Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): I welcome to the meeting the First Minister, Michelle O'Neill, and the deputy First Minister, Emma Little-Pengelly. I remind Committee members that the briefing will focus on the Programme for Government (PFG) and ending violence against women and girls (EVAWG). There will also be time for topical questions relating to the Executive Office's work. Questions should be relevant to the work of TEO and the Ministers' official responsibilities. I also remind members to be succinct in asking their questions and the First Minister and the deputy First Minister to be brief and to the point with their answers. The Ministers have indicated that they must conclude their time with us today at 3.15 pm, so we have one hour. To allow for brief opening statements, members will therefore have around six minutes each for their questions. I ask members to remain within the timescale. The Committee Clerk will keep an eye on timings to ensure that all members get a similar time allocation for questions. Are members content with that approach?

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Timothy, are you content with that?

Mr Gaston: Yes. Thanks for asking.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): I invite the Ministers to make their opening remarks.

Mrs O'Neill (The First Minister): Thank you very much, Chair. We welcome the opportunity to be back with the Committee to discuss the two issues that are strategically important for the Executive Office and the wider Executive: the Programme for Government and ending violence against women and girls.

If you are content, Chair, I will begin by talking about the Programme for Government and the progress that we have made to date. The deputy First Minister will then detail progress that has been made on ending violence against women and girls.

Since February 2024, the Executive have been focused on delivering our nine shared priorities, with a clear emphasis on meaningful delivery, which is delivery that people can see and feel in their lives every day.

Funding for the Department of Health has supported immediate and structural improvements, alongside our wider programme of reform. It is good news to say that progress is being made on hospital appointments, with over 180,000 additional outpatient appointments, diagnostics and inpatient procedures. To give the Committee another example, endoscopy waiting lists have reduced by 63% from June 2022, when they were at their peak. From March to December 2025, the named procedures backlog decreased by 70%.

The Executive also agreed a 37-point action plan to protect and restore Lough Neagh. Strong progress is being made there, with 15 actions already delivered and 22 others, many of which are longer-term actions by design, already in progress. The actions cover the key themes of scientific research and innovation, monitoring and enforcement, education and engagement, regulatory reform, and strategic communication. We recognise that, despite the strides that have already been made, continued effort will be required for many years, if not decades, to restore the lough fully, but that is a process to which we are all very much committed.

Some £45 million has been allocated to a new regional balance fund to promote regional growth. The fund promotes the establishment of local economic partnerships in each council area to identify the specific interventions that are needed for their local economic development, so they are very much tailor-made. For example, Newry, Mourne and Down District Council is funding a pilot project to bring derelict buildings back into productive economic use and to stimulate new business activity. More than £20 million is being invested in the skills fund to support over 9,000 individuals and 1,000 employers. That fund addresses critical skills shortages through a range of initiatives, including the Skill Up programme, which reskills and upskills participants in priority sectors such as small to medium-sized enterprises and women returning to the workplace.

Another initiative, the Step Up project, is aimed at the economically inactive and those who find it hard to access opportunities. That project is making a real and positive difference not only at an economic level but to people's well-being. We know that the pathway to education and employment is not always linear and straightforward for people, and Step Up gives them the ability to take a different approach through offering life-changing opportunities where people perhaps did not see them before. The DFM will provide more delivery points on all of that shortly.

Those achievements do not reflect the totality of the Executive's work. As the Committee is aware, although the PFG is an Executive programme, responsibility for delivering policies and services rests with individual Ministers and their Departments. What is clear, however, is that progress is best made when the Executive work together. We will work together with a sense of purpose so that we make a difference that has an impact on people's everyday lives.

Progress against the Programme for Government is monitored throughout the year and will be detailed in a published annual report, supported by our well-being framework, which ensures that we understand progress, not just in pounds and projects but through the real-life impact that it has on people's quality of life. All the data, which is drawn from official statistics and published independently, is available on the well-being dashboard.

The Executive's Budget is closely aligned with the Programme for Government. In the current financial year, 42% of the resource budget, amounting to £6·9 billion, and 78% of the capital budget, amounting to £2 billion, contribute directly to PFG priorities. That demonstrates that the Executive's commitment to effective delivery is consistent and grounded in the needs of all our people.

In short, yes, the Programme for Government is a plan, but it is also a commitment to action, openness, transparency and impact. We are being very clear about what it is that we are trying to do and achieve. We are trying to do that in a way that improves workers' lives and the lives of families and communities across our society.

The Committee is only too aware that there are challenges. There is more to be done. We are operating in a shortened mandate and a challenging fiscal environment. At the end of the day, investing in our public services comes down to funding, and the funding from Westminster does not allow us to do everything that needs to be done. It is important, however, that we continue to engage in a conversation with the Treasury.

I will finish by offering some thoughts on our ending violence against women and girls strategy, which the DFM will pick up on. I acknowledge the continuing scourge of violence against women and girls in our society. We recognised from day 1 that it was a priority area to tackle. Thankfully, the entire Executive and Assembly feel the same. The situation here is unacceptable, so we are absolutely committed to tackling all violence, be it at home, online or in the workplace. It is an issue that requires collective, connected and sustained action, and that is certainly a commitment that we can give. We have also sought not just to have a nice strategy but to resource it. We have prioritised doing so in our Department, having invested more than £5 million in community-based action to end violence against women and girls. It is all about early intervention and prevention. We are addressing some of the core issues. The strategy remains a priority for us. That is all from me by way of opening remarks.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Thank you.

Mrs Little-Pengelly (The deputy First Minister): I echo the First Minister's thanks for inviting us here today. It is good to be here. I will begin by reinforcing the importance of the Programme for Government. It is underpinned by a focus on prioritisation and reform. That is particularly evident in our approach to public-sector transformation. Over the next three years, £129 million is being allocated through the public-sector transformation fund to modernise services and to improve how they are experienced by the public. That will be phase 1. The six transformation projects target key areas, including health, special educational needs, justice, planning and infrastructure. The funding is explicitly designed to deliver measurable improvements in service efficiency, accessibility and sustainability, while supporting earlier intervention and better outcomes.

Some £61 million has been allocated to the Department of Health to provide support for the expansion of multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) in GP practices, thus allowing better access to preventative care and faster interventions. Last week, I had the opportunity to visit a mega-clinic for gall bladder procedures in the Chair's constituency. I visited on a Saturday morning, and it was good to see people coming into that surgery. There were 39 people there who were able to see an anaesthetist or a surgeon, talk to a nurse or a nurse practitioner and have their procedure scheduled if it was still deemed to be necessary. They walked out the door with an appointment for their procedure in the next two to three weeks. It is a really great initiative, and such initiatives are key if we are to tackle waiting lists and ensure that everyone gets the treatment that they need.

