week, I think, so I hope that it will be on the agenda of the next meeting.

Ms K Armstrong: On 2 June, you talked about investing in a "multimillion-pound employment programme". Is the disability and work strategy part of that or separate from it?

Mr Lyons: The strategy has been formulated separately, but, obviously, they overlap and interact. It is an important part of that. The employment programme that I will announce will not exclusively be for those who are disabled, but part of it will be for that purpose.

Ms K Armstrong: OK. Thank you very much.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Minister, you indicated that you were going to bring a draft of the disability strategy to Executive colleagues for consideration before the end of June. Has that happened?

Mr Lyons: It has not. It will be with me, I have been told, imminently, so I expect that to be on my desk within the next week. I will then forward that to Executive colleagues. The disability and work strategy is with the Executive, and I hope that the disability strategy will be with the Executive very soon.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): OK. Do you not have a tighter timeline?

Mr Lyons: It is not with me yet. I expect it to be with me next week.

Ms Morelli: It will be with the Minister shortly.

Mr Colum Boyle (Department for Communities): It will be next week.

Mr Lyons: Next week.

Ms Morelli: Yes.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): OK.

Mr McCrossan: Minister, you are very welcome. The draft strategy has come under quite a lot of heat and criticism in the last number of weeks. The co-design group and key contributors have said that it is not fit for purpose; there are no new actions; it will not make any difference; it lacks clear and time-bound targets; the life-cycle approach is questionable; there are no clear funding commitments; and it does not meet any of the key principles that were committed to. Do you feel that the draft strategy falls far short of what people were expecting?

Mr Lyons: I cannot comment on what others were expecting, but, from my point of view, I have been clear from the start that I want to make sure that we have a strategy in place that is realistic, deliverable and will make a difference in people's lives. I think that that is what we have. I will repeat what I said: this is a consultation period, and I will genuinely listen to what people have to say in the consultation. If we can make changes to the strategy, that is great. I want the strategy to be the best that it can be, but I want it to be deliverable as well.

I do not believe that there is nothing new in the strategy. I do not believe that targets will not be associated with it. The strategy absolutely will be funded. For example, the group called for an extension to welfare mitigations. We extended and funded those welfare mitigations, we got Executive agreement and the legislation has gone through. Lots of other things will be new in addition to funding what we are currently doing. However, it is a consultation period, so let us hear what people have to say.

Mr McCrossan: Looking at a lot of what is in the draft strategy, it seems as though it is just business as usual; it does not look as though there is very much new in it. That said, the co-design group that did a lot of work and spent a lot of time and effort on it will be very disappointed to see that a lot of its fingerprints are not on the draft strategy. Surely, given the reliance on the evidence from that group and some of the exceptional organisations that were involved, such as Barnardo's, as Minister, you feel that it is a damning indictment of the Department to receive such criticism of the strategy.

Mr Lyons: That just does not match up with reality. We have drawn heavily on the evidence that those organisations presented. You will find many of their suggestions and recommendations in the draft strategy. Some are things that we have already done, such as deliver an Executive childcare strategy, and a commitment has been made to that. Measures to keep homes warm; issues on low pay; maintaining the triple lock; providing support to help people to access benefits; housing issues; working with the advice sector on eradicating fuel poverty; eliminating period poverty — those are all things that they asked for and all are included. Other things that they asked for are not included yet, and we can look at some of those again. Ultimately, I can go only on what Departments come to me with and say, "This is what we're doing".

As I said, I hope that DOF will look at community wealth building again. I hope that the Department for the Economy will look at some of the issues on broadband that were raised. I hope that DFI will look at community infrastructure issues. Education and Health could perhaps look at other issues. It is also important to distinguish what is in the overall strategy from what will come later in the action plans. The action plans will probably see more change year to year as they progress, whereas the strategy is more about the longer-term things that we are trying to do.

Mr McCrossan: The Department's track record on child poverty and poverty generally has been quite bleak, and it was the subject of considerable criticism and, not least, was the subject of an inquiry by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC). I declare an interest as Chair of that Committee. There was quite a bit of heat on that. Can you reassure us that your Department has learned lessons and that those mistakes will not be repeated?

Mr Lyons: That was an Executive strategy, so the responsibility is on all Departments to make sure that we do what needs to be done so that we can get to where we need to get. You will be aware of the PAC report, the recommendations that were made and how we are taking those forward. I would be happy to provide you with further information on how we will do that.

