Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I welcome to the Committee the Minister for Communities and, from the Department for Communities, Grainia Long, permanent secretary, and Iain Greenway, deputy secretary for the engaged communities group. They will be providing a briefing on the NI Place-Name Project and the draft anti-poverty strategy. Given the short notice following last week's meeting, I thank the Minister for his attendance to discuss those two issues.

Members, this is an additional evidence session. I emphasise that it is not in place of the planned session in June with the Minister and his officials. I also make it clear at the outset that, last week, I proposed that the Minister attend today because I was keen for the Committee to scrutinise him on those two matters.

I am also aware that there have been overnight reports in the media on a related subject, which is the ongoing court case on the Irish language strategy. I remind members that legal proceedings are active. Under Standing Order 73, the Committee must not discuss matters that are sub judice, except to the extent that the Chair is satisfied that such consideration will not prejudice legal proceedings. Members should therefore avoid making reference to the details of the ongoing legal challenge and expressing views that could be seen to anticipate or influence the outcome of the proceedings. Questions should instead focus on general policy, process and administration. If I consider a line of questioning to risk breaching the sub judice rule, I will intervene accordingly.

Minister, the place-names issue has caused people a concern that the Department is not serious about the Irish language and is not effectively bringing forward measures that would see a strategy put in place. I invite you to make a statement, after which I will bring in members to ask questions.

Mr Lyons (The Minister for Communities): Thank you very much. I appreciate the invitation to brief the Committee today on the Northern Ireland Place-Name Project and the Executive's draft anti-poverty strategy. Given the confusion that has arisen in recent days and weeks, the opportunity for me to do so is particularly welcome.

By way of background, the Place-Name Project was established almost 40 years ago, with the key aim of researching and publishing the origins and meanings of local place names. It also provides translations of street names at the request of local councils. That is the first point of confusion, I suppose. The project is not, as some have called it, an Irish place-name project. Rather, it researches and publishes the origins of place names, drawing from Scots, English, Norse and French traditions, as well as from Irish. As the Committee knows, celebrating all our shared heritage is very important. I believe that language and culture enrich our communities, strengthen our sense of belonging and provide meaningful ways for people to connect with one another and with the place that we share.

The second point of confusion with the project has been on funding. Over the past four years, DFC has had oversight of the project, but the Department of Finance has funded it. My officials actively sought assurances from DOF on funding in advance of this business year, without any satisfactory conclusion being reached. In order to assist continued discussions on the matter, my Department therefore put in place temporary contingency arrangements to support the project into the summer. I want to be very clear that no decision was taken by me, or by anyone in my Department, to end the project or to allow it to come to an end.

The situation was, however, far from ideal for the Department, and particularly for the university team. In that regard, I understand that personnel continuity has also been an element — perhaps the most significant element — of the uncertainty that has arisen from recent events. One factor for the university is the need for it to meet its responsibilities as a responsible employer and to consider the future viability of the project. Unfortunately, that uncertainty continues, and members will be aware of the Minister for the Economy's recent announcement that she would step in. At present, we do not have details of the nature or scope of the proposed support, but we remain open to engagement with colleagues across government to identify a way forward.

In the meantime, my officials continue to work closely with the project director to ensure that the valuable database developed by the project remains accessible to researchers and the public. I recognise that demand for place-name translation services continues. As an interim measure, officials are providing support out of our existing resources to ensure the continuation of the necessary outputs from the work of the project.

Mr Chairman, I will also address some of the anti-poverty matters, but I am happy to leave them until later.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I propose that we split the session in two. We will try to divide the time equally, because the draft anti-poverty strategy is also an important issue. If members are agreed, I propose that we allocate equal time to members for questions. Members, please indicate early if you want to ask questions about the Place-Name Project. We will then deal with the draft anti-poverty strategy in the second half of the session. If members feel that they are not getting answers to a question, please indicate, and I will direct the Minister back to it. Are members content that we proceed on that basis?

Mrs Mason: Minister, you have the issue with the Place-Name Project, are embroiled in court cases against the Irish language, have removed the branding from your Department and are clearly blocking the development of an Irish language strategy. You therefore have form. It is one thing after another. Why are you so afraid of the Irish language and Irish identity?