We are focused on making a real difference to people's lives. The Department of Justice has been allocated £20·5 million for its speeding up justice programme, the aim of which is to reduce court delays and case backlogs and modernise the justice process. We understand the frustrations that are out there about that particularly important issue. The Department for Infrastructure has been allocated £15 million for its natural solutions for urban drainage programme to reduce flood risk and £3 million for its transforming planning programme. I do not need to tell anyone on the Committee about the frustrations that there are with the planning system at the moment.

There has been significant investment — £27·5 million — in the Department for Education's special educational needs transformation project. That programme will see a redesign of the SEN system, supporting earlier intervention and more consistent support for children with additional needs. In our constituency offices, no doubt we have all dealt with parents who are really struggling to get an early diagnosis for their child. If there are issues that need to be identified, parents know best. They want to get the right support for their child. Too many children are starting preschool and, indeed, school without having got a proper diagnosis, which is essential to their getting tailored support.

That investment is on top of the £55 million that has been invested in early learning and childcare provision. When Michelle and I took up office, we said that we would focus on delivering improvements in childcare. That is what we have done, working very closely with the Minister of Education, who has been driving forward improvements. The funding has meant that 2,500 new, full-time preschool places were provided in September 2025. An additional 2,382 places will come online in September 2026, so the number of places will double in that time. I understand that that brings provision up to a level that means that around 50% of preschool offering to parents will be full-time hours.

Everyone in the room is very aware of the tragic reality that too many women have lost their life to violence in Northern Ireland. The statistics are a stark reminder of why our work on ending violence against women and girls matters. I know that the Committee has really got behind the strategy and framework, and we really appreciate that cross-party support. Moreover, the strategy and framework have particularly been embraced by our co-design and co-production partners on the ground. They are now supporting us to get the funding out to where it needs to go. We are clear on the vision. We want to create a society in which women and girls are safe and feel safe. That, however, will require a sustained effort and an unwavering commitment to working together.

Although there remains much to be done, we are pleased that, since launching the strategy in September 2024, we have already seen the beginnings of meaningful change. At the start of 2025, we launched the change fund, in which we have invested more than £5 million to support community networks and to provide opportunities for grassroots and regional organisations that are working to end violence towards women and girls. The local change funds are now operational across all 11 council areas. We are supporting over 164 grassroots organisations. We continue to monitor the change fund. We are delighted that an estimated 48,000 people will be reached through that local support fund alone. I could provide a significant amount of additional detail on ending violence against women and girls, but I am conscious that Committee members want to get on to asking questions, so I do not want my remarks to be overly lengthy. I am happy to answer any questions, however.

We focus on delivering what matters most, and working together is a thread that runs through everything that we do. What Michelle and I have talked about today gives the Committee a snapshot of some of that work. We cannot summarise all of it, because doing so would take much too long. We are now happy to take questions.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Thank you, ladies. As you say, when you set it all out, we can see that a lot of work is going on across all Departments.

I will focus on a couple of areas that are specific to the Executive Office. The first relates to the draft business plan for 2025-26 that was supplied to sit alongside the Programme for Government. Under the business area heading:

the milestone for quarter 3, which has just passed, is to:

It states below that milestone that you will launch a public consultation on the strategic framework in quarter 4, which is this quarter. I would therefore like an update on that, please.

Mrs O'Neill: We are continuing to work our way through that. This morning, we did a piece of work on the racial equality strategy, in which I know that the Committee has been interested. We have signed off on that new strategy. We have therefore been able to make progress on that area of work. We intend to go out to consultation now to seek views. Hopefully, you will view that as progress in the wider area of good relations. We were determined to get that strategy out the door in order to get the consultation under way, which will then allow us to point to a refreshed strategy that reflects particularly on the challenges that we have had over the past year. I just wanted to say that today, Chair.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Are you saying that the good relations strategy will not go out to consultation in this quarter?

Mrs Little-Pengelly: It is under review at the moment. There are three key elements to it, the first of which is the core strategy. We are firmly of the view that it remains fit for purpose. The key vision and objectives remain a work in progress. Significant progress has been made, but there is more to be done.

We are actively looking at the signature projects under T:BUC. We have had huge success across all the signature projects, but we are conscious that some of them, such as the signature project for sport, have fallen by the wayside. We have discussed the potential for reviving that signature project. We are also looking at whether music and the arts might be integrated into it.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): I have about six questions, sorry, so I want to get through them.

Mrs Little-Pengelly: I will add that section 75(2) of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 covers good relations and race, and we are actively looking at how we can better integrate race into T:BUC 2.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Thank you. Later in the meeting, the Committee will get a briefing on the draft Budget, and we are all very pleased that we are moving to having a multi-year Budget cycle.

I will pick up on the First Minister's comments about working together to drive forward societal improvements. The investment strategy for Northern Ireland (ISNI) 2050 will not come forward, however. That is a missed opportunity to use the capital budget for strategic long-term thinking to support different sections of society. Are you able to give us an update on that? Last that we heard, it was being worked on at pace, but the Committee has been hearing that for the past two years.

Mrs O'Neill: There are a number of relevant factors involved in arriving at the final investment strategy, one of which is the Budget itself. We are in the middle of the process to agree a three-year Budget, and that will have implications for the capital money that we will have, for where it can be allocated and for the projects that can be delivered. Alongside that, we have faced particular legal challenges, not least with the A5 and what such challenges mean for capital projects. Owing to a number of those issues, we have had a bit more time to shape the investment strategy, but progress has been made on the draft document, and its status is considerably advanced. The investment strategy will fall naturally into place once the Budget has been agreed.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Finally, before you came in, I said that the plaque dedicated to victims and survivors of historical institutional abuse (HIA) will be unveiled later this month. You will be aware that some of the victims and survivors' groups are very concerned about the word "state" being removed from the plaque. We have seen some correspondence from senior departmental officials in the Executive Office to the groups that states that the decision to remove that word was the decision of the joint office. Can you provide some clarity on how or why "state" was removed from the wording?

Mrs O'Neill: We tried to find a balanced way forward to which everybody could sign up. We did a significant amount of work, but the wording that we arrived at represents what we feel is the balanced position. That was informed by input from many of the representative groups and individuals who engaged directly with us and the commissioner. We shared the wording with the groups on 13 October. Unfortunately, as with all these things, we will not satisfy everybody as much as we would like to, particularly a category of people whose lives were so tragically interfered with over the years. We hope that, in the main, the plaque is seen as an advancement, but I accept that not everybody will be happy with its exact wording.