Mr McCrossan: In a similar vein, Minister, as soon as you issued your press release or made your public statement on the draft strategy's being agreed by the Executive, hot on your heels was the First Minister saying that she was distancing herself from the strategy. Did any of the parties that share the Executive table with you raise such concerns when you brought it to that table?

Mr Lyons: Obviously, I cannot go into detail about Executive discussions, but the strategy had been the subject of extensive discussions through the cross-departmental working group. That was the time and opportunity for Ministers to put forward what they wanted to see in the strategy. I received some comments, and I addressed them in correspondence. It is safe to say that there was not a lengthy debate on that issue, and I certainly left that Executive meting believing that there was good consensus on the way forward, we were open to consultation and listening to what people had to say and there was broad agreement on what we had in front of us.

I listen to what others have to say. I will do that throughout the consultation period, but I was not getting pushback at all in the Executive. I believe that there was good unity among Executive colleagues. I understand that people can come under a bit of pressure and can change their positions or want to be seen to be on the right side. I have taken on board all the criticisms that have been made of the strategy, and we will certainly listen to them.

I believe that a lot of those criticisms do not have a basis in reality. I hope that I have explained to the Committee the approach that I am taking and have reassured it about that. If anybody, inside or outside the Executive, has changes that they want to make to that strategy that they have not expressed to me so far, I am opening to listening to them. I hope that they will also be willing to provide the funding that will be necessary if those changes come at an additional cost.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Maolíosa, lean ar aghaidh, le do thoil.

Mr McHugh: Fáilte romhat, a Aire.

Fáilte roimh d'fhoireann fosta.

As a Gaelgeoir, I am only too aware of the importance of the visibility and accessibility of the Irish language in all aspects of society in the North of Ireland. In fact, throughout the whole of Ireland, its visibility and accessibility has proved to be a very useful tool for all Gaelgeoirí. The very fact that you have involved yourself in an issue on the Irish language in Grand Central station in Belfast has caused me concern. As the Minister who is responsible for the development, protection and promotion of the Irish language, how committed are you to it? When are we likely to see an Irish language strategy being produced?

Mr Lyons: Again, as your colleague did in the Chamber earlier this week, you are making the case for me. That absolutely is a cross-cutting issue, because responsibility for languages lies with me. We have a delicate system of government in Northern Ireland, and a lot of work went into making sure that we have stable political institutions. Those are based on the rules, and the rules are that significant, controversial or cross-cutting issues must come to the Executive. That is why I believed that it was important that I intervened in the way that I did. I believe that the case that has been taken is an important one. I had hoped that we would not get to this point and that we could have a conversation in the Executive about the issue. Unfortunately, however, I was left with no option other than to make sure that I intervened and provided the court with the evidence that I have, which, in my view, supports my assertion that the issue, being controversial and cross-cutting, should go to the Executive.

I take my responsibilities for an Irish language strategy very seriously, as I do my role to promote and protect languages. That needs to be done in a way that is proportionate and reasonable. We set up the cross-departmental working group in order to ensure that actions that could be taken through an Irish language strategy are proportionate. I fully support the right of people to learn and use languages and to promote and protect them. However, that cannot be done at a cost to others or to the public purse in an unreasonable way.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): On the back of that question, it is very clear that you are the Minister who is responsible for the promotion and development of the Irish language and other languages. You, however, are now back in court as a result of not bringing forward the strategy that you say that you are responsible for. Conradh na Gaeilge has said that it is incredibly disappointed to have been left in no position but to seek further remedy from the courts and that it has seen nothing to convince it that the Minister is in any way treating the development of the strategy as a priority. Can you explain the irony in that situation?

Mr Lyons: That is your analysis of it. I have been clear in the Chamber and in the Committee that we are going through a process. That process is not dissimilar to those for the anti-poverty or disability strategies or the others that we have put in place. In fact, it follows very closely where we are on the anti-poverty strategy. There are a number of issues to be looked at. This is not solely an issue for the Department for Communities: it impacts on other Departments, and that is why we have a cross-departmental working group in place. The Departments have nominated representatives to that group, and that work has now started.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): When will we see a strategy?

Mr Lyons: Obviously, that will depend on others. It is not solely within my gift any more because of the work that has gone back. Emer, will you update us on the cross-departmental working group and say when it is expected to be finished?

