Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I welcome the officials to the meeting. I am delighted to welcome Grainia Long for the first time as permanent secretary of the Department for Communities. You are no stranger to the Committee, by any means, given your previous role as chief executive of the Housing Executive. Tá fáilte romhat. Ádh mór

This is another significant role. As a Committee, we look forward to working closely with you on what is a very important Department. Thank you and welcome. We are also joined by John Greer, who, again, is no stranger. He has been here in recent times. John is the deputy secretary of corporate services branch. John will be staying on for the financial briefing, which we will take later.

Grainia, you are very welcome. We know that you have not been in post long. You are standing in for the Minister today. If you want to make an opening statement, we will then move to members' questions.

Ms Grainia Long (Department for Communities): Thank you, Chair. Good morning. Yes: there are lots of familiar faces in the room. Thank you in advance. This is week 3. I have been made very welcome in the Department, I have to say. As you said, given my previous role in the Housing Executive, I am familiar with the Department. Obviously, housing is a hugely important aspect of the Department's wider brief, which, stretching across Communities more broadly, includes employability, local government and culture. It is a huge brief. It is an absolute privilege to be in the role.

It goes without saying to you, Chair, and the entire Committee that I am at your service. As the permanent secretary, I am very keen that my colleagues and I are at your disposal as and when you need us in person here or, indeed, when you need information. When you come in new to an organisation as accounting officer, it is really important to ask questions about what we are doing, what we are doing well, what we are doing less well and what we can improve. You can rest assured that, if there is anything that you want to raise with me today or in the future, I am at your disposal, and rightly so.

The other thing to mention, and I will stop there, is that the other key point for me coming in as an accounting officer is always to ask the big strategic questions. Some of the really big strategic questions for me coming into the Department — I know that lots of people are asking them, and rightly so — are about resources, and you will come on to that. In advance of that, the obvious challenges are the scale and extent of the need for public services and the changing profile of the people whom we serve when it comes to their needs.

A number of really acute points are front of mind for me and my colleagues in the senior team. One is that there are very high numbers of households in Northern Ireland with people with life-limiting conditions and disabilities. Those are the people whom we serve, and we need to continue to find sustainable solutions for them. Another is the fact that, in this decade, we will have more people who are above retirement age than we will have young people. While it is wonderful that people are living longer, and it is testimony to the fact that we have had improved health outcomes over many decades, there are, nevertheless, really significant economic and social impacts. I have mentioned only two points. As someone who is new in post, it is really important that I do not go straight into the weeds and that I keep my focus on the big strategic priorities. I am sure that we will talk at length over the weeks, months and years to come. Thanks, Chair.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Thank you, Grainia. I suppose that that is a good lead-in to my first couple of questions, and then I will come to members. The first area that I want to look at is homelessness and the disappointing response that there is now not likely to be, within this mandate, a duty to prevent homelessness. Why has that decision been taken, given that it is a massive and rising crisis? What is the logic for not making that a duty?

Ms Long: First and foremost, the homelessness strategy, which was published a number of years ago, was clear that we needed to see a strategic shift in terms of prevention. That was important. From a strategic point of view, that was the intent. I was before the Committee in my previous role, so I will not rehearse the explanation as to why the impact of the pandemic took so much focus on resources. We went from — we have all said this many, many times — a focus on pointing as many resources as possible towards prevention to, when the pandemic hit, having to go into response mode. Since then, we have seen growing numbers in temporary accommodation.

What was helpful about the focus of the Northern Ireland Audit Office (NIAO) in the past year — we had the Public Accounts Committee hearings and report — was that it showed that there is absolute agreement on the value and benefit of preventative approaches. I want to see, and we have already commenced — my colleagues had it under way since the Audit Office report — the scoping work that is required to understand what legislative or strategic change followed by resourced practical change looks like, how we can do it and how quickly it can be done. I have a couple of meetings coming up in the not-too-distant future, in the next week or two, to understand how far that has advanced. I am happy to come back to the Committee and give you that undertaking and give you more detail on that or, indeed, to write to you, Chair. Rest assured that the exploratory work is under way on what a prevention duty would look like, how it would work and what we can learn from other jurisdictions that have gone ahead, learnt things and now say that they might do things differently in future. I have asked for a critical path on that, and I will be able to update the Committee.

As I said, the NIAO and the Public Accounts Committee have been very clear, and the Department has been positive in its response and said, "We need to do that". In a practical sense, finding legislative time for that in the mandate was not possible, but that does not in any way stop the strategic focus. Importantly, funding was ring-fenced for prevention in the last financial year. Obviously, without a Budget, it was not possible to allocate funding beyond the first quarter, but I was really pleased to see, as I left the Housing Executive to come into this role, that, where the Minister was able to ring-fence the allocation in the interim, he did so. That bodes well for the coming year. All that is said with the massive caveat that, without a Budget, we can guarantee no more than that.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): OK, thank you. I absolutely agree that we have to move more into the prevention space. I declare an interest: I am developing, with the Speaker, a private Member's Bill on increasing the time within which people can get support from the Executive.

One of the key measures that the Minister has cited in relation to saving on the Budget, presumably so that we can get more into prevention, is around the reduction of temporary accommodation. Part of that was an allocation to purchase 600 homes. That seems to be mired in delay, with not a single home having been purchased. What is the reason behind that delay? It appears to be that the Treasury has concerns about it. Why were those concerns and an understanding of what it would take to meet the Treasury's requirements not bottomed out with the Treasury prior to announcing that scheme?