Mrs Little-Pengelly: The plaque has been a long-standing commitment. When Michelle and I came into post, we wanted to move the process on, because we were conscious that there had been a lot of discussion about the issue. I am very clear that the unveiling of the plaque should be about promoting reconciliation, bringing people in this place together and recognising the wrong that was done by multiple individuals and organisations. At times, criminal activity was carried out in homes and other places, by people who supposedly were protecting those children but did not, and by the state. The Hart report is multilayered, and there were failings across the piece. We tried to get consensus on the way forward, and that is very much the tone in which we will be unveiling the plaque in the next couple of weeks.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Thank you, ladies.

Mr Dickson: Thank you for joining us this afternoon. I want to ask about what is in the Programme for Government. Can we expect to see progress made on Maze/Long Kesh site?

I appreciate that you are both subject to political vetoes. People who instruct you on what to do have said no. It is a blot on the Executive Office and a failure on its part that the Maze/Long Kesh site has not been progressed. If you cannot resolve the issue, will you at least admit that you cannot do so and hand over responsibility for it to some form of dispute resolution process or international mediation process so that we can move on and genuinely deliver the prospect of development on the site? It is an incredible size of a site. The Committee has been to it and seen its potential. I am not blaming you personally in the Executive Office, because I think that you are controlled externally.

Mrs O'Neill: I will start from where you started. I take exception to your saying that we are controlled by people outside this room. It is rather unfortunate that you said that. I believe in the site's potential, and, like you, I believe that it has enormous economic potential, historical potential and reconciliation potential. The reality, however, is that there will need to be political agreement on opening up the site. I think that that is what you were trying to get at. There are sensitivities around it all. I am not going to give up on it. We should continue to work towards getting that political agreement, albeit there is no doubt that achieving it will be challenging. All the boxes need to be ticked: those on the site's historical potential, on its reconciliation potential and on its economic potential, as they are all linked.

Mrs Little-Pengelly: I add my concern to your allegation that I am controlled. You do not know me very well if you think that anybody can control me. This has been a long-standing issue. It is very difficult to determine what we can do with the listed buildings that will meet the expectations of Sinn Féin as a party and of the First Minister and that does not cause significant upset to the many victims and survivors. The Maze/Long Kesh site is at the very heart of my constituency, and it has huge economic potential in particular. There are some great aspects to the site, not least the huge success of the Balmoral show and the various other shows and activities that take place there. The Ulster Aviation Society does incredible things, attracting a huge number of people.

Mr Dickson: Air Ambulance NI also is based there.

Mrs Little-Pengelly: I have said very clearly that getting resolution on a way forward for the listed buildings will be very difficult, as there is the potential to cause hurt to victims and survivors. I do not want to do that in my life or in my role, but, in the meantime, we should be unlocking the site's economic potential. The position of the then deputy First Minister, Martin McGuinness, was to say no to any further activity on the site pending agreement on the politically sensitive listed buildings. I have said publicly and in the Chamber that I would like the First Minister to lift that veto in order to allow the potential of the Maze site to be realised, and not just for the people of Lagan Valley, because it could be a site of regional significance. Allowing economic activity to go ahead would start to change the narrative of the site. Doing that could make it much more possible for a future to be found for the listed buildings.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Deputy Chair, you have two minutes left.

Mr Dickson: Thanks, Chair. I appreciate that there are two competing arguments. If you cannot resolve the issue, I encourage you to get advice and guidance from elsewhere to assist you. There is no shame in doing that.

Mrs O'Neill: I assure you that I am very open to involvement from the likes of the National Museums NI people, who have curated other sites. Look at what has been delivered at Ebrington and at the Crumlin Road Gaol. There are therefore avenues by which to do that and people who can help.

Mr Dickson: Bearing in mind the Chair's concern about the time limit, may I ask you about violence against women and girls? I very much appreciate the depth and breadth of the work that has gone on, but can we be assured today that that work permeates every single Department of which you have control through other Ministers around the Executive table and that every policy of every Department has it as a key reference point? We have to change the narrative in Northern Ireland, and, sadly, there is no great evidence that the narrative is changing at this time.

Mrs O'Neill: I think that there is buy-in for that across the board. Every political party recognises that we have a huge societal problem with violence against women and girls, and I think that everybody is committed to playing their part in addressing it, be that in an educational setting, a community setting or in all the work that we have undertaken, which has involved working with regional partners — Women's Aid, Nexus and every other organisation that is involved in supporting women — and at a very local level through some of the brilliant projects that we have seen rolled out. From some of the early feedback that we have got on measuring activity, we can see improvement, particularly in young people's experience and in how they feel. As you know, the problem that we have involves turning around a tanker. I genuinely feel that there is the appetite across the board to continue to work on the issue in a joined-up and collaborative way. The board itself is made up of representatives from all the Departments and thus receives their input.

Mr Dickson: Finally —.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Briefly.

Mr Dickson: Finally, and very briefly, today is World Cancer Day. We have failed on every single target in Northern Ireland when it comes to cancer. I have a very personal commitment to meeting those targets. England has just produced a massively improved cancer programme, which is to run until 2035. I appreciate that you are not the Department of Health, but what are you doing to support that Department to deliver better cancer strategy outcomes for Northern Ireland?

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): In one sentence, please.

Mrs Little-Pengelly: That is an absolutely critical issue. Our cancer waiting lists are a shame, and they are a shame on all of us. They are something that we really need to tackle. Action is needed, not warm words. That is why we have ring-fenced waiting list funding in the Department of Health. The situation is complex, because we need to get consultants and all the rest of the right people in the right space. We know that it is not just about money. We have been working really closely with Mike Nesbitt to try to drive down cancer waiting lists. They are simply unacceptable, and more needs to be done. You will have seen that there is a proposal for further ring-fencing in the draft Budget. That is in there to try to focus minds in the Department of Health on what is an important issue.

Ms McLaughlin: Good afternoon, Ministers. You are very welcome. From the get-go, I will say that the time allocated by your office, and the structure of this session, is suboptimal, in that it curtails opportunity for scrutiny. I will be succinct and ask my questions consecutively. You can choose how to answer them succinctly in the short time that is available.

My first question is on regional balance. First Minister, you talked about achieving regional balance in your first address to the Chamber two years ago. Some 94% of inward job creation goes to Belfast. Last year, 526 jobs were created in Belfast, while absolutely none went to Derry. Not even one. We were led to believe that one job had come to Derry, but it had not. It went to Omagh instead. Is that what you meant in your first address? I do realise that progress has been made on the expansion of Magee. That is really welcome, but there needs to be a real commitment made. In the final quarter of last year, you said:

Will you reconsider that comment?