Mr Lyons: I am certainly not afraid of the Irish language or Irish identity. I will focus on the facts, because accusations have been made about me. There is a narrative that some are trying to establish, and I think that you are at the forefront in doing that. Let me take the Place-Name Project, however. You are saying that the issue with it is part of a pattern of behaviour.

Mrs Mason: It clearly is.

Mr Lyons: Let me explain that I have presented to the Committee the evidence and the information about the project. I do not know whether you have seen it. Was the Committee provided with the emails?

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Yes.

Mr Lyons: It was. Thank you, Chair. The information has therefore been —.

Mrs Mason: Minister, with all due respect, you are judged on your actions, not on empty words. Is it not the truth that you pulled the funding because you are terrified that there were 2,400 applications in Belfast alone, 990 of which were being progressed? Suddenly, however, the support just disappeared? Is that incompetence or deliberate contempt?

Mr Lyons: I have set out the information and the facts. At no stage did any decision come to me, Deputy Chair. At no stage was I —. You can sigh and roll your eyes, but I want to deal with the facts and the truth. You are determined to portray this as a decision that I have made, when all the facts and the evidence —.

Mrs Mason: I am not determined to do anything, Minister. I will give you an example. I received an email last night, and I will read it out to you so that you can hear it directly:

Is he lying?

Mr Lyons: That is not correct, and you are not correct in what you have said. You continue to assert that I took a decision to cut funding for the project. I did not do that, and I —.

Mrs Mason: Are you embroiled in court cases against the Irish language?

Mr Lyons: I have —.

Mrs Mason: Did you remove the Irish language signage from your Department?

Mr Lyons: Hang on. This is the thing —.

Mrs Mason: Are you blocking the Irish language strategy?

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Make your remarks through the Chair.

Mr Lyons: No, I am not. What you are doing, Deputy Chair, is continuing to move from one issue to the next. Let us deal with the Place-Name Project, because that is what I am here primarily to talk about. I have made it very clear: the evidence is clear and in front of us, and officials here will attest to what I am saying. I am sorry to bring you in like this, Iain, but was any decision brought to my desk on the Place-Name Project?

Mr Iain Greenway (Department for Communities): No decision was taken to the Minister, because we had a series of extensions in place that allowed us time to look at, as the Minister has said, finding a sustainable way forward. It appears that some communications within Queen's University between the administrative and professional sides led to notice periods being invoked, and, understandably, individuals needed to make their decision at that point.

Mrs Mason: OK.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Just a second, because I want to come in on that point. I have heard you say, Minister, that a decision did not reach your desk. I am absolutely flabbergasted. I cannot understand that, because I have here the letter not just from your desk but with your signature on it, dated 9 April, raising concerns about the issue. It therefore certainly was on your desk.

Mr Lyons: No. No decision was made by me about what you have accused me of, which is that I have cancelled funding. What the response to your Assembly question for written answer states is that the funding was being maintained and kept in place until summer 2026, until options could be considered. There is a very clear question here, and it is this: did I take a decision either to cut funding for the project or to let the project die? I did not do either of those things.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Omission is just as bad as commission. I will bring the Deputy Chair back in.

Mr Lyons: No, that is exactly —.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I came in on that only as a point of clarity —.

Mr Lyons: Sorry, Mr Chairman, this —.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I came in on that only —.

Mr Lyons: Sorry, Mr Chairman —.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): — to clarify that it was most certainly on your desk.

Mr Lyons: Sorry, Mr Chairman, this is exactly the point. It is not an act of commission or omission. A decision did not come across my desk, so you are wrong on that.

Mrs Mason: Minister, your answer states:

You signed it.

Mr Lyons: Yes.

Mrs Mason: It therefore very clearly came in front of you. Not only was it on your desk but you signed it.

Mr Lyons: Yes.

Mrs Mason: Minister, sorry, but your —.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Briefly, Cathy.

Mrs Mason: — deflection and bluster on this is just continuous.

Mr Lyons: Cathy, you have got this wrong.

Mrs Mason: No, sorry —.

Mr Lyons: The evidence is in front of you, and you cannot accept it.

Mrs Mason: My constituents do not have it wrong. What my constituents think matters.