Ms Long: That is an excellent question. I need to be very clear here, having been the accounting officer in the Housing Executive and put together the business case to the Department. The clarity that was required from the Housing Executive was that it would invest from its reserves — that is an important point — in order to purchase those homes, initially for temporary accommodation but with a view to their being social housing in the future. You are absolutely right to say that the challenge relates to the potential implications that the rental charge on those properties would have. At the moment, if those homes were to be charged at a Housing Executive rent, which, as we know, is much lower, that could have an impact on the Housing Executive's balance sheet, because a low rent would not cover the cost of that purchase over the lifetime of the home. In other words, the alternative was to go to local housing allowance rents, which are higher and closer to the lower end of market rents. The impact of that is that a top-up would be required to cover the cost, and that would have an annually managed expenditure (AME) implication. Discussions are ongoing with the Treasury. Again, I have a number of meetings coming up. One of the priorities that I set myself when I came into post was to understand where that is at. I look forward to updating the Committee on that. I hope that I will be in a position to update you more positively. I can speak for only myself, but I am frustrated to find that what appeared to be a sensible and sustainable solution to the need for additional temporary accommodation at a sustainable level has not been possible. It is taking too long, so it is a priority for me to find out the point at which we can solve that.

The alternative, quite frankly, is to find another solution, and we do not want to go there. Currently, we may need as many as 6,000 units of temporary accommodation. Obviously, 600 homes is just 10% of that. When COVID hit five or six years ago and we needed an increased supply of temporary accommodation, I was very unhappy to find that the strategic housing authority did not have its own ready supply of temporary accommodation other than its hostel accommodation. We need to fix that. It is done in other jurisdictions, so the questions that I am now asking, with a different hat on as accounting officer, are about how we solve that. I am happy to come back to you and keep updating you on that.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): What is the timeline and when can you provide a further update?

Ms Long: I cannot give you a timeline other than to say that, in my third week, I have already asked for meetings on this. I am happy to come back with a timeline when I know more.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): OK. My other question is about the Irish language strategy. First, though, I want to ask you about the place names project at Queen's University — that vital service that is providing interpretation and translation services for sign applications. Why has the Department indicated that that funding will last only until the summer? I have a specific concern, because it is a specialised field. If we lose people from that field, we might not have the people to carry out that work in the future if money is made available. Therefore, why is that not being seen as a priority?

Ms Long: If you can bear with me, Chair, I am not across the detail on that. John, there is anything that you want to add? I am happy to follow up with the Committee on that.

Mr John Greer (Department for Communities): I would like to follow up with the Committee on that. Without a Budget, all funded parties were provided with an interim allocation for the first quarter. That could explain why they have been provided with funding until only the summer, but I would need to confirm if that is the case.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): OK, but you will commit to coming back to me on that?

Ms Long: Absolutely. No problem.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Serious long-term damage could be caused by a potentially short-term problem if there is not proper understanding and communication.

Are we going to see an Irish language strategy in this mandate?

Ms Long: Yes. I will brief you on the progress. As you know, a strategy is required. All Departments are currently engaged in developing the Ulster-Scots language, the heritage and culture strategy and the Irish language strategy. There has been, as you know, a cross-departmental working group — I apologise if I am telling you things that you already know. Since I came into the Department, I have seen the scale of the work involved. Officials are working urgently on that. I have had meetings with them as part of my first-day briefings. I will not go into detail or comment further on live legal proceedings other than to say that the issuing of those proceedings has, of course, had a resource impact on officials, with those working on the strategies having had to take time to deal with connected matters. Certainly —.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Sorry, Grainia, we hear that every time, which is part of the frustration. I accept and understand that work is ongoing. Given that the strategy has been the subject of court proceedings and there has been a clear call that it must be delivered, can you commit, as permanent secretary, to it being delivered in this mandate?

Ms Long: I can certainly commit to ensuring that we will have the resources internally, because my role is to ensure that the staff and officials in the Department are working on that. I am happy to commit to that. A huge amount of cross-departmental work is ongoing. We now have a document that we are working through with the Minister. That will go to commissioners and then be put out for further consultation. The urgency is certainly there. I hope that you do not see me as obfuscating in any way, but I am always careful when saying that I can guarantee something by the end of a mandate, particularly given that this is a set of Executive strategies and we are dependent on others feeding into them. I will ensure that there is no lack of urgency on this and that officials are working very closely together. They are doing so, and I have had briefings on the matter. Where we can do that, we will do it, but, as you know, there is a need for full consultation, and that is absolutely right.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): You have said that you will ensure that the resources are in place. Is that an indication that the resources are there to do that in this mandate? If it does not happen in this mandate, will that have been a political decision?

Ms Long: I do not know that yet, because I am new to the Department. Just bear with me as I work my way through that.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I have one more question, and then I will go to members. The Ulster-Scots and Irish language commissioners appeared in front of the Executive Office Committee recently and expressed concerns about substance. This Committee has not seen any substance, but the commissioners expressed concerns. Are you committed to engaging with them in order to address their concerns?

Ms Long: Absolutely; that engagement will have to happen. It is intended that engagement with the commissioners will commence once the next version of the document that has been developed by the cross-departmental working group has been approved by the Minister.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): OK, thank you.

Mrs Mason: Good morning, Grainia. As Colm has already said, you are very welcome. I know that you have been here many a time, and I wish you all the best in your role.

It is disappointing that the Minister is not sitting here. As you said, you are only three weeks into your tenure, so it cannot be easy for you to have to answer these questions. No doubt, later on in the Budget conversations, we are going to hear how extremely tight budgets are. We hear that across the board, and it is no secret that every sector is crying out. We hear that from the Minister time and again as well. To be quite frank, it is batted out there as an excuse for the lack of delivery. He gets very offended when he is questioned on that as well. There is money for marching bands and hundreds of thousands of pounds for US250 projects. There is money for churches, and there was £40 million for the Ulster Folk Museum. All of those seem to have been prioritised over housing, tackling homelessness, lifting children out of poverty and even the energy support scheme. Coming into this role, do you see that as a good prioritisation of the Department's budget?

Ms Long: The role of the accounting officer is set out very clearly in 'Managing Public Money NI'. I will take the same approach as every other accounting officer and ensure that our resources are assigned in the right way in order to meet departmental and, ultimately, ministerial priorities. There are a range of measures and steps that all accounting officers must take in order to ensure that they apply those resources carefully. That is what I see across the Department. As the accounting officer, I have no cause for concern about the allocation of resources. That is my role, and it goes no further than that.