My second question is on delivery. At the beginning of the mandate, you set up a delivery unit. Have either of you chaired a meeting of it? When was the last time that you received a report on its work? Were you happy with the progress that it was making?

My third question is to the First Minister. On 19 January, your party supported the SDLP motion that expressed:

and agreed that the failure to deliver is:

Why does your own party not even have confidence in the Executive?

Mrs O'Neill: How we have turned things around in the north-west and placed a real focus on the area is a good-news story. That is demonstrated not least by the fact that the Minister for the Economy brought forward a plan to address regional imbalance. That is very positive.

Alongside that, look at all the other things that have happened in the north-west even in the past two years, such as the city deal, which represents significant investment. That is something that we went to bat for, and we fought very hard for it when there was a British Government decision taken to halt it. That is £290 million of investment. Add to that the Strabane regeneration programme, which is over £73 million of investment, and the Magee expansion programme, which you yourself mentioned. There are now in excess of 6,500 students at Magee, which is a very welcome development and has moved us closer to meeting the target. We have €16·7 million for the Riverine project, £45 million for regeneration in Foyle and investment in City of Derry Airport. Moreover, we have made quite a number of job announcements ourselves — with Alchemy, Seagate and EY — when up in Derry.

There are also a number of things being done at community level. There is social and community investment, good relations funding and Department for Communities funding.

Sinéad, there has been significant investment in what we are trying to do in Derry, and that will continue. If we have been able to achieve that in that short period, imagine what we can achieve over the next few years. I am very much committed to ensuring that we address the issue of regional imbalance and also to finding opportunities that allow every area across the North to be able to participate in prosperity. That is a shared desire across the Executive.

All the parties have concerns about delivery and even about the nature of the Executive itself. It is a very challenging arrangement. Individually, everybody is trying to do their best, but, collectively, we have focused on the common ground of the priorities that are set out in the Programme for Government. That is what we are going to continue to deliver on. We have outlined what we have delivered in this short time. One of the biggest things that hampers us is the underfunding that we have experienced for well over a decade. We are trying to build that back up again. We are trying to fix public services and transform things. The funding that has been allocated to us was described by the Secretary of State as "a record allocation". That is nonsense, because that "record allocation" does not take into account all the years of neglect and underfunding. We continue to make that case, and therein lie a lot of the challenges that come with the Executive. We do not need to be too precious about being critical of ourselves at times when that is the case. That is the approach that I take.

Mrs Little-Pengelly: I will deal with the delivery unit and look at overall delivery. It is important to understand what the delivery unit is. It is a unit within the Executive Office structure, not a stand-alone structure. We do not chair the Together: Building a United Community unit, or the race unit. We put the delivery unit in place in order that it would work directly to us.

You ask us about the engagement that we have. We have regular engagement and updates. It is important to note that we met Sir Michael Barber's team to discuss how delivery units have worked previously. He is the global expert, and he made it very clear, and feels very strongly, that it is important that such units have a direct line to the Minister in the relevant Department — in this case, the First Minister and I. The unit is designed to be small and agile. It is not going to do everything. Sir Michael Barber was very clear that delivery should remain within Departments. The unit was designed to support people and to take a look at an issue or problem in order to find solutions.

It is often said, "How do you eat an elephant? You do it in small chunks". As Michelle and I have often said, to mix a metaphor, we have a huge ship in the harbour that we need to turn around. How do we do that? We use a small tugboat to deal with the issues that we can identify. There is no doubt that delivery is incredibly frustrating. Ministers can be frustrated, as can the Executive and MLAs, but, more importantly, members of the public can be frustrated when they see a lack of delivery. That is not just a challenge for Northern Ireland; it is a challenge across the world at the moment.

Time and time again, we are seeing a huge amount of process behind any decision. I said that in the Assembly Chamber. When you look at some of those big decisions on which people see a lack of progress, should that be the A5 or the maternity hospital, that is not because of a lack of political agreement. The political agreement was there and the money was allocated. The process and procedures and what is commonly now called the "sludge" of the system are holding that back, and people are frustrated about that. It is our responsibility to drive change in the system. We need game changers, and we need to change the way that we do business. That requires a Civil Service that is fit for purpose, but it also requires the Executive, collectively, to drive that agenda from the top down.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Thank you. I am sorry; we are pressed for time. Go ahead, Timothy.

Mr Gaston: Thank you very much, Chair. First Minister, back in August 2022, you said that there was "no alternative" to IRA violence. Do you want to take this opportunity to apologise for your remarks and withdraw them, or do you stand over that you are the First Minister of "no alternative"?

Mrs O'Neill: I am the First Minister. I am your First Minister, whether you like it or not.

Mr Gaston: You are not my First Minister.

Mrs O'Neill: I have said many times that we should not try to score points when we are dealing with the legacy of the past.

Mr Gaston: Is that a no, then?

Mrs O'Neill: We should not try to score points when we are dealing with the legacy of the past. We have to recognise that there were many tragedies and injustices in the past. Our job, as leaders today, is about building for the future, trying to heal those wounds, recognising all that hurt and pain and finally dealing with the legacy of the past in a way that can command the support of victims and survivors.

Mr Gaston: That is a no. I will move on to the ending violence against women and girls strategic framework for 2024 to 2031. It states:

That is a frightening stat, First Minister. How important do you believe it is that victims are listened to and believed?

Mrs O'Neill: We have discussed this before, Timothy, in this Committee. It is very important that people are believed.

Mr Gaston: In 2018, you said, regarding Máiría Cahill:

Do you want to take this opportunity to apologise to her?

Mrs O'Neill: I feel that we are on a wee bit of a repeat. I think that you asked me that question before, and I said, "Of course, I believe her".

Mr Gaston: I am giving you the opportunity —.

Mrs O'Neill: I have just answered you.

Mr Gaston: I am giving you the opportunity to clarify that again. Was that comment, back in 2018, victim-centred and trauma-led?

Mrs O'Neill: I have said my piece. Any woman out there who has been sexually assaulted or assaulted needs all the support that she can get under the sun.

Mr Gaston: Is that an apology to Máiría Cahill?

Mrs O'Neill: I do not have to apologise for anything, Timothy. I want to support every woman on whom violence has been inflicted, be that sexual, physical or any other kind.

Mr Gaston: Do you understand why a comment like that calls into question your ability to lead a strategy on ending violence against women and girls? You have said that you believe her: that is progress.