Mr Lyons: Do you know why your constituents are saying that, Cathy?

Mrs Mason: Minister, sorry, but the clue is in your title.

Mr Bradley: Chair, is there any chance that you can stop the badgering of the Minister? I am trying to take part in a Committee meeting.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I will allow the Deputy Chair to make this point and will then bring in the next member.

Mrs Mason: The clue is in your title. You are the Minister for Communities, not just for one community. You do not get to pick and choose.

Mr Lyons: Absolutely.

Mrs Mason: You are the Minister for the GAA community, for the Irish language community, for those communities that are living in poverty and for the LGBTQ community. You are failing them all. The Irish language and Irish culture are thriving. The Irish language community is thriving, and it will continue to thrive despite your attacks on it. We will support that community every step of the way.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Very briefly, Minister.

Mr Lyons: Chair, you have to let me respond to that.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I am.

Mr Lyons: Cathy, first, the reason that your constituents are writing to you like that is because you are whipping them up into a frenzy.

Mrs Mason: I think that your actions are doing that.

Mr Lyons: I have your Facebook post here, which states:

That is wrong on two counts. First, I did not remove any funding, as has been made so —

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): OK. Minister, this is a scrutiny —

Mr Lyons: — clear, and, secondly, it was not for Irish language street signs.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): — Committee, and our job is to scrutinise you, not social media posts. I want to —.

Mr Lyons: Do you not think that the truth is important, Mr Chairman?

Mrs Mason: Your actions show —.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Excuse me. I am chairing this meeting. Scrutiny is also important, and we have a very short time span in which to do it. I ask all members to address their questions through the Chair and, if they wish to intervene, to indicate to me as the Chair rather than intervene directly.

Ms Mulholland: Good morning, Minister. What is your current understanding of the Department for the Economy's involvement? What information have you received? Has there been Minister-to-Minister agreement? Are any discussions at all ongoing between the two Departments?

Mr Lyons: No information has been provided to us. Again, Iain, you can keep me right on this. We have sought some clarification.

Mr Greenway: We have sought clarification.

Mr Lyons: None has been provided, however. This has been portrayed primarily as being a funding issue, but funding was not the main issue at play. Rather, the main issue was the staff who had been in place but moved on. We put in place contingency measures, as the Chair outlined when he referred to my response to his question for written answer. Those contingency measures would have allowed funding to continue until the summertime, but, in the absence of having the staff, who had moved on for different reasons, we could not put the measures in place.

I am therefore not sure about the Department for the Economy's involvement. We have sought some clarification from the Minister but have not received any. As I said, I am happy to work with anyone to find a resolution to the issue, but I do not yet have the clarity that you seek.

Ms Mulholland: Have any conversations been had with Queen's about the staffing issue? What clarity can we get on that?

Mr Lyons: I will let Iain answer that.

Mr Greenway: To augment the Minister's answer, we have engaged with Queen's. We have talked informally to DFE colleagues, but we are none the wiser as to what that intervention might or might not entail. On the position in Queen's, a small team has been working on the project, and I do not want people who could easily be identified as being on the staff of Queen's to get drawn into this, as that would be unreasonable. There are, however, people there who are at different stages in their career. They have been trying to see how the project might have continuity in Queen's, but they have not been able to achieve that continuity, so they are now moving on to different things. Inevitably, there comes a tipping point, at which the team says, "This is not looking viable from the Queen's point of view. We need to think about ourselves and our own careers". A number have therefore moved on, and I absolutely understand why. It will therefore be very challenging for Queen's to continue the project, I believe. If it is not Queen's doing it, I am not clear whether DFE has the vires to do it either.

Ms Mulholland: That indicates a real lack of clarity about where the project sits. Is it under language, education, heritage, mapping or records? We have heard that Land and Property Services no longer has the vires to fund the project. This is £6 million of public money. You said yourself that this is not just about the Irish language. It is about part of our history, and it tells us so much. What is being done to protect the investment that has been already made? My fear is that there is a real lack of clarity about where the project now sits.

Mr Lyons: That is a fair point. The project has sat with and been the responsibility of different Departments at different times. The Department of Finance felt in 2022 that it was better that it be placed with DFC. You will have seen the meeting note about that. Overall, it is an academic research project. There is that element to it. We are very keen to make sure that we can secure the work that has been done so far. As I said in my opening statement, we have pulled together that work, because it is very important that we keep it.