Ms Morelli: The Executive agreed to nominate senior officials to that working group, which is convening. The work of the co-design groups, Conradh na Gaeilge and others will be provided to the cross-departmental working group in line with what was done with the anti-poverty strategy. Each Department will assess both the impact of taking those issues forward and their ability to do so. That will go into the strategy. This is stepping outside that, but the same approach is being taken to Ulster Scots.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): That is the process, but what is the timeline?

Ms Morelli: That work will happen over the summer, and we expect to advise the Minister in the autumn. Where it goes from there will need to be considered by the Executive.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Is that the start of the autumn or the end of the autumn? The autumn is a decent period in itself.

Ms Morelli: I am not going to give any incorrect information to the Committee today. We are about to go into summer recess, so —.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): The Deputy Chair wants to come in, and then Kellie. Maolíosa, you can wrap up first.

Mr McHugh: Sorry, I had not finished, but I will say this in wrapping up: mair, a chapaill, agus gheobhaidh tú féar — live, horse, and you will get oats. That is very reflective of how the Irish language community feels about the development of a strategy that is not forthcoming.

Miss Brogan: In the same vein, it is very frustrating that Gaeilgeoirí across the North and across Ireland, who have the right to have their language protected and promoted, are facing those delays. It is frustrating for the like of Conradh na Gaeilge, which had to take another judicial review (JR) just last week because of the delays. I will not rehearse what has been said, but I would like to know what funding has been put in place for the Irish language strategy for when it does progress.

Mr Lyons: I do not agree with that characterisation. It has not been stopped. The work is continuing. We will take different views on that. Funding will, ultimately, be subject to Executive agreement. It is impossible to say how much we will spend on something when we do not know what actions will be taken forward. Of course, I will update the Committee on that at every opportunity.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): That working group has been in place since 2021. That begs these questions: what has been happening over the past four years, and why are we seeing further delays?

Ms Morelli: To be clear —. Sorry, Minister.

Mr Lyons: Go ahead.

Ms Morelli: Under the Executive, the nominations have been refreshed and taken forward. We are not starting from scratch; I assure the Committee of that. We have a wide range of information available to us, but, as the Minister said, as was done with the anti-poverty strategy, we are putting it through the lens of affordability, feasibility, sustainability and deliverability.

Ms K Armstrong: On that, you mentioned, John, the timescale for the Budget's being decided. This applies as much to the Irish language strategy as it does to all the strategies. If the Department misses the timetable for the Budget and action plans have not been brought forward before the Budget is determined, does that mean that we will not be able to put investment into any action plans? Will we miss the boat on that, meaning that it will be another three years before anybody can look at it again?

Mr Greer: I cannot answer that, Kellie, because I am not sure what will happen with underspend in that Budget period during that three-year period. The work on setting a three-year Budget period is likely to extend into early next year. We would hope to have action plans in place for the majority of our strategies and then to cost them into the Budget. I suggest that, where we do not have action plans in place, with the Minister's approval and, obviously, Executive approval, we will have enough information to be able to potentially have placeholders for those spends. I stress that the important thing in setting all those strategies in the action plans is that they should be deliverable and realistic within the very constrained Budget by which we are likely to be challenged for the next three years.

Ms K Armstrong: For clarification, the Committee is going to hold your feet to the fire on that, to be honest, because, in that multi-year Budget, if we have strategies that do not deliver and do not bring forward an action plan that will allow placeholders or a budget to be set to them, the theme will, effectively, be killed off. It would be very useful for the Committee to receive an idea of the placeholders as soon as possible and to know why, if any are not being brought forward for consideration into the multi-year Budget, why they are not. I am interested, for instance, in the gender strategy, the LGBTQ strategy and all the strategies. A Member is having to bring forward a private Member's Bill on the age strategy. There are a lot of strategies in which those who are covered by section 75 will not have appropriate strategies set for them if we do not have placeholders. Can we get an update in the autumn on what those placeholders will be? We want to support the bids that come from the Department, but it is very hard to do that when we do not have the detail. I appreciate that you guys do not have the detail, but, my goodness, we have been back for over a year, and we still do not have those strategies.

Mr Greer: For clarity, not all the actions will require additional expenditure. It is important to consider that as well.

Ms K Armstrong: The other Departments will be required to step up for a cross-cutting strategy, however, and they will take time with what they have to do to produce the action plans. I am just very concerned about that, because, as this Department has the lead on those strategies, it means that we will miss out on a multi-year Budget.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): We have a lot more to cover, so, Daniel, very briefly, please.