This is the book that Máiría Cahill wrote. This was put to you before. In the book, she says:

It goes on to say:

On that basis, First Minister, why was the IRA in a Sinn Féin office?

Mrs O'Neill: Again, I think that you have asked me that question before.

Mr Gaston: You have not answered it.

Mrs O'Neill: I am not getting into your nonsense.

Mr Gaston: You have not answered it, First Minister.

Mrs O'Neill: I am not getting into your nonsense. I can say this about the strategy on ending violence against women and girls: it is a very considered strategy. It is an excellent strategy. It has been well co-designed with all the partners. It is about making a difference in an area in society with which there is a huge problem — violence against women and girls and misogyny. It starts with what people say and how people treat other people. It is very important that we drive home the strategy and make it work. I believe that everybody else is interested in doing so.

Mr Gaston: Instead of being a sound bite, that is advice that you could take on yourself when you are making comments such as those that I mentioned today. Are you not going to comment on the IRA being in a Sinn Féin office?

Mrs O'Neill: Why would I?

Mr Gaston: You believe Máiría, and it is in her book. You are the leader of Sinn Féin. It calls into question your fitness for government. Once again, you have not taken the opportunity.

There is something else that I want to explore with you. In October 2024, before giving evidence to this Committee, you had a private meeting with the Chair, which was formally recorded by the Executive Office, but no independent minute was taken by this Committee. The only official record for that meeting — I have it in document form — shows that it was taken by your private secretary, Carol Morrow. Do you agree that Carol Morrow took a handwritten contemporaneous note?

Mrs O'Neill: You are fancying yourself as a judge here.

Mr Gaston: No, just asking questions.

Mrs O'Neill: I watched with interest your nonsense around this all week. It is all about deflection and distraction from the fact that you got suspended from the Chamber —

Mr Gaston: Can I just point out that —.

Mrs O'Neill: — for two days.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): I will let the First Minister respond.

Mrs O'Neill: It is about deflection and distraction from the fact that you got pulled up on your behaviour and sent out of the Chamber for two days.

Mr Gaston: The difference is —

Mrs O'Neill: I will finish my answer —.

Mr Gaston: — that I acknowledged that my comment was ill-judged —

Mrs O'Neill: I will finish my answer —.

Mr Gaston: — and I apologised. You are failing to do that.

Mrs O'Neill: Do you want an answer?

Mr Gaston: If you want, I can go on to my next series of questions.

Mrs O'Neill: Everything in relation to that meeting is well documented and on the public record. You know that; everybody else knows that. It is distraction and deflection.

Mr Gaston: Regarding —

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): You have only one minute left.

Mr Gaston: — Carol Morrow. She took the minute. We have it here. Moving on to when the information came into the Executive Office, it now turns out that Ms Morrow, who took the contemporaneous minute, asked in an email for it to be assigned to her. She appears to be the one who is not allowing the evidence to be released. Surely that is a clear conflict of interest, First Minister. Somebody in your office who took a contemporaneous —.

Mrs O'Neill: That is factually incorrect.

Mr Gaston: No —.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Timothy, let —.

Mr Gaston: I can share —.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Excuse me, please.

Mr Gaston: I can share the information with you.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Timothy, please.

Mrs O'Neill: I am going to help the member out, because he seems to fail to understand the freedom of information process. All requests for information are received and processed in line with our legislation, which is the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the Environmental Information Regulations 2004. The process is managed by the information unit. We, as Ministers, have no responsibility. Why should we? We should never have, because it would be interference. It is all done in line with agreed practices on the functioning of government that are set out in legislation. When a freedom of information request comes in, it is allocated to a business area.

Mr Gaston: The person who took the note asked for it to be assigned to them.

Mrs O'Neill: Listen. You might learn something. It is allocated —

Mr Gaston: I think that you could learn something from this. Do you know this?

Mrs O'Neill: — to the business area that is —

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Guys.

Mrs O'Neill: — most likely to hold the information based on a high-level search of information. The grade 5 in the appropriate business area is then designated as senior responsible owner, and a grade 7 is designated as a request coordinator. You have put in a request under freedom of information. It has been dealt with. You have got your information.

Mr Gaston: No, I have not.

Mrs O'Neill: I believe —.

Mr Gaston: No.

Mrs O'Neill: Hold on.

Mr Gaston: There is the problem. You are dragging your heels —

Mrs O'Neill: I believe —.

Mr Gaston: — on releasing it.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Guys, we are already over time.

Mrs O'Neill: I believe that you have appealed. Let the staff do their work. Let the process run. I hope that you are not suggesting that Ministers should get involved in the freedom of information process. That would be absolutely wrong.

Mr Gaston: Somebody is dragging their heels here and is not releasing the information.

Mrs O'Neill: You know the process; you are just trying to distract and deflect.

Mr Gaston: Carol Morrow —

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Last comment, please.

Mr Gaston: — said that she wanted —. There is an email here. I can share it with you if you want. You might learn something from it. She asked for it to be assigned to her. She was the one who took the handwritten contemporaneous note. She then officially became the person who said, "I don't want that released", and now we are in this merry-go-round —.

Mrs O'Neill: Again, that is factually incorrect. It is with the information officer. It has nothing to do with us. We — neither you nor I — should not have a role. Everything in relation to the meeting —

Mr Gaston: Can I share this information with you?

Mrs O'Neill: — is factually on the —. No, thank you. I do not need it.

Mr Gaston: You do not want to know.

Mrs O'Neill: It has nothing to do with me.

Mr Gaston: You do not want to know.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Guys. We have —

Mr Gaston: You do not want to know.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): — serious business to do —.

Mr Gaston: I am happy to share it with you if you want. You might learn something from it.

Mrs O'Neill: Let the officials do their job.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): You know where the First Minister's office is. You can drop it off afterwards if you wish.

Mr Brett: First Minister and deputy First Minister, thank you for your presentation and work. You have my full support on delivering the Programme for Government.

Before I start my questions, I put on record my objection to comments that were made about my party colleague — the joint head of Government, the deputy First Minister — about her being in some way instructed or controlled. The deputy First Minister is a strong, independent woman who is very capable of making her own decisions.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Is this in relation to the Deputy Chair's —?

Mr Brett: It is. I believe that, if I had made that comment, I might have found a complaint being sent to the commissioner, accusing me of being a misogynist.

First Minister, I listened with interest to your interview on Sunday with Sky News in relation to the progress of the Executive, in which you said that you are a proud Irish republican. Of course, you are entitled to hold that view. However, I listened with interest to your stating that there should be a border poll by 2030. What legal basis or criteria have you used to set that date?