John and colleagues will shortly deliver a very strong briefing on the budget more generally. It is important that we allocate all resources, be that people, time or money — we can talk about money in the widest sense, in terms of subsidy — in a strategic way so that we can make changes and efficiencies in the year to come. We will talk more about doing that in a strategic way so that the public understands that, when we make decisions, we are open and transparent in how we do that.

Mrs Mason: I appreciate that, but the public understands that we are looking at millions of pounds being spent on a range of different projects while there has been very little movement on housing, tackling homelessness and lifting children out of poverty. We still do not have an anti-poverty strategy. Can you understand how the public view that? It is concerning to hear you say that you are content that those finances have been assigned in the right way.

Ms Long: Yes, because the role of the accounting officer is to assure himself or herself that money is allocated and spent in the right way. That is my role as the accounting officer. The Minister will set priorities —.

Mrs Mason: Are you content that it is being spent in the right way?

Ms Long: Of course, and if I had concerns —. I hardly need to tell anyone in this Committee that all Departments are subject to Audit Office scrutiny — both external and internal audit. My role is to provide that assurance. I am comfortable with what I have seen. I am three weeks in, and I will continue to look.

Mrs Mason: I will follow on from some of the Chair's line of questioning. I appreciate that you have outlined where we are with the Irish language strategy. We have been waiting for an Irish language strategy for 20 years. Conradh na Gaeilge has been in court three times, most recently in January, fighting for basic rights for Irish language speakers. You have taken control of the Department that is leading on delivering the Irish language strategy: you are steering the ship. Unfortunately, we have a Minister who seems to be more intent on, and giving more energy to, blocking it than delivering it. Has the Minister given you any direction on the Irish language strategy?

Ms Long: "Direction" is a very specific word. I have come into the Department, and I have found a piece of work that is ongoing and that we have officials working on. I have had briefings on the work that is being taken forward, and I have no reason to think that it is something that is not being taken forward as urgently as the Department's other priorities.

Mrs Mason: Can Irish language speakers be content that the Irish language strategy is a priority and will be delivered?

Ms Long: I have seen that all of the strategies are a priority. I am very happy to say to you that that is what I have seen.

Mrs Mason: Is the gender equality and LGBTQ strategy a priority?

Ms Long: Yes, but I understand it to be the case that the Minister has taken a decision and prioritised a number of strategies, given the necessary resources — people, time and money. The strategies that we have talked about — the language strategies, the anti-poverty strategy, the disability strategy and the active aging plan — are the areas that officials are working at pace to progress. Naturally, the Minister has prioritised those, for now, over the other two strategies that you have mentioned. However, he has asked us — the officials — for a clear path with regard to taking those forward. He is clear that this is not about not undertaking work on them, but the focus of the people, time and money that are required is on the anti-poverty strategy, the language strategies that we have set out, disability and active ageing. He is clear, and has been clear to officials, that he wants to see a critical path for those other strategies.

Mrs Mason: Again, Grainia, I am not putting it on you — I understand that it is about ministerial priorities — but you will understand that there is a sector watching that will be disappointed with that response. I do not think that it will come as a surprise to the sector that it is not being prioritised. Virtually no progress has been made on it.

We spoke earlier about co-design and the Bill that we saw being passed this week for the deaf community. One of the huge benefits felt across the Committee was from the co-design work on that and the involvement of the sector. The Minister has indicated that he is fundamentally opposed to the views of the LGBTQ co-design groups. How can they see any light at the end of the tunnel with regard to there being any progression on this, given that the Minister has outlined that he is opposed to their views? The fact that it is not being prioritised and the fact that the Minister is saying that he is opposed to their views — they are putting those things together and concluding that it is not going to be delivered.

Ms Long: In my three weeks, I have not had a conversation with the Minister on that issue. I am happy to come back. You will have to bear with me, but I have not had a conversation with him on that.

Mrs Mason: Thank you.

Mr McHugh: Tá fáilte romhaibh uilig, a Ghráinne agus John. Comghairdeas leat, a Ghráinne, faoi do phost úr fosta. Ádh mór ort.

I wish you the best of luck in fulfilling that role. This is probably your first test in the Committee in your new role.

Grainia, my concern is about the lack of progress that there seems to be when it comes to many of these strategies. There is not one of them that I can say with confidence I will see come to fruition before the end of this mandate. You identified the three that seem to be prioritised by the Minister — the anti-poverty strategy, the disability strategy and the Irish language strategy — and talked about whether the resources, including the financial resources, are there for them. Do you have an opinion on the amount of money that has been spent by the Department already on court cases, particularly in relation to the Irish language?

Ms Long: No, I do not. Again, given that I am new to the role, I will be careful about what I discuss when it comes to legal matters, both in terms of how they are progressing and the money that we spend. I will be guided by colleagues and the Committee when it comes to providing you with information. There will be no lack of information, so I am very happy to follow up on that point.

It is really important that I say to the Committee — I am being clear here — that I am not seeing a lack of progress on strategies. From an official level, I have seen the work that is ongoing on the anti-poverty strategy and the language strategies and in relation to disability and active ageing. There has been much movement. It is absolutely appropriate that those strategies are undertaken with full consultation. We all know where we are in relation to the anti-poverty strategy and all the others. I will continue to pursue those. I will ensure that officials are clear to me about where progress is being made. Where we can undertake continued discussion with the various partners and sectors, we will do that. Those strategies are deeply important. I will always ask how we are making progress, where we are making progress and where the next milestones are, and I will make myself available to the Committee on that.

Mr McHugh: The Committee will continue to ask the same question: what progress has been made? At a personal level, I am very interested in the progress, or the lack of it, on the Irish language strategy.