Mr McCrossan: Minister, not to sound condescending, you are an extremely capable and tuned-in individual in the Assembly. I find it really depressing, disappointing and in poor judgement that you have hooked yourself to Jamie Bryson's cart on Grand Central station. How did you reach the decision to join that judicial review and intervene on the Irish language signs, and what exactly does that mean for your Department? I would like to know just for the sake of having that on the public record.

Mr Lyons: I had hoped that no case would have to be taken at all. I hoped that what I believe and the advice that I have received about other Ministers' responsibilities are very clear. I could have gone ahead and taken legal action straight away, because it is important that we uphold the law and that Ministers are subject to that just the same as everybody else. However, despite many attempts at Executive meetings, through correspondence and through other Ministers, that did not happen. I gave as much time and latitude as I could, but the Minister was not forthcoming. A case had already been taken at that stage, but I believed that it was important, and the court has agreed, that I have information that would be useful for that that helps to prove my assertion. That is why I have taken it forward.

Mr McCrossan: Even though there was no Executive consensus on the necessary action, legal or otherwise, you had it within your gift to go ahead and take legal action or involve yourself in that judicial review without the consent or agreement of the Executive. Is that within your power?

Mr Lyons: Yes, and there is precedent for that.

Mr McCrossan: Is that the same for every Minister? For example, the Minister for Infrastructure said this week that she needs Executive consent to appeal the JR on the A5. What is the difference, if that Minister needs Executive consent?

Mr Lyons: That is because I think that it would be impossible for the Executive to give their consent if one Minister were taking legal action against another. It is very clear that it is within my gift, and there is clear legal precedent for that.

Mr McCrossan: Does that mean that, basically, a Minister has the power to take whatever course of legal action that is required in the interest of their Department, for example?

Mr Lyons: No, I do not think that there is any power whatsoever to do that. You have to look at precedent and what has happened in the past. I think that I know what you are saying about the A5. That is the real point that you are trying to make, but, ultimately, that is a significant judgement that would have implications across all others.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Yes, and that is a crucial issue, but we have very important work that we need to continue with today.

Moving on to housing, Minister. In the past number of weeks we have, disgracefully, seen families, individuals and children burned, beaten and intimidated out of their home in the disgraceful scenes that we have witnessed around the North. As Minister of housing, what steps have you taken in the meantime to ensure that all those families have been supported and are in housing and that those families, children and, indeed, a pregnant woman, are safe, secure and housed?

Mr Lyons: I am sorry, Chair, but I cannot provide that information. However, I could perhaps provide it privately to the Committee, if that were allowed. We do not want to talk about individuals because of the small numbers that are involved, so I could provide that information confidentially. I have been in touch with the Housing Executive, which is the responsible body, on a number of occasions over the past few weeks. I make it very clear again that there is no justification whatsoever for violence. It is never right, and it never has been. Although that is an operational matter for the Housing Executive, I have been in touch with the chief executive to offer my full support. I have offered myself personally in any way in which I can be helpful.

Ms K Armstrong: Minister, have you visited any of the families that were put out in order to show support?

Mr Lyons: I have said to the chief executive of the Housing Executive that I am happy to meet anybody who has been affected. That offer has not been taken up yet, perhaps for understandable reasons — people may not want that focus or attention on them. I have made myself available. If anyone would like to meet me to talk about it, I am more than happy to, but I am not going to push myself on others either.

Ms K Armstrong: I will go back to housing. The decision the other day on the A5, which was taken because of climate change considerations, has remarkable reverberations across all Departments, including on housebuilding. Have any housing plans or projects, including design standards, been reviewed to make sure that they comply with climate change legislation?

Mr Lyons: You are right to say that the decision will have wide-ranging consequences. We do not know just how wide-ranging they will be at the moment. We have had conversations with the Departmental Solicitor's Office (DSO), and I have taken other legal advice. At the minute, the answer is, "We don't know. We're not sure". However, there are some things in the judgement that are very clear. One is that, as a result of the decisions that the House took a number of years ago, there are now requirements on us. That has an impact. It will have an impact on not just major infrastructure projects but smaller ones. Even with the best homes that you can build, even if they are built to Passivhaus standards, there will still be embedded carbon in them. Roads will need to be constructed to take people to those homes. I really believe that we have created difficulties for ourselves in the legislation that we passed.