Ms Mulholland: Can you give us a bit of clarity on what is being done to protect it?

Mr Lyons: Iain can inform you about how that is being done.

Mr Greenway: We are working with Queen's at the moment. Queen's is the custodian of the database and the material. The intention of working through to the summer was to make sure that that was all properly lined up, closed off and made ready for whatever came next. We are hoping that the people who are moving on from Queen's will still be able to do that tidying up. I know that Queen's is in discussions with others about how that research material can be best kept safe. In parallel, the Department for Communities is looking at where we go next with this. As the Minister said in his opening statement, we understand that, as well as the important research that the project is doing on our heritage and culture, there are customers, if you want to call them that, for the outputs from the project. We are therefore actively looking at what the options will be and where the expertise sits across all the languages. As the Minister said, this is not solely about the Irish language. There are councils now looking for Ulster-Scots street names, for instance, so we have to make sure that the system, whatever that means, can respond to councils' needs. Councils are getting a free service at the moment. Is it appropriate that they get a free service, or should it be a charged-for service? There are many questions that we need to work through.

Ms Mulholland: My final question —.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Very briefly, Sian. We have to move on to the next member.

Ms Mulholland: The situation has arisen because we do not have a collectively agreed multi-year Budget? It is an untenable position for staff constantly to have to work from month to month. That applies not just to the Place-Name Project but to the community and voluntary sector as a whole.

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

Mr Lyons: Of course. That is why we need to have long-term budgets in place. It would be unfair, however, to say that the staffing changes that have happened at Queen's are a direct result of that uncertainty. Other factors were at play. Not having budgets in place was one factor, but this was not simply a case of our not having the money in our budget. There was an agreement that funding was to come directly from DOF for four years, and that agreement then ended. We did not get that clarity, but even if we had had the money in place, that would not have guaranteed the continuation of the project, because of the staffing issues.

Mr McHugh: Tá fáilte romhaibh uilig anseo inniu.

I doubt, Minister, that you have any posts from me from the net similar to the one that you produced from Cathy. Most times when I am on the net promoting the Irish language, I am promoting it as inclusive and there for all to embrace. That is your responsibility as well. As the Minister for Communities, you should be encouraging use of the Irish language, defending it and helping promote it as a minority language. Unfortunately, there seems to be a Pontius Pilate approach being taken to the Place-Name Project and so on. The wider community, and Gaeilgeoiri in particular, view your response as being a very negative one, but that is consistent with other actions that you have taken in the past. Minister, apart from the non-funding of the Place-Name Project and your involvement in court cases that could affect the promotion of the Irish language, what have you done as Minister to secure, promote and develop the Irish language to ensure its visibility? Its visibility to all is a very important aspect, not only for Gaeilgeoiri but for all the people who live on this island. The Irish language is part and parcel of our culture and our history.

Mr Lyons: First, I do not agree with the premise of your question. I believe that this is a coordinated attack on this issue. I have not seen your social media on this one, Maolíosa, but it is perhaps like that of many of the others, where this has been lifted and run with as an issue. Many of your party's representatives have said that I cut funding for the Place-Name Project. That is just wrong. It is disappointing that, despite my having produced the evidence today, people still fail to grasp that.

If you really care about the language, you will agree that its politicisation needs to end. It has been politicised at the Committee today, and that is what has happened in the past. I have not done the things of which you are accusing me. In fact, Sinn Féin Ministers have contributed to the issues that we are talking about today. The Department of Finance was asked whether, at the end of the four-year period, it would continue to fund the project. It said no. I was not asked whether I would fund the project. As I have said many times, it is not something that appeared on my desk. The Department of Finance refused to fund the project any further. It is important to bear that in mind.

I know that you are trying to build a narrative that, in some way, I am hostile to the Irish language. I am hostile to the actions that you and your party have taken around the Irish language. I have been to Irish language events in this Building and in the community. I have had conversations with those who really care about the language and want people to have an opportunity to learn it and to enjoy the history and culture that surrounds it. I am more than supportive of that. What you are trying to do today is paint a picture that does not have any basis in reality. I believe in fairness and in everybody being treated well.