Something that you are, perhaps, more at home with, given your previous role at the Housing Executive, is the revitalisation of the Housing Executive. Where are we at with that?

Ms Long: Progress has been made. I have been coming to the Committee for five years and saying that progress has been made. It has been incredibly slow. While those years have passed, what has happened — I know that there is absolute consensus on this — is that the gap between the Housing Executive's rental income and its investment requirement has increased yet further. The last financial year was the first year in which its annual investment requirement was not met through rent. That was the first time that that had not happened. In other words, the rent that was received has not paid for the full annual investment programme. That means that it has to dip into the reserve base. That reserve base is also intended to pay for 600 homes. So it has reached a critical juncture.

The Minister has made that his absolute priority. Since coming into the Department, I have seen the extent to which ministerial engagement is strong on that, including the Minister's engagement with the Finance Minister and his ongoing engagement beyond that with Treasury. Without question, there is now a very strong understanding across the Department of Finance and Treasury of the urgency that is attached to that. I think that they understand the numbers and exactly what is required.

On foot of a meeting with Treasury in December, it is no longer the case that the stumbling block here is a borrowing rule change. It is now about the source of that borrowing: in other words, whether it will come from Northern Ireland Executive borrowing, wider UK Government borrowing or somewhere else. For example, a number of other infrastructure-related public funding sources — I need to be very clear: we are all looking at public funding sources here — are available. Therefore, the conversations that are currently taking place are about how we use that and attract that borrowing. Of course, the Housing Executive is not the only organisation that is trying to borrow, so there is a very clear upper limit, not just for Northern Ireland Executive borrowing but for the UK Government. There is a very clear target for borrowing trends across the UK Government. While there is, I am pleased to say, an acceptance that the Housing Executive should and could be able to borrow, the debate has now changed to one on the source of that borrowing, so public housing is now one of many priority areas that is seeking to access public funding.

To be absolutely clear: we are looking only at public funding here. It is positive, but we are now part of a different debate. I would far rather be here than where we were this time last year, when we did not have that clarity on the ability to borrow. However, the next set of conversations, which are ongoing, are about how we do that. Those will need to be urgent. I am conscious that I have said that many things are urgent this morning, but it was ever thus.

Mr McHugh: Are you confident that we will see progress made in that whole area before the end of the mandate?

Ms Long: In her spending review last year, the Chancellor referenced the full fiscal framework negotiations, which will include discussions on Northern Ireland Housing Executive borrowing. As of today, that remains the case. If that continues to be the case, we all know that the timeline for the fiscal framework negotiations may be substantial. There is therefore no question that, in the interim, there is a need for a borrowing solution for the Housing Executive in order for it to bridge its finances. I am sure that that phrase is not correct, but I will use it for now. There is no doubt, however, that the Housing Executive's reserves are under incredible strain. If it has to reduce its programme of investment from about £240 million to anything under £200 million, that money will come out of our local economy, and the impact will be immediate. The Housing Executive improves its homes by contracting local construction companies, which, in turn, subcontract to very small construction companies that also use local supply chains. Any reduction in Housing Executive spend on its homes will have an immediate impact on the local economy. That is my concern.

Mr McHugh: OK. I have always had the greatest respect for the work of the Housing Executive, and I hope that it will be supported and assisted in any way possible so that it can continue with that work.

Mrs Cameron: You are very welcome, Grainia. Congratulations on your appointment to the role. It is a very important role, but I am sure that you are more than able for the brief. Communities is a huge Department. I am still trying to get to grips with the many things that are talked about in Committee. For sure, we do not envy the challenge ahead for you.

Housing is clearly a passion of yours, and you have great experience in the area. What is the biggest structural barrier to increasing the housing supply? We understand that housing stress is a real issue, affecting all housing tenures. We have seen it affect everything from home buying to private rental prices. Availability is incredibly important, so it is really important that we get the numbers up and get more houses built.

Ms Long: The housing supply strategy gives us a really strong strategic framework to do that. Fundamentally, as of 26 April, the biggest barrier to social housing new builds is capital funding. To get to the Programme for Government (PFG) commitment of 5,850 homes, we need to hit 2,300 or above. In the current financial year, there is capacity in the system under the programme for about 2,300 homes, which leaves us short of the 5,850 target.

There are a number of issues. If capital funding becomes available, we have to get funding for up to 2,300 to meet the capacity in system. Doing that will be very difficult, and it may require the Minister to deprioritise other capital priorities. He therefore has a difficult decision ahead of him about whether to prioritise social housing new builds to get the funding for up to 2,300 homes or to fund other priorities in the Department. In order for him to make that decision, we will, no doubt, have many conversations to advise him. Capital is therefore an issue. To a certain extent, capacity is an issue as well.

On the issue of waste water, in the past two to three years, we have had very positive and proactive engagement with Northern Ireland Water (NIW) in order to de-risk the new-build programme as much as we can. We have made site-specific interventions so that we can, site by site, look at how we can reduce waste water treatment concerns.

The past two or three years of the programme have not been negatively impacted on. The homes that were on the programme have been built. This year, the Housing Executive will do the same. It will layer its new-build programme, which it is commissioning from housing associations, with the data that it has from Northern Ireland Water. My current understanding, and I do not believe that anything has changed, is that, provided that we can find the solutions, the forthcoming year of the programme looks to be positive, in that waste water infrastructure will not be an inherent barrier.

Beyond that, my view is that, fundamentally, we need to approach social housing new builds as we would any other form of infrastructure. Social housing new builds need to be at the core of and central to the investment strategy. There needs to be a 10-year line of sight. We have an absolutely wonderful sector of housing associations, but we ask a lot of them. We are funding an annualised new-build programme and are asking those housing associations and their boards to undertake balance sheet risks. That will be quite difficult, but, so far, they have absolutely not been found wanting. They have hit their targets. Having the Department work with the Housing Executive and housing associations is a great partnership. Other jurisdictions often look at us and say, "That's really good. Can we have some of that?". The housing associations need much more certainty, however. An annualised programme is not good enough, and even a three-year programme would not be good enough. We should have a 10-year programme. The housing supply strategy aims to achieve that by setting out very clearly the number of new builds that we need over the next 10 years.