We may be able to find a way through, but there will need to be trade-offs. In the best-case scenario, it will simply be about trade-offs and the Executive's having to sit down and work out what needs to be done. I have written to the AERA Minister to ask him to consider the targets and evaluate whether we can go to something that is realistic. We have talked a lot today about expert groups. In 2022, expert groups were very clear about not going 100% to net zero by 2050 because of the unique circumstances in Northern Ireland. We are getting advice, but my concern is that housebuilding and the carbon that is associated with it will create problems for us.

Ms K Armstrong: I do not agree with you. I meet the construction industry regularly. It says that all that it needs is to be told exactly what it needs to do, and it will then do it. It is already doing quite a lot of that. In fact, the electric vehicles that are used on-site to, for instance, dig foundations are already contributing to the net zero goal. What is holding —.

Mr Lyons: That comes at a cost as well, Kellie.

Ms K Armstrong: It does not them cost any more, because that is built into the prices anyway. The design standards —.

Mr Lyons: The prices for whom? The people. That is the key point, and it is worth emphasising that. Those costs will go to somebody else. Who do those costs go to? They go to the people who have to build the homes. We are making it all more expensive. I am very passionate about this. We take decisions all the time in the House that have implications. We have had a long conversation this morning about the anti-poverty strategy. We have to understand that the measures that we take come at a cost. We need to at least be honest about that.

Ms K Armstrong: Minister —.

Mr Lyons: I am not in denial. I recognise that there is an issue that needs to be dealt with. I am concerned about the costs for people.

Ms K Armstrong: The house will be slightly more expensive, but the benefits that come from reducing fuel poverty are enormous because of the running costs of the house. We need to —.

Mr Lyons: Over time. It is sometimes over a long period of time.

Ms K Armstrong: A mortgage lasts for 25 or 30 years, Minister. I do not think that you —

Mr Lyons: Mortgage payments are —.

Ms K Armstrong: — are reading the room. The industry is saying that it needs an update on the design standards. You are the Minister responsible for housing. Are you and other Ministers going to look at the design standards so that our housing is brought up to modern standards in order to ensure that people have houses that have inbuilt energy savings?

To be honest, we are building houses that are out of date. Housing associations are trying their best, but the design standards for the houses that we are putting public money into are out of date.

Mr Lyons: First, I am all on for making our homes more energy efficient. In fact, I made a bid in the monitoring round for £3·8 million to ensure that we could make our homes fit for purpose. That is one of the primary reasons why I want to see the revitalisation of the Housing Executive. Yes, our standards could be better, but the real problems lie in some of our Housing Executive stock and existing stock. There is no doubt that, if you build to the highest specification possible, you will make considerable savings. We see that in Sunningdale Gardens in north Belfast. However, that comes at an additional cost. You talked about the long length of mortgages, and that is absolutely correct, but building homes to the high standard that you mentioned costs up to twice as much as it would otherwise cost. I am happy to bring in Mark to talk about the design standards. We need to be aware that a bit of balancing needs to be done.

Ms K Armstrong: To be honest, because our design standards are so low, we miss out on the savings that could be made from the Setanta-type homes that are built in a factory.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Please be brief, Mark.

Mr Mark O'Donnell (Department for Communities): I will try to be brief, because it is a complex area that involves more than one Department. Some of the policies in the climate action plan, which is out for consultation, refer to what the Minister has said. Some of the proposals are about continuing to uplift the building regulations standards. That is currently the responsibility of DOF rather than DFC, but it is in the residential part of the climate action plan. There is no doubt that we have to go on a journey to improve across all tenures.

The Housing Executive has a big challenge with social stock, and revitalisation is the best way to respond. We are also working with the Federation of Housing Associations (NIFHA) on support that we can provide using financial transactions capital (FTC), because we know that the prospect of getting more capital funding is increasingly remote. You know that as well as anybody. We are trying to reach for things, but there is no question that they will require funding, as the Minister said. Whether that comes from capital funding or the use of FTC or whether the burden will fall on the private rented sector, people will have to pay for the construction over a period of time. The case will be to show the net benefit from reduced electricity bills and, hopefully, the phasing out of fossil fuels.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): It is an important issue, but, to be fair to other members, I will have to move on.

Ms K Armstrong: We dump £500 million of renewable energy into the ground every year. We could use that a lot better to offset those costs.