Mrs O'Neill: I do not really think that that is relevant to my role as First Minister. However —.

Mr Brett: I will tell you why it is relevant. I have a copy of a tweet that you, or someone from your office, sent out on Sunday morning.

Mrs O'Neill: I am glad to hear that you are following me.

Mr Brett: Of course; I have to follow the First Minister. The tweet states "First Minister Michelle O'Neill". You gave that interview as First Minister. That is why it is relevant to the Committee.

Mrs O'Neill: I believe that the British Government have a role to play in setting out the criteria for the border poll. I think that 2030 is a fine date for us to aim for. We are all being failed by decisions that are being taken in London over our heads. Your party should know an awful lot about Brexit —

Mr Brett: What is the legal —?

Mrs O'Neill: — and how those decisions can have a detrimental impact —.

Mr Brett: What is the legal basis on which you have set that?

Mrs O'Neill: A legal basis?

Mr Brett: Yes.

Mrs O'Neill: Do I need to have a legal basis to make a comment about when I think that there should be a border poll?

Mr Brett: Well —.

Mrs O'Neill: I think that now is the time for change. I believe that there is something better for all of us. Phillip, I ask you to join me in the conversation. Let us have a debate about what the health service and education could look like. I think that there is a prize of something better. I think that you and I should have that conversation — I am more than happy to have it.

Mr Brett: The legal basis for a border poll is set out in the Northern Ireland Act 1998. Are you aware of the provisions of that Act?

Mrs O'Neill: The criteria are not very clear. I have challenged many a British Secretary of State and British Prime Minister —.

Mr Brett: You signed up to those criteria when your party supported the Belfast Agreement.

Mrs O'Neill: Absolutely.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): One at a time, please.

Mrs O'Neill: Absolutely, we did support the Good Friday Agreement. I believe in the Good Friday Agreement. I also believe —.

Mr Brett: Then you believe in that basis.

Mrs O'Neill: If I can finish my sentence. The principle of consent is also in the Good Friday Agreement. It will only ever be the people who change the constitutional position here.

When I fulfil my commitment to be in these institutions and work them faithfully, I am working towards the Good Friday Agreement provisions that talk about the principle of consent and our ability to decide our constitutional future at a certain juncture. That is all part and parcel of the Good Friday Agreement. I do not think that you have anything to fear from that. If you are confident in your unionism, and confident that this place is better and delivers for everybody, you have nothing to fear from having the conversation.

Mr Brett: I am very confident in the law, First Minister. I will read it into the record, in case you are not aware. It is clear that a border poll can be called on one condition, and one condition only. The Act states:

That is the law of the land.

Mrs O'Neill: I am very aware of the Good Friday Agreement.

Mr Brett: OK. You should reflect, then, on the comments that you make as First Minister.

What is the reason for the change in date? In February 2024, you told us that there was going to be a border poll here in Northern Ireland by 2034. Why did you change your position on the date?

Mrs O'Neill: I am less fixated on the date than you are. I have said —.

Mr Brett: Your party is quite fixated by it. Gerry Adams told us that there would be a border poll by 2016. The late Martin McGuinness told us that there would be one by 2016. Mary Lou McDonald told us that there would be one by 2022. You, in February 2024, told us that there would be one by 2034. Then, on Sunday, you told us that there would be one by 2030. Do you not think that the public deserve consistency from their First Minister?

Mrs O'Neill: The one thing that I am consistent about is that I believe in the unification of the people of this island. I believe that there is a better thing out there for all of us: a better economic fortune; a better health service; and a better education system. That is the conversation with that we should all be focused on. This place, in its formation, is failing us all. Partition failed us all. We have been forced to live back to back. This state that I am First Minister of was built in such a way to ensure that someone from my background would never be First Minister.

Mr Brett: You are here now.

Mrs O'Neill: All the certainties that unionism — I am talking about political unionism — relied on in the past are gone. I do not want to repeat the discrimination and the sectarianism that was done to the nationalist people. I want to build a better future, a brighter future and a more hopeful future. Again, I make the call to you to join me in that conversation.

Mr Brett: I do not want the sectarianism to be inflicted on the Protestant civilian population of this country —

Mrs O'Neill: I —.

Mr Brett: — that was done by the IRA —.

Mrs O'Neill: I think —.

Mr Brett: I did not cut across you, First Minister, so let me finish —.

Mrs O'Neill: I think that you will find that there is no sectarianism —.

Mr Brett: I will move on to my question in relation to the Budget. Some £3 million has been allocated over the next three years in the draft Budget for a Climate Commissioner. First Minister, do you know what the outcome of the work of the Climate Commissioner will be? I am interested in your knowledge of the impact of global emissions here in Northern Ireland. Do you know what percentage of global emissions are created here in Northern Ireland?

Mrs O'Neill: No, because I did not know that we were going to get into any kind of detailed conversation about it today.

Mr Brett: But you are advocating for £3 million of public money to be spent in that area when our roads cannot be fixed —

Mrs O'Neill: Of course, we have —

Mr Brett: — when our schools are falling down —

Mrs O'Neill: — because that is the will of the Assembly.

Mr Brett: — and you cannot tell us what impact it will have.

Mrs O'Neill: That is what is in the legislation, Phillip.

Mr Brett: Do you stand over that legislation?

Mrs O'Neill: Absolutely. We stand over that legislation. We need to bring in a Climate Commissioner. It is within the remit of this office to do so. Your Committee will get a chance to scrutinise all that.

Mr Brett: Do you not have any concern that the A5 — one of the signature projects — will not be built as a result of legislation that you voted for and that you stand over?

Mrs O'Neill: No, let us separate out the two issues —.

Mr Brett: No, let us not.

Mrs O'Neill: I know that you are a climate denier.

Mr Brett: Can you give me some evidence of that?

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Excuse me. Order, members.

Mr Brett: Can you give me some evidence of that?

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Mr Brett?

Mr Brett: No, that is a very serious accusation that she has made, —

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): I want —.

Mr Brett: — and if I made an accusation —

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): The First Minister —.

Mr Brett: — against the First Minister —

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Order, please.

Mr Brett: — she would come back against me. I know the facts. You do not know the facts. For example, what percentage of the electricity produced and consumed here in Northern Ireland comes from renewable sources?

Mrs O'Neill: Had we —.

Mr Brett: See, you do not know. I do —

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Order, please.

Mr Brett: — so I am not a climate change denier.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Order, please. Mr Brett, order please. Can we just let the First Minister respond to that?