I should add that it is not about social housing alone. We also need to build intermediate housing. There is a clear target for intermediate housing in the strategy. Departmental officials have briefed the Committee on the work that the Department is doing on 300 intermediate homes. Those homes will not be for sale on the open market and are not social housing. Rather, they are in between the two. They tend to be for key workers: people on above-average income who cannot afford a home on the open market and do not qualify for social housing but who need housing. The Department has commissioned 300 of those intermediate homes, but we need to get the number up to 12,000. The question that I have been asking since coming into the Department, and on which we will be having a number of meetings shortly, is this: how do we drive momentum towards hitting that intermediate housing target? That is critical, because, fundamentally, if we were to have more intermediate housing, that would take the pressure off the social housing waiting list. Thousands of households on the waiting list for social housing have said to us, "We would be delighted with intermediate housing and could just about afford it", but the products are not there. Housing associations, to their credit, have said that they would like such products to come forward. The Department therefore needs to do a very important piece of work with planning authorities, housing associations and others to bring forward intermediate models, urgently and at scale, in this decade. I have begun to ask the questions, and we will come back with some answers in due course. There is a lot of work to be done. I hope that that has answered your question.

Mrs Cameron: That is very helpful. Thank you, Grainia. You touched on waste water, which I was going to ask you about, so that was also very helpful. As you said, even having a multi-year departmental budget would not be sufficient to meet the housing supply strategy's targets, but it would certainly be better than having an annual budget. How important is it for the funding to come from a multi-year Budget? The Committee has supported full funding for the strategy and has written to the Executive about that, because it wants to see it come to fruition. We need those houses. How important is a multi-year departmental budget?

Ms Long: It is hugely important. A multi-year budget for the Department would give certainty to housing associations, developers and anybody else with an interest, including, most importantly, the people on the waiting list. It would also give certainty to lenders. All those parts of the puzzle are important.

The other point about not having the multi-year Budget in place, which is the bit that probably frustrates us all, is that, when we get to the end of March and a scheme has not passed planning for some reason, it falls out of the programme, even though it might have passed planning in the following month. That is frustrating for local people, such as councillors, who may have been working on a scheme for a long time. Having a multi-year budget would take some of the edges off the programme. How we manage that with the Housing Executive will be important.

As I have said many times, the other key factor is to look beyond just capital. Land is used more effectively in other jurisdictions. The Minister has been taking forward a piece of work — he is really committed to it and is producing a paper for the Executive — to look at ways in which we can better use public land across the public-sector estate in order to reduce the capital requirement. Having land already reduces the capital requirement, because we then do not have to go out to the market to buy land. Development costs, rather than land and development costs, have to be met. That work is ongoing, and I am looking at the paper this week to work my way through what that will look like.

The other point, which we have not really touched on, and it may be for another day, is how we make better use of existing homes. I should not really say "existing homes". Rather, they are existing stock or existing physical assets. From our communities, we know that there is office space, derelict space and so on. To meet our targets, we will have to not just focus on new builds. I have asked for a piece of work from officials, which is under way. They have been helpful in starting those pieces of work. That work will look at what we can do by being a little more creative and innovative if we are unable to meet the new-build target in the Programme for Government and at what is out there that could be available. That is important work. Some of the information will be commercially sensitive, so I am happy to come to the Committee at the right time to brief you on that.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): On the issue of existing buildings, we know that we need single-occupancy units. Is there a way in which to marry the two in the strategy?

Ms Long: Most definitely. I am happy to come to the Committee to speak about that. Again, it would probably be best that I do so in closed session, because, if we have to go out to the market, some of the information will be commercially sensitive. Now is an opportune moment for us to think about how we can be more interventionist in the market to purchase what we can. It would be best to have that conversation in closed session, however, if you are content to do that.

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

Ms K Armstrong: I will do my best to rattle through my questions. A lot of them are for you, John, on the budget. Congratulations, Grainia, and welcome. I do not know whether you are jumping out of the frying pan into the fire, but there is no better woman.

Ms Long: It is all good.

Ms K Armstrong: I share the concerns that some other Committee members have voiced about the social strategies. The harm that has been caused to the expert groups that were involved in the strategies that have now been parked is something that, as permanent secretary, you will come up against, particularly in the disability sector, which felt that some of the social strategies were in place, only for them then to be set aside. A lot of work is therefore needed to restore that community's confidence. You said that the Minister had decided how the strategies are to be delivered. Have the staff who were working on the LGBTQIA and gender equality strategies been relocated to work on delivering the other strategies?

Ms Long: That is work ongoing. As an incoming accounting officer, I will always ask those kinds of questions. I do not have answers yet, because the role is so new to me. I spoke about the people and about the time and money that we have spent on those strategies. I want to leave the Committee today having given it the strongest of messages from me that there is no lack of urgency. I fully appreciate what you have said. As someone who spent many years running organisations in the community and voluntary sector, what is hugely important for me is not just the voice of the organisations that will undertake the work in partnership with us but the voice of the people whom we serve. It is essential to have that. All that work is being taken forward with urgency. Once I have mapped some of it out, I will come back to you, Kellie, on what you asked about resources.

Mr Greer: I can provide a little detail. The Minister wanted to take a phased approach to the strategies. Given the constrained resources that the Department faces, that was not unusual. Policy groups are dependent on other technical areas in Departments, such as analytics and data specialists. A significant amount of work has already been undertaken on a gender equality strategy and on a sexual orientation/LGBTQIA strategy that is based on previous co-design work and engagement. Now that the anti-poverty and disability strategies have reached a certain stage, the Minister has asked officials to work with stakeholders to see how to progress them. To be succinct and concise in answering your question, I will say that policy officials have been working consistently on those strategies. Policy areas rely on various inputs to develop a strategy, so taking a phased approach to those strategies was more to do with availability of resources in other parts of the Department.