You asked what is being done to promote the Irish language. We have North/South language bodies that are responsible for that work. My Department does have some responsibilities in that regard, and money is being spent through four different programmes. Over the past three years, more than £3·5 million a year has been spent on the Irish language. At the Committee meeting last week, I think that it was Cathy Mason who said that, under my leadership of the Department, the coffers have been empty. That is certainly not the case. A substantial sum is being spent on the Irish language.

I have no objection to Irish, but I do have some objection to the way in which people are using it.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Maolíosa, I am going to have to move on.

Mrs Cameron: Thank you, Minister, for your attendance today. I also thank your officials for being here.

I will ask you a few questions for clarity. Did you personally cut the funding for the Northern Ireland Place-Name Project?

Mr Lyons: No.

Mrs Cameron: Thank you. Did you fail to take a decision on the Northern Ireland Place-Name Project?

Mr Lyons: No.

Mrs Cameron: At any stage, did the Northern Ireland Place-Name Project come to your desk for a decision?

Mr Lyons: No.

Mrs Cameron: You referred to a lack of personnel as being the most significant element. I do not understand that, nor do I know whether you can talk about that. Had the staff stayed, would you have funded them to carry on the project's work?

Mr Lyons: We had plans in place to enable work to continue until the summer. Other options were to have been brought to me so that I could consider a sustainable way forward.

Mrs Cameron: Who funded the project between 2022 and 2026?

Mr Lyons: As the emails that have been provided clearly state, it was the Department of Finance.

Mrs Cameron: Thank you for that.

You referred to some social media posts. The Chair seems to think that they are irrelevant, but I do not. Colm issued a statement on his social media, in which he refers to being:

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Absolutely.

Mrs Cameron: which is not just you, Minister, but me, Maurice and Andy Allen on just this Committee —

Minister, may I ask —?

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

Mrs Cameron: Chair, I take it that I will get the same amount of time that everybody else has been getting.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I am thanking you for reading that into the record.

Mrs Cameron: OK. That is good.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I am giving you more time. Do you have a question for the Minister?

Mrs Cameron: I welcome that, because, Chair, you were vociferous about wanting this meeting and having the opportunity to question the Minister, but you immediately handed over to the Deputy Chair.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I remind you, Pam, that our job is to scrutinise the Minister, so, perhaps, you will return to that. I will give you plenty of time on that.

Mrs Cameron: I note that you did not ask questions to the Minister.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I am trying to allow members time, which you are now taking up. You have about a minute left.

Mrs Cameron: The Deputy Chair had seven minutes; I am just saying. In the spirit of equality, I am sure that you will allow me more time.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Actually, Pam, I intervened during that seven minutes, because I wanted to ask a focused question. Go ahead, please. You now have about half a minute.

Mrs Cameron: OK, that is the way it is. That is very good, Chair.

Minister, I want you to take the opportunity to be able to answer questions, because there are members of the Committee who do not want to hear answers. They just want their voices to be heard and nothing else —. [Inaudible.]

Mrs Cameron: It is not a wonder that there are sections of the community who think that they are hard done by, because that party is telling them that they are hard done by; quite frankly, that party is telling them utter lies. It is terrible and hateful, and it is highly offensive to me. I am really offended by the slant that three members of the Committee have put on me as a unionist.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Excuse me, Pam. I will not allow members to interact between each other. Please speak through the Chair.

Mrs Cameron: Minister, I do not know if you want to comment on how you feel about the statement that was put out by Colm Gildernew, the Sinn Féin Chair of the Committee.

Mr Lyons: It was a fabrication and had no basis in reality. The Chair and the Deputy Chair put out statements saying that I had cut funding. I do not know where they got that from, because —.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): You know well, Minister; you know very well. You remind me, increasingly, Minister, of the arsonist who is running around trying to blame the fire brigade for causing water damage.

Mr Lyons: Do I get a chance to answer?

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): When it comes to the Irish language, you have an excuse for everything and a solution for nothing.

Mr Lyons: May I answer the question, please?

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Yes, go ahead.

Mr Lyons: You stated that I cut funding for the project. I did not cut funding for —.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): You allowed the project to fail.