Mr Brett: If she is going to make accusations against me, Chair, she needs to stand over them.

Mrs O'Neill: It is no secret that the DUP are climate deniers.

Mr Brett: Do you want to give me an example of me being one?

Mrs O'Neill: Let us just —.

Mr Brett: We have moved from me being one to the DUP being one. Are you going to say unionism is one next?

Mrs O'Neill: Are you not the DUP?

Mrs Little-Pengelly: I am so sorry, but can I —?

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): I am going to bring you in next.

Mrs O'Neill: I will finish this point.

Mr Gaston: Dark arts and deflection.

Mrs O'Neill: We are all concerned about the A5 judgement. That is why we have to go through the appeal process. We want our capital projects to go forward — all of us do. We have to challenge, as the Minister is doing, the interpretation of what was agreed in the climate change legislation. I welcome the fact that the AERA Minister is also involved in that fight back. We believe that it has not been interpreted in the way in which it was intended. Let us try and resolve that issue. Let us find a way —.

Mr Brett: By scrapping the legislation.

Mr Gaston: Hear, hear.

Mrs O'Neill: Let us find a way to get an agreed way forward that allows us to deliver on all the capital projects that we want to see delivered and do our bit for the climate. There are ways for us to navigate our way through this instead of clashing on it.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): OK, First Minister. I am very conscious that the deputy First Minister has not spoken in a while. Go ahead please, Emma.

Mrs Little-Pengelly: Thank you. I will not touch on much of what the First Minister has said there, save to say that, when it comes to the Climate Commissioner, I am not a climate denier — absolutely not — but I believe that Northern Ireland should not be going deeper and faster than any other place on this planet, because it will not change the global figures. However, I believe that Northern Ireland should play its part.

I recognise that the appointment of a Climate Commissioner is a legal obligation at the moment. However, I have publicly articulated that I do not think that we should move forward with it because of the cost. It will cost £1 million a year, and it is not clear at all whether it will add any value.

The First Minister is correct that it was a decision of the Assembly. My party voted against it on the basis that we have a UK Climate Change Committee and a whole range of different bodies. I do not believe that a Climate Commissioner will add anything, nor will it improve anything in relation to the climate. I just want to be very clear about that.

We should be focusing on the Programme for Government priorities for our office. My focus is on making our health service work, making our education service work and serving the people of Northern Ireland, who have put all of us in this place to serve them. That is my focus. We need to get on with making things work and making things better. That is where the focus should be, not on border polls or other issues. There is a very clear difference between us on that issue.

Mr Gaston: Hear, hear.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): I gave a little bit of latitude there —

Mr Brett: I appreciate that, Chair. Thank you.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): — because I was conscious that you needed to put your position forward, deputy First Minister.

Mrs Cameron: Thank you, First Minister and deputy First Minister, for your time today. I know that you are very busy ladies. I very much appreciate the updates on the Programme for Government commitments, and the tremendous work that is being done on eliminating violence against women and girls. I congratulate you and your Department because I know that there is a large body of officials who have done fantastic work in collaborating and ensuring that there has been really good co-design work on that project. I very much welcome that work.

My question is on whether the Executive should implement the armed forces covenant as soon as possible. Given Northern Ireland's contribution to the armed forces, they represent a significant base in our population. Our armed forces personnel and their families are often disadvantaged and suffer because of the circumstances of their work. With regard to access to housing, education and health, therefore, it is important that we move forward on that. What are your comments on that?

Mrs Little-Pengelly: That is an incredibly important issue. We often talk in this place about equality and disadvantage. We know that those who serve in our armed forces, and armed forces families, suffer significant disadvantage and inequality, particularly when it comes to education, housing and health. That is due partly to where they are on waiting lists: their job necessitates the movement of people. It does not just affect those who serve or those who have served; it affects their families too, including their children. There are many other aspects to it. Therefore, when we talk about equality and disadvantage, it is beyond doubt, and many reports show this, that armed forces families are some of the most disadvantaged and face the most inequality with regard to public services. That is why the UK Government have stepped in and put in place the armed forces covenant.

In Northern Ireland, we contribute significantly more per head of population — about three times more than the average — to the armed forces. We have a lot of people in Northern Ireland who serve or who have served, so having the armed forces covenant is more important for Northern Ireland than it is for any other place in the United Kingdom. It is a disgrace that we do not have it. It is something that I absolutely support, and I call on the First Minister and other Executive partners to immediately adopt the armed forces covenant. I welcome the legislation that is going through to ensure that there is statutory protection as well.

Mrs O'Neill: Obviously, that is a British Government policy, and it is for them to implement. It is like the issue that Stewart raised earlier: there is no politically agreed way forward on it. For me, it is very much in the realms of the British Government's responsibility.

Mrs Cameron: It is the responsibility of Northern Ireland to do what is right by, and look after, its own citizens. Given Northern Ireland's huge contribution to and representation in the armed forces, should the Ministry of Defence be investing more in Northern Ireland? Should we not be benefiting from that contribution?

Mrs Little-Pengelly: We often hear people talk about making sure that we base our decisions on objective need. There is objective need in this case. There is a recognised need among armed forces families in Northern Ireland. That is not a central UK issue; it touches on many devolved responsibilities, such as health, education and housing, and the programmes that we have in those areas. Therefore, there is no justification for people being discriminated against, when there is objective need, just because they are connected to armed forces.

I am really proud of those who serve in the armed forces. Indeed, the sacrifices of their families should also be recognised. However, you raise an important point. Northern Ireland gets the lowest spend per head of the population from the MOD. That is something that we have been raising for some considerable time. That spend has increased significantly over recent years but we still receive the lowest spend of anywhere across the UK. The MOD has given a commitment. Post-Brexit, it has the opportunity to direct spend across the UK, and there is a real opportunity to continue to invest in the fantastic companies in Northern Ireland.

Importantly, though, we need to get our defence deal. There have been defence deals across Great Britain; Northern Ireland deserves that defence deal. We have been doing a huge amount of work with the MOD and the UK Government to ensure that that happens, and I hope that we will get good news on that shortly.

Mrs Cameron: Thank you.

Ms Murphy: Thank you, folks, for coming in to brief us, particularly on the ongoing work on EVAWG, which is something that we touched on when you were previously here.

My question is about the engagement that you have had with Uachtarán

Catherine Connolly. I was delighted to see that she was in Belfast this morning on what was, I think, her first official visit to the North. When it comes to dialogue, peace and reconciliation and respect, how important are such engagements, meetings and visits to the betterment of relations on the island?