Ms K Armstrong: Unfortunately, Grainia, you have inherited a Department that has a huge number of vacancies and a dependence on temporary staff. We know from different reports that there are many issues with recruitment, one of which is how long the Northern Ireland Civil Service (NICS) recruitment process takes. For expediency, given what some of those reports state, is there any intention to decentralise some of that work and contract it out to external bodies? I think in particular of the strategies for which we have been waiting for some time and are almost ready. If it is a case of resourcing, is it time to move to using external providers? There is a concern that, if there is not enough resourcing, there could be a delay in people getting their benefits. I am particularly worried about that.

Ms Long: The Department for Communities is a very large Department. In people terms, it is the largest. All Departments — in fact, all large organisations — need a strategic workforce plan. What does that mean? It means that we should have a view into the future. What are the services that we will provide? What is the balance to be struck between policy, strategy and delivery in the Department? How will that change over the next number of years? Those are easy questions to answer. It will take a little time to answer them, but they are answerable questions. A workforce strategy would set out the skills that we will need from people. That work is under way. John and I have had conversations with other colleagues about that already. That workforce strategy will answer those questions.

I can speak only for the Department. It needs agility in order to ensure that we have the right people in the right roles; that we have a plan for those individuals; and that we place a really strong focus on learning and development and on well-being, which is something that I feel passionately about, in order to provide public services. Well before my time, there was a pilot in the north-west — it was completed recently — that looked specifically at the Department's approach to agility in recruitment. In other words, it looked at how to reduce the time that it takes to bring people into the organisation. That pilot secured 350 substantive posts in under 12 weeks. It was a really good exercise. End to end, we learned a lot. NICS HR learned a lot about how to do recruitment by taking a localised, place-based approach to recruitment. Last week or the week before that, we commenced another round of that pilot.

To answer your question, Kellie, it is about ensuring that we have a pipeline of talent coming into the organisation and that, over time, we reduce, hopefully, the attrition rate. Like many big organisations, because of our age profile, we are losing 40 to 50 people —

Mr Greer: Each month.

Ms Long: — each month for a range of reasons, but one reason is that there are a lot of retirements. Having a strategic workforce plan that will set out where we are going and what talent we need, alongside taking a much more agile approach to recruitment, is really important.

I will not cover this today, but staff retention is an issue. The best employers retain people well. There is a host of ways to retain people well, one of which is to have a people strategy that has staff's well-being at its heart. We have to look after our people. Our people strategy across the Civil Service is key to doing that. As I said, we are trying to understand how we recruit people.

The final point that I will make — I am sure, John, that you will want to come in on it — concerns vacancy management. I have looked in detail at the number of vacancies. We had a discussion this week at our senior leadership team meeting about how we approach vacancy management. It is really important that we do that as an organisation. It is very much a priority for us.

John, what have I forgotten or left out?

Mr Greer: The Department led on the new approach to recruitment, working closely with colleagues in NICS HR, which Grainia referenced. It is important to note the stark benefits that taking that approach has. The previous administrative officer (AO) competition took more than 18 months to get to the allocation of posts. When we got to allocation, we were speaking to people who had applied for a job 18 months earlier, which meant that the dropout rate was massive. Twelve weeks represents quite a change.

The recruitment campaign that, as Grainia mentioned, was launched last week is to address 738 vacancies in Belfast for AOs, around 85% of which are for our Department for Work and Pensions business. We also ran a recruitment campaign for principal accountants. In 12 weeks, we got in 36 principal accountants. We have one coming up for industrial workers. We are moving to more agile, place-based recruitment. Alongside that, we have a people strategy that will deal with some of the things that Grainia mentioned, including how we address retention and make the NICS a more attractive place to work.

Finally, I will speak about vacancy control. Given the stark budget position that we face, which you will all be aware of and will have heard much about, it is absolutely incumbent on the Civil Service to ask difficult questions each time that there is a vacancy: is that position needed, will it be needed in the future, and is there another way in which the role can be done? All those questions are being rigorously and consistently asked in the Department, and that is starting to be embedded in processes. That will form the foundation for a strategic workforce plan, which we are committed to producing by the end of the financial year.

Ms K Armstrong: I am a wee bit worried —

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Briefly, Kellie.

Ms K Armstrong: — about the centralisation of staff. Sorry, Chair. Red tape was a challenge when I worked in the community and voluntary sector. Road safety grants were handled by the community and voluntary sector in the past. I know that that issue is not one for the Department for Communities, but there are options and answers out there, because others can do things. I do not often hear about a cost-benefit analysis of the options being discussed; it is always, "Let's get those vacancies sorted out". To be honest, HR Connect does my head in. [Laughter.]

Mr Greer: I can give you a personal view on that.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Briefly, please, John.

Mr Greer: What you describe is something that I have talked to Grainia about. The key words here are "agility" and "efficiency". That is what we are looking to have. If we can administer something in a different way, whether that involves going to a third party, and do it faster and better in a way that is robust, rigorous and agile, why are we not doing it?

Ms K Armstrong: To be honest, were we in the private sector, HR Connect would have been sacked a long time ago, because a boss would have said, "How long?".

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Thank you, Kellie. We have to move on. Sorry.

Ms Mulholland: Welcome, Grainia. As others have said, congratulations. I do not know whether it is also commiserations, but good luck with what you have ahead of you. There is no better woman.

Ms Long: Thank you.

Ms Mulholland: We have heard a lot over the past few months about the role of councils in delivering the anti-poverty strategy. I recently attended a training session on ending violence against women and girls (EVAWG). I was struck by how central councils are to the delivery of that Executive strategy on the ground. Have you discussed whether there will be a shift towards working with councils as active partners in its design, delivery and monitoring, rather than simply consultees?