Mr Lyons: We are looking into that.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): It is an important issue, and we will return to it.

Mr Kingston: My question is on housing supply, Minister. There is an extra £9 million in the monitoring round this week. Can you clarify how many new social homes that equates to? You will be well aware of the obstacle caused by waste water connections. It seems as though every development receives an objection from Northern Ireland Water. Certainly, small schemes in north Belfast that may be trying to progress 25 houses have faced delays that can last for years. Some extra funding has been provided. The Department of Infrastructure takes the lead in the area, but the problem impacts heavily on your Department. Is there monitoring from the equality impact assessment of where extra funding will enable waste water connections? It seems that parts of west Belfast have had extra investment, but that remains an obstacle for schemes in north Belfast. Is there engagement across Departments?

Mr Lyons: I have secured an additional £9 million for social housing. It does not go far enough, but we want to do what we did last year when we did not expect to meet our targets and more money became available. There is £9 million in this monitoring round, plus a first call on the first £2 million next time around. We are talking about 135 homes or thereabouts.

Mr O'Donnell: More work needs to be done to refine that figure, but it is about right.

Mr Lyons: The ballpark figure is 135 homes. Waste water infrastructure is a massive issue. I met the Infrastructure Minister this week. Additional money has been allocated this year to ensure connections for homes that need to be built, which shows the benefit of the housing supply strategy and the Programme for Government commitment. Certainly, our experience so far, Mark, is that the housing supply strategy has been useful in getting Departments to work better together. I hope that that will continue. When I met the Infrastructure Minister on Monday, I made it very clear to her that this is essential for us. We need to make sure that we can connect the homes that we are trying to build. It is a priority for me as well.

Mr Bradley: Welcome to the meeting, Minister. We heard this morning on the radio that illegal waste dumping is costing £17 million of revenue, notwithstanding the cost of removing that waste and the damage done to the environment. You spoke about trade-offs: how do you imagine that type of trade-off against major infrastructure projects that are in the offing, if illegal waste is to be tackled properly?

Mr Lyons: That is not directly my responsibility, but you are absolutely right that that all has an impact on other Departments. I am not sure whether any of my team has worked on that recently.

Mr Colum Boyle (Department for Communities): It is for DAERA.

Mr Lyons: Yes. It is mostly a DAERA issue, but we are more than happy to work with DAERA. You are right about the costs, and that money is not available to be allocated elsewhere.

Mr McCrossan: I will be brief, Minister. Your Department bid for £230 million to build new social homes. The Minister of Finance allocated £63 million and a further £9 million in this monitoring round, making £72 million. What conversations did you have with the Finance Minister on why he allocated so little — far short of what was expected — given that this is supposed to be a priority for all the parties in the Executive?

Mr Lyons: Yes. There is also £100 million of reinvestment and reform initiative (RRI) money, so I was short by roughly £63 million. This year, I got £9 million with the promise of an additional £2 million, which means that that number is coming down. I made clear representations to the Finance Minister in correspondence and at the Executive meeting. I told him that that is not enough for us to do what we need to do. I got my message across: that was clear. I have requested that the Finance Minister meet me so that we can plan the way forward. We need to make sure that we have a clear path to meeting those targets. I have not given up on that. The SDLP says that I have, but I guarantee you, Mr McCrossan, that I have not given up on it. I will get every pound that I can for more social housing. In addition, I have been working on proposals to reduce the cost of social housing through what we can do with public-sector land. I have an Executive paper, and I want to meet the Finance Minister first to get his support for it. We have a way forward that, in longer term, can reduce the cost of housing.

You will be aware of the considerable progress that I have made on housing and the new and innovative things that we have been doing, including reducing the cost of temporary accommodation by using Housing Executive reserves to purchase 600 homes; introducing intermediate rent; and securing additional money — £153 million — through financial transactions capital to expand co-ownership. We are doing lots of things. We cannot do what we have always done: we have to look at new, innovative ways of doing things. That is what I am committed to as well as pursuing that additional funding.

I would be more than happy for you to join me in making representations to the Finance Minister, the First Minister and other Executive colleagues.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): OK. Minister, we are very tight for time. Can we whizz quickly through a couple of other things while we have you here?

Mr Lyons: We are over time, I am afraid.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Can you just give us —?

Mr Lyons: I am a very generous individual, Mr Chairman.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Given that you have not been with us since 27 February —.