Mr Lyons: No, I did not allow the project to fail.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): It failed under your watch, Minister.

Mr Lyons: Now you are changing your story. Let us get back to what —.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): No, I am not.

Mr Lyons: Will you please let me answer the question?

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): The facts are the facts.

Mr Lyons: Will you let me answer the question?

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): You were happy to allocate £470,000 to US250 but refused to find a way to allocate £90,000 per year to keep this important project running.

Mrs Cameron: Chair, may I ask another question?

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Go ahead, Pam.

Mrs Cameron: I am very aware that questions are being asked and answers are not being allowed to be given. I am really, really wondering about your chairing of the Committee.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): You can wonder away, Pam. I am content with it. Go ahead, Minister, briefly, please, before I go to the next member.

Mr Lyons: He is interrupting because he does not like the answers, Pam. The fact is that I did not cut any funding, but that does not fit his narrative.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Minister, through the Chair.

Mr Lyons: What the Chair did was make it up — he made it up. He said that I cut funding, but there is no evidence, basis or justification for him saying that. He made it up to suit his own political narrative. We have provided the evidence, today, of how that is not the case. They are ignoring the reality, because they want to get out their own narrative in order to distract from their own failings. That is becoming common: Sinn Féin blames somebody else for its failings. Sinn Féin has questions to answer around this, as it does on other issues, and it is trying to distract from that. I could not have set out more —

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Minister, I have to move on.

Mr Lyons: — clearly what I have done, but some people will not accept —.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): OK, Minister, you referenced the emails. We asked for all emails, not just the emails that you cited. At the end of this meeting, we will require all information to be transferred, because you did not send us the communication from the Place-Name Project. I have received it. The Place-Name Project wrote to you, in November, raising urgently its concerns around its continuation. You did not provide that to the Committee. Clearly, therefore, there is more information out there that we will want to come back on.

Mr Lyons: Mr Chairman, I am happy to ensure that all of that information is provided.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Well, we have not got it yet.

Mr Lyons: I have not been sighted on some of it, but, Iain, I am more than content for any information to be provided to the Committee, because, unlike you, Mr Chairman, I have been honest and told the truth on the issue. I have not fabricated anything.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): OK.

Mr Bradley: Thank you, Minister and team, for attending. I have issues with the way in which the meeting was opened last week. There were allegations that you, Minister, have hatred towards the Irish language and utter contempt for Irish identity. Those were irresponsible comments, unsupported by the factual record of the project's funding arrangements, which we have had sight of today. Will you explain how it makes you, as a Minister, and Pam, Andy and I as unionists on the Committee, feel when someone alleges that political unionism has a hatred towards the Irish language and utter contempt for Irish identity?

Mr Lyons: I again put on record that I have no hatred or contempt for the Irish language. In this job, I am used to being lied about — having things said about me that simply are not true — in order to suit the political agendas of others; unfortunately, that comes with the job. What has annoyed me more, however, is that, even when evidence is provided — when the facts are laid out; when my Department has been open in providing the information — others deny the reality that is in front of them in black and white. I struggle with that: people not seeming to be able to accept the truth of the matter and just doubling down again and again. They may think that there is short-term political gain in that, and maybe there is, but, in the long term, it is not good for this place or for the people out there, who want us to address issues. There will be significant areas of disagreement on Irish language issues and how it is dealt with in the public sphere, but, on this issue, it is particularly frustrating, because what has happened is crystal clear, yet some still use it for political purposes. That is disappointing.

It is also disappointing — we have heard this again from the Chair and the Deputy Chair — to hear continual references to the musical instruments programme, Ulster-Scots funding and US250. That is really disappointing because it impacts on and affects people. I am being accused of showing disrespect towards the Irish language, whereas, in reality, the only disrespect that has been shown around this table has come from the Chair and the Deputy Chair, who continually besmirch those who are involved in and have applied for funding for those things. The Deputy Chair has called them "pet projects" and "vanity projects", yet she has not given any rationale or set out what her threshold would be for cultural investment. Despite the Republic of Ireland's having, in my view, fewer historical and cultural connections to US250, it is still investing in it; why should we not do so? Why should we not give people who are, largely, from disadvantaged backgrounds the opportunity to learn to play musical instruments? Why should we not invest in Ulster Scots as well? I am —.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Quickly, please, Minister. There is another member to come in.