The funding of the anti-poverty strategy is linked to that. EVAWG had the local change fund, and £3·5 million was allocated across the 11 councils to support that community-based action. When I look at the draft Budget for the next three years — this may be veering slightly into John's remit — I do not see an equivalent dedicated funding line for the anti-poverty strategy, never mind something like a local delivery fund. How does the Department expect the anti-poverty strategy to deliver on the ground without that dedicated funding stream?

Ms Long: Thank you, Sian. Absolutely, yes. I cannot say that strongly enough. I am a big fan of community planning and what it has delivered and continues to deliver. I am a huge fan of place-based approaches to delivery. I am excited by the new neighbourhood model that the Department of Health has launched. It presents a huge opportunity for services to be integrated at a local level, and, when I say "services", I mean all services locally.

My view on Kellie's final question is that we need to get the balance between policy, strategy and delivery right in government in Northern Ireland. Where I can move things on locally, I always will. That is my natural bent. Getting services as close as possible to the people whom we serve works. I cannot imagine a way in which the anti-poverty strategy or, indeed, any anti-poverty intervention could be taken forward without there being local provision and local services. That will always be the lens that I will look through.

Strategies also need to be resourced. This may be mildly controversial, but I am not sure that we are as good as we could be — I mean generally, not the Department — at setting out in strategies what we are doing, what is working and how a little engineering could bring a range of funding and funding streams together more effectively in order to achieve objectives.

Sometimes when I say that, people assume that I am saying that we are going to club budgets together and do less — that we are going to strip out budgets. It genuinely does not mean that. It is meant to look at ways that we can be a bit more strategic in bringing funding opportunities or funding streams together to give people more clarity and to give voluntary and community sector partners more clarity. It is not about spending less necessarily; it is about achieving more.

I absolutely take the point that a good strategy requires resources. We need to start with what we have. We need to understand the impacts of what we have and what is going less well and what is not delivering. If we can divert resources away from things that are not delivering effectively, we should do that. That is my job. As accounting officer, I have to ask uncomfortable questions. I fully take the point that this will require some resource, and it will be a combination of people, time and money, which I have said a number of times. John, do you want to answer anything specifically on the Budget line?

Mr Greer: On the Budget line, there is input from all the other Departments. This is an Executive strategy. The public consultation is closed, and development of the action plan is under way. Currently, in the three-year Budget, there is no specific anti-poverty line for a lot of the reasons that Grainia spoke about, as there would need to be an action plan and input from all the other Departments. To support Grainia's view, with many of the contributory factors to poverty, I think that there is probably a need to look at the current provision and think about how it can be engineered and joined up better. That will all come through the action plan and, obviously, the paper returning to the Executive.

Ms Mulholland: Do we have a timeline for the action plan?

Mr Greer: I will need to get back to you on that, Sian. I know that it is being worked on.

Ms Mulholland: My other question is about discretionary support. The Department has maintained the budget for the discretionary support grant, which is a key crisis support net, at £25·5 million for 2025-26. I am not seeing a clearly protected line for it in the multi-year Budget.

Grainia, I understand that the Minister mentioned that there has been some consideration of moving away from cash support towards vouchers. What evidence base is the Department relying on for that? The wider evidence that I have seen is that cash-first crisis support is more flexible, more dignified and more effective. I am concerned that any change reduces flexibility. Can you assure the Committee that any future change to discretionary support will be assessed and consulted on and informed by data rather than anything else?

Ms Long: Sian, I will ask John to come in on that.

Mr Greer: I can speak to both. On the three-year revenue budget through the spending review, all we have at this stage, Sian, is a top-line draft indicative allocation. It will be for the Minister to decide whether he will continue to support Supporting People as he did in previous budgets with the £25·9 million that has been dedicated. That decision will be taken when we receive a budget from the Executive or, if we do not, from the Department of Finance.

There is an ongoing review of discretionary support looking at a number of models for how discretionary support might be delivered. The one that you referred to is more of a direct-delivery model. I believe that that work is nearing completion and will go to the Minister for his consideration. That review takes the views of stakeholders and considers the data on the performance of the current programme.

Mr Bradley: Grainia, I welcome you to your new position and look forward to working with you in the future.

Ms Long: Thank you. Likewise.

Mr Bradley: We have had meetings in the past, and they were cordial and very productive. I hope that that continues.

My question is about benefit fraud. Has any scoping exercise taken place to see how much money is being saved through detection of fraud and how much money is being lost through error? I think that that needs to be balanced. Can we have some idea of the money saved through stopping benefit fraud and the money lost through benefit errors? Can we have some sort of correlation between the two, please?

Ms Long: Thank you, Maurice. Yes, indeed. I know that the Minister has briefed the Committee on that area in the past and that he has made it an area of focus for himself and for officials. There were a number of recommendations in a report from a task-and-finish group that he established with a strong focus on reducing fraud and error. I will send you the statistics on the scale and nature of the fraud and error.

For example, on average, the Department receives about 10,000 allegations per year that are reviewed before being routed to the appropriate team. The estimated global loss due to fraud across all the benefits is 2·5%. It is important that we focus on the percentage because the benefits bill is large, and a number, without understanding the context, could be viewed as much higher than it is. There is a 2% global loss due to fraud. It was 2·5% in 2024, which was an increase from 2% in 2023, and it continues to rise.

At the Minister's urging, we have put officials in place and a series of measures to deliver ways of reducing fraud and error. We are beginning to see the effects of that both in the numbers and, just as importantly, what it is doing to the culture and delivery of benefits and benefit entitlement.

Chair, with your agreement, I can send a follow-up letter because there is a lot to go through. You might want to cover it in more detail with me and Linsey, our deputy permanent secretary.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): That would be useful.

Mr Bradley: Thank you, Grainia. I found that very interesting and look forward to seeing the figures. I prefer the term efficiency and effectiveness to fraud and error, but that is how it is.