Mr Lyons: I am prepared to give you some more time. That being said, I have not been asked to come either. I am more than happy to come to the Committee any time that you would like.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): We had an agreement that it would be quarterly, and it has gone beyond that. Let us not waste any more time on that. We will come back to it.

Mr Lyons: I am happy to give you a few minutes.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I will turn to sport. The British Government have made a welcome announcement of an additional £50 million towards Casement Park, a key Executive commitment and a flagship project. In light of that announcement, what you are doing, in your role as Minister, to ensure that the project is delivered?

Mr Lyons: The first thing that we need is clarity on exactly what that money is and what it means. I know that discussions are ongoing between DOF and the Treasury, but it is fair to say that we do not have clarity on exactly what that means for debt and equity. That will need to be bottomed out, but other work can go on in the meantime.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): That is what I am asking. What work are you doing?

Mr Lyons: As I have said, this is not necessarily our project. You will be aware of what happened in the past with Windsor and with Ravenhill: we were a grant-giving organisation. A few things still need to happen. The Finance Minister has requested a meeting with me, at which I want to bottom out some of the issues around exactly what this means, because it is not simple or straightforward. I am sure that we will hear more on it soon. We need to figure that out.

Secondly, the GAA needs to consider what the money means for its plans. It is taking time to do that. It needs to consider its strategic need, how it wants to take this forward and whether it is committed to what is still on the table. No one has reached out to me for a meeting on that, but that engagement can absolutely continue. Let us get the issues bottomed out.

Mr Boyle: We are engaging at official level on all of that. That is ongoing.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Thank you, Minister.

Mr Lyons: Of course, I should say this, because it always seems to come up: I am not forgetting about other sports. I recognise that there were four projects at one stage: the subregional football fund, Casement, Ravenhill and Windsor. Two of those are proceeding and two are not. There was a package in place at that time, so it is important that we consider them in the round.

Mr Bradley: That brings me to my question about football. Chair, I declare an interest in the sport.

Minister, what budget is required to meet the assessed need of the football clubs identified by the Northern Ireland Football Fund and the impending grassroots delivery?

Mr Lyons: We do not have a final figure for that. I have estimated the need before to be £200 million. Obviously, we have received applications. I have not seen any of them yet. They are being assessed for the main element of the football fund. With the grassroots element and the national training centre, it is still a significant sum. You will be aware that we have mentioned the figure of £200 million for some time, but I expect that that has grown.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I will give what I hope is the final word to our Deputy Chair, Nicola.

Miss Brogan: I will move on to the next theme, if everyone has finished with that.

Minister, you have recently made a number of welcome announcements on funding streams. There was one on musical instruments and, last week, there was one on the community infrastructure fund. There was also an announcement of £40,000 towards Orangefest. How will you and your Department ensure that that money is spent in a way that really promotes the values of diversity, inclusion and respect for all cultural traditions?

Mr Lyons: I am really pleased that we have been able to make a number of announcements over the past weeks on poverty and housing. Those issues are really important, but there are other important elements in my Department, such as culture and the arts, and I am keen to promote them. In particular, I have listened to the concerns that have been raised about Arts Council funding and its distribution around locations.

The musical instruments fund is a great way of ensuring that we get more people involved in music, whether they are professional musicians who need help or school groups, other non-professional groups or bands. The funding that has been made available for Orangefest was previously in place. I am not sure when that was removed, but it has been put back. I was pleased to be at the Orangefest launch last week in Belfast City Hall. The organisers are clear that they want to create a different atmosphere in Belfast city centre and beyond on 12 July. They want to make it welcoming, and, in particular, they highlighted how they want to make it open and welcoming to those from outside Northern Ireland who might be visiting and tourists who might be interested. As with any of our grants, there are responsibilities. The recipients need to demonstrate how that money is being used. I will be able to provide details of that to the Committee.

Miss Brogan: OK, thanks for that. Are the three strands of the musical instruments fund equally funded and equally distributed?

Mr Lyons: Emer, do you have the breakdown for that?

Ms Morelli: We can provide the written breakdown.

Mr Lyons: We can provide that. They are not equally funded. The professional musicians' strand is probably the smallest. The non-professional and amateur groups' strand is larger than that. We can get you the breakdown, Nicola. I would say that it changes every year: it is not a set sum.

Miss Brogan: How does your Department promote the fund in order to make sure that all cultural traditions and organisations — the likes of Comhaltas and so on — are aware that it is available?