Mrs O'Neill: They are really important. We have had a bit of a debate about different identities and different outlooks for the future, but the reality is this: if we can all find the space to be respectful of one another's identity and find an accommodation for one another, that is a good outcome for everybody. You are right that the visit from an uachtarán na hÉireann

this morning was historic. She is my president; it was my pleasure to invite her here. The deputy First Minister and I welcomed her to Stormont Castle as part of her official visit. She said that she would come North on her first visit, and she has done so. I very much welcome that and want to see much more of it.

There are, likewise, opportunities for those in the unionist community who very much look towards the British monarchy. I will always be respectful there, because that is important in sending the right message — setting the right tone — about how we need to be respectful of one another's background, outlook, identity, culture and heritage. Those things are precious to all of us. I add to that the fact that we now have the Irish Language Commissioner, the Ulster-Scots Commissioner and the Office of Identity and Cultural Expression. That should allow us to move forward with confidence in our ability to be respectful of one another, and it create structures that, I hope, will be a really positive addition to our society and our place here and be for all our cultures, identity, heritage and the other things that we hold very precious.

Mrs Little-Pengelly: It was the first time that I have met President Connolly. It was a positive meeting. As I would always say, I do not share the politics of President Connolly, but I do not have to. In my role, it is about building positive relationships regardless of the politics of the person who holds the post. I take the same approach whether it is the president of Ireland or the president of the United States of America. My job as deputy First Minister, which is a coequal position in jointly leading the Executive, is to turn up, stand up, and champion Northern Ireland, doing what I can to build good relationships with other leaders. It is not about just sharing politics. That is why the engagement was a positive one. Ireland is our closest neighbour; of course we want to have positive relationships. We have built good relationships with the Taoiseach and others in the Irish Government, and, as the First Minister said, we regularly engage with the Prime Minister and the royal family in the United Kingdom. I believe that that is to the benefit of everyone in Northern Ireland.

Ms Murphy: Thank you for that. I found the imagery of the visit striking as the photos on social media showed three women: the head of state in the Republic and the joint heads of state here.

I will quickly move on to EVAWG. Deputy First Minister, you made some remarks about how the strategy is playing out at grassroots level. In recent weeks, we have seen reports of Grok and other AI tools being abused to produce sexually explicit images and deepfakes. What steps need to be taken in the sphere of EVAWG to ensure that such material cannot be created?

Mrs Little-Pengelly: Urgent action is required across the piece. The big issue is the need to be ever-vigilant about the way in which the technologies continue to develop. They are doing so incredibly quickly, bringing new challenges to women, and, indeed, everyone, that are, sadly, very often misogynistic and abusive. We need to move quickly.

One of the issues that I am looking at relates to legislation that is going through Westminster. We understand that a relevant Back Bench amendment in the House of Lords will be accepted, which would allow the law to come into force quickly.

Northern Ireland is not currently included in that. It is the quickest way to make sure that we have protection; otherwise, we will have to bring forward our own legislation or use a vehicle here. We need to pursue that quite heavily. It is a devolved issue, but these things very often cross borders, and we have raised it in the Department. I do not think that any of us should be precious about the vehicle. The key thing is to get the protection as quickly as possible. If that does not work out, we have worked with the Minister of Justice on alternative options, but the optimal solution is to move quickly. We need to be vigilant right across the piece, because this is not going to be the last of this type of thing. As the technologies advance — and we have heard about the dark web and different issues — there is a big, bad world out there that includes the virtual space, and we need to move incredibly quickly to address these issues as they emerge.

Mrs O'Neill: The fact that some of these social media companies are allowed to create this kind of content —. The buck stops with them initially, but we have to create the legislative framework to be able to take action when that does not happen. Anybody who has been elected has seen the online trolling and abuse that we all get, and it is not acceptable. We would not accept it from somebody in the street, and we should not accept it online either. We will all call it out, but we need the legislation to back it up when the companies are not being responsible. There should be no world in which anybody is allowed to create that kind of content.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Sorry, Áine, your time is up.

Ms Murphy: Can I ask one more quick one?

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): No.

Mrs Little-Pengelly: We can stay for one more question.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): OK. Go ahead.

Mrs Little-Pengelly: I hope I will not regret that.

Mr Gaston: Is it one more question for each member?

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): No.

Ms Murphy: Going back to the PFG, there is an emphasis on our economy and the tourism sector. I am sure you are both aware that, just before Christmas, the Economy Minister announced that County Fermanagh would be included in Fáilte Ireland's Hidden Heartlands brand — I am very biased; I will not say sorry for it, Chair — to promote the tourist offering that we have as a county. In that vein, I extend an invitation for you both to come down, visit us and see what our tourist industry is about.

Mrs O'Neill: We are actually planning to come to Fermanagh.

Ms Murphy: Even better.

Mrs O'Neill: We will be absolutely delighted to do that. The announcement before Christmas was a great development, because Fermanagh is a beautiful part of the world. Earlier, we talked about regional balance, and we want to make sure that we are out and about, engaging with people. We definitely want to get down to see the tourist offering in Fermanagh.

Mrs Little-Pengelly: It is timely, because we have actively been looking at having what we are calling "Fermanagh day" to get down and see that. It is incredibly important. Earlier, we talked a little bit about ensuring regional balance, and we want to make sure that we are out and about in every part of Northern Ireland. We have so many fantastic things: our built heritage, our natural heritage, our tourism offering, our entertainment — all of that — and it is important for us to champion it on the world stage. I am always a little apprehensive about some of our tourism offerings just being rolled in with, and being hidden by, some of the other offerings that are under the same brand. I support keeping our branding, such as the Causeway coast for the north coast, because there is something really distinct about it. The Open golf tournament from Royal Portrush, the North West 200 and the programmes that are filmed here and that type of thing showcase to the people watching them something unique about Northern Ireland and what we have to offer. We want people to get up that road if they fly into Dublin and come to visit Northern Ireland. Importantly, I hope that they will fly directly to Northern Ireland and spend their time and money on the wonderful things we have to offer.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Ladies, before you go, will you pass on our sincere thanks to your departmental officials for their support during the deliberations on the Inquiry (Mother and Baby Institutions, Magdalene Laundries and Workhouses) and Redress Scheme Bill? Hopefully, you have had a chance to read our Committee report, and we encourage you to bring the Bill to the House for its Consideration Stage debate as soon as possible. Thank you.

Mrs O'Neill: We thank the Committee for the work it has done. We know it is an emotive and sensitive area, with a lot of emotion throughout that whole period, so we thank the Committee for what it has done.

The Chairperson (Ms Bradshaw): Thank you.