My other question is about antisocial behaviour in the housing stock in Northern Ireland. Antisocial behaviour is an increasing problem, especially for good neighbours and tenants, and it has not been properly dealt with either by the PSNI or the Department.

Ms Long: I note the increase in the number of times that I have been asked that question in the past 18 months. Maurice, you are absolutely right: if people are asking the question, they are asking it for a reason. As I was leaving the Housing Executive, we discussed antisocial behaviour at a strategic level. Antisocial behaviour had moved away as an issue, but it has come back. There is work to be done. I am speculating, but is it the impact of reduced budgets in key areas of focus and public service? I do not know. It may be down to something else.

Rather than give you a glib, short answer, I agree that even if the perception is that antisocial behaviour is increasing, as well as the reality, we need to pay attention to it. I am very happy to take the issue away and give further focus to it. You will be aware that there is forthcoming legislation on the matter to strengthen our responses and the levers available to landlords and other local partners. However, it feels like more than that. It feels like more of a strategic issue and something that the Department, councils, the PSNI, landlords and other partners need to discuss. Again, I am happy to come back to the issue rather than give you a short answer, but I certainly agree that antisocial behaviour is coming up as more of an issue.

Mr Bradley: Thank you, Grainia.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I will pick up on a few things, some of which have arisen out of members' questions. First, we are waiting on four Bills, two of which are parity Bills. What is the delay with the other two Bills on housing and charities?

Ms Long: Chair, would you be content if I follow up on that with you this week? I can get the information from my colleague straightaway.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Yes. I will come back to that in a general sense. Kellie's question was about the workforce strategy and vacancies. You mentioned a place-based approach, well-being and the concept of its being people-centred, and I fully support all those things. In October 2024, 1,000 jobs were created here by DWP to support its work. About 600 of those jobs were allocated to Belfast, 300 to Derry and 100 to Ballymena. Not one went to Tyrone, Armagh or Fermanagh. That is a challenge to all those important elements. When we asked why that was the case, we were told that the Department had no infrastructure in any of those counties to employ people. What has been done about that since?

Ms Long: John, can you answer that?

Mr Greer: I can, but I am afraid that the answer may not please the Committee. DFC, like all Departments, relies on estate from the Department of Finance, so the simple matter is that we would need large processing and administration centres created in those locations. The Department of Finance is working with Departments on an estate strategy, but, given the budget constraints that we face, my view is that it will be difficult to see a large-scale capital building programme to house large operational centres.

However, we will work with the Department to see how that might be done, because our built infrastructure is ageing, is not a good place to be, and is, I think, a contributory factor to some of our retention issues. In those conversations, Chair, we will certainly be pushing for a greater spatial distribution. I am sure that that will be a principle, but there are budget constraints.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Let me check: does either of you find it acceptable that no jobs went to those counties? Is that acceptable?

Ms Long: I do not really have a view on it, in the sense that it is one service being provided in Northern Ireland. The easy answer would be for me to say, "Chair, we should have people everywhere", but it is genuinely not always possible. It may well be the case that we need to provide other services in those areas. Again, I want to bring everything back to a workforce plan —.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): But, Grainia, listen. This is systemic. The Department does not have anywhere for people to work for it in those areas or to work from. There are places such as Connect in Dungannon, where people can go in, where the Department is taking a more creative approach. Therefore, I do not see how your strategy is place-based if half the Six Counties are not included.

Ms Long: I will take that challenge. You have given me something to think about.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): If another 1,000 jobs were to be allocated tomorrow, those three counties would still not get any of them. That is unacceptable. Something has to be done about that, at pace.

Ms K Armstrong: I know quite a few of the people who work there. The majority of them work from home for most of the week. They can work wherever a laptop goes. It does not need to be a huge processing centre. For instance, we have moved with Clare House and the Departments of Finance and Agriculture. Hot-desking is provided all over. I thought that there were hot-desking facilities in Enniskillen.

Mr Greer: There are some hot-desking facilities. The current Civil Service policy requires office attendance two days per week. Particularly in DWP, there are only certain sites from which you can access the network resources because they are on a separate network and you need to access DWP systems. We are working with DOF about blended sites, but that is work in progress. Blended sites are sites such as jobs and benefits offices, where the Northern Ireland Housing Executive is also housed, and potentially other services, such as DWP services and so on. We are taking incremental steps in that, but I will be honest with the Committee: none of this is easy, given the ageing infrastructure that we have and the budget constraints.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I will tell you, John, what is not easy is to live in one of those counties and for people to say —.

Mr Greer: I accept that.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): We cannot address that historic discrimination. There has been historic discrimination; therefore, we have to get going. That does not fit in with the regional balance Programme for Government strategy, never mind anything else. In my view, it has not been made a priority. It is discrimination against those counties, and it cannot be allowed to continue. There are lots of modern solutions that need to be explored at pace. I welcome your commitment to that.

Ms Long: I genuinely take that challenge. To go back to the point, a workforce plan does what I said earlier: it puts a plan in place to put the right people in the right jobs in the right places. We look forward to further conversations on that, genuinely.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): OK. Thank you for your attendance and contribution today. I wish you well in your role. I look forward to a reset on the Committee's interaction. We have a duty to scrutinise the Department. To do that, we need to have information on time and to have our questions answered. That is how we carry out our scrutiny. It is fundamental. When significant announcements have been made, Committee members have not even been invited to attend, so I look forward to a genuine reset.

I said at the outset that I prefer to operate in close cooperation. As a Committee, we have demonstrated that we can add significant value to the work of the Department, but, to do so, we need information, and we need connections to flow. We may need to look at that as we go on, but I am keen to move forward on that basis.

Ms Long: Likewise.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): It is a huge challenge, but I know that you are more than up for it and that you have extensive experience of a significant part of the Department, which will assist you. We look forward to seeing the information that you have committed to providing and to engaging with you again in this format. It has been useful for members today.

Ms Long: Thanks very much indeed. It is good to see you all. Take care.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Thank you very much.