Mr Lyons: I promoted it by making an announcement in the Great Hall. I think that we had everybody covered there. We had the professional and non-professional groups. Did we have someone from Comhaltas there as well? I think so. We put it out there and let people know what the fund is for and who can apply. We will provide whatever assistance is necessary for that. Nicola, if you or any other Committee members would like to know more about the fund and how people can apply, we are more than happy to provide that information.

Miss Brogan: That would be helpful. I have one final question on this theme, Chair. Fleadh Cheoil na hÉireann is coming to Belfast next year, as you will be well aware, Minister. You will also be aware of the positive consequences of having the fleadh in Belfast. It will be a massive festival across Ireland, and over half a million people will come to Belfast because of it. That will produce a massive economic boost for the city. What are you and your Department doing to support the fleadh next year and the bid for 2027?

Mr Lyons: That is great news, not just for Belfast but for Northern Ireland as a whole. It is an opportunity for us to display our culture and music across all genres and backgrounds and, importantly, from all communities. I met the organisers a couple of months ago. Belfast City Council has an important role to play, as do the Department for the Economy and Tourism NI primarily, but I have said that I am keen to help in whatever way I can. It is not primarily an issue for my Department, but, where support can be given, we are happy to do that. I recognise that it will be a significant event and an opportunity for us, as I said, to showcase not just Belfast but many different parts of Northern Ireland. I hope that that will happen, and, having spoken to the organisers, I am encouraged that they want to make sure that it is an inclusive event. I have said that I am happy to meet them again later this year to see what, if any, assistance we can provide.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Kellie indicated that she wanted to ask a brief question about legislation, in order to allow us to plan.

Ms K Armstrong: As a Committee, we are working through the Sign Language Bill. This week, we passed a motion in the House on the Executive's legislative programme. Can you give us an idea of whether you plan to introduce anything in the autumn time, so that we can move forward?

Mr Lyons: I am sorry: I do not have that information with me now. Obviously, we have introduced four Bills so far. There will be seven in total. I can get you that information, but this may be an opportunity for me to put my concern on record. I saw a red, amber, green (RAG) status for our legislation the other day. Everything is going as expected with the exception of the Sign Language Bill. You have extended that for a year of Committee scrutiny. I have a slight concern about that. I know that you have got the extra time to do it, but I do not know whether that is appropriate. I would like to put my concern on record, because a lot will come through towards the end of the mandate. If the Bill could be brought forward so that I could get it into the House as soon as possible, that would really help me. People have been waiting on that draft legislation for a long time. Anything that you can do to help move that forward will be important, because it is now outside my original timeline for it.

Ms K Armstrong: I am a member of the deaf community. I will just declare that. To be clear, Minister, the effective scrutiny that the Assembly has allowed us to do through interpreters requires that extra time. That is to be welcomed. We have been told that, unlike in other places, deaf people here feel as though they are being listened to through our consultation. We have given ourselves more time to allow that. I do not know whether we will need it, but, to be honest, it is extraordinarily difficult. That is why we need the Sign Language Bill: to deal with the lack of communications for deaf people.

Mr Lyons: That is exactly what I just said. You have got the extra time. I did not vote against it. I did not make any comment on it at the time. I am just saying that the only thing that is worse than not properly taking the time to do it is taking too much time to the point that we may struggle. All that I am saying — I think that you agree with me — is that, if you do not need to use all that time, do not use it all. However, I recognise how important the Bill is. I want to see it done, and done well. I hope that we can work together. We will do anything that we can to help speed that up while not losing anything in the process, of course.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): We have always taken that on board. There are specific requirements for engagement with the community. Material has to be produced, translated, sent out and all that. The community has expressed its appreciation for how engaged the Department was in developing the Bill. We want to apply the same level of scrutiny. I appreciate your offer to expedite any issues. There is a clear list of things that may appear and may add value. We will return those to you and, hopefully, that process can come back. We will certainly do all that we can and do it in a way that meets the needs of that unique, colourful and wonderful community.

Minister, we thank you and your officials for attending today. We appreciate your responses to members' questions.

Mr Lyons: On your earlier comments, Mr Chairman, I have no issue coming to the Committee. I am happy to do that at any time. I have never turned down an invitation. I am always more than happy to come here, because I have full confidence in the Committee and its ability to do the job. I am happy to assist in any way that I can.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Thank you, Minister.