Mr Lyons: OK. I am all for equality and for people being treated well, and I have not said anything that has denigrated the Irish language community, but we repeatedly hear from the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Committee very negative language towards Ulster Scots and those who play musical instruments.

Mr Bradley: Chair, I have one brief question left.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I will have to move on —. Go ahead, Maurice, but be very brief.

Mr Bradley: OK. It is about the database that has been saved. What reference is there in that database to Norse, Scots and English as well as to Irish? Maybe we could have a breakdown of that information. That might show not that we are disadvantaging the Irish language, which we have been accused of, but that, in fact, we are disadvantaging the other minority languages that have been circulating in this wee country of ours.

Mr Lyons: We can look at the research to see what we can provide.

Mr Greenway: We can have a look. Historically, all these things are mixed up, so it might be difficult to say cleanly that something is this, that or the other, but we can certainly look, Maurice.

Mr Bradley: OK. Thank you.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Mark, you will have to be brief; you came in late, and we need to get to the anti-poverty strategy. Be as brief as possible, please.

Mr Durkan: Minister, you have denied that there is a pattern in your behaviour in regard to the Irish language, but you cannot deny that there is a pattern of results or outcomes that conspire to delay the progress of the Irish language — they certainly will not stop that progress — so you can surely understand how people conclude that the termination of the programme, the virtues and values of which we have all previously outlined, is born out of your antipathy towards the Irish language. There is no evidence of a conscious decision by you to cut the project, but it seems as though it has been allowed to wither on the vine. Are there projects that we have not heard about that are similarly funded through, as opposed to funded by, your Department and that have reached a similar crisis in funding and that the Department, working with others, might have been able to continue to fund?

Mr Lyons: With respect, Mark, I take issue with what you said about allowing the project to wither on the vine. I want to be very clear: not only did I not take a decision to cut funding, I certainly did not hold off on doing anything and on taking a decision hoping that it would just peter out by itself. That is all false. When the Assembly question came before me, my understanding was that the funding would continue until the summertime. It was not until media queries were raised that we — me anyway — had an understanding of the situation. I think that it came as a shock to people in the Department just how quickly that funding had come to an end, but it was because of the staffing issues rather than the lack of funding or the lack of contingency planning. I did not in any way allow it to wither on the vine, Mark.

Mr Durkan: OK. Thanks, Minister. This has been the latest unedifying episode during your Ministry and, you will argue, the latest unedifying episode in this Committee. That has allowed a public blame game to take place between the DUP and Sinn Féin. The Irish language community is fed up with having its basic rights treated as a political football. Yes, scrutiny is important and we are here as a Committee to scrutinise you, Minister, and the work of the Department, but it is worth noting — I will put this on record — that, on the day that this whole issue blew up publicly, Sinn Féin and the DUP walked into the Lobby together to vote against increased and improved scrutiny of Executive Budgets.

Mr Lyons: Mark, I have no issue with scrutiny on this at all. I have come to the Committee today; I changed plans to ensure that I could be here. I have answered questions and provided emails. I am not holding back or hiding anything in any way. Here is my frustration: that does not matter a bit. I have listened to what Committee members have said today. I could talk until I am blue in the face and provide you with all the information under the sun, but certain members will continue with their own narrative regardless. We will provide the information, but there are members here who are determined to argue that black is blue. I do not think that I have ever been so clear about an issue and had so much evidence to present to a Committee, yet there has not been any acceptance of that. It seems as if it is a waste of time, but I am happy to do what needs to be done in order to allow you to fulfil your scrutiny role, whatever that is.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Thank you, Minister. We will move on to the anti-poverty strategy.

The Committee Clerk: Andy had his hand up.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): OK. Andy, really quickly, please. I was about to move on to the anti-poverty strategy. Go ahead, Andy; very briefly, please.

Mr Allen: I appreciate that. Apologies, Chair. One thing came to me. As a unionist, I have no hatred towards the Irish identity: I want to make that absolutely clear. I served in an Irish regiment, as I have made clear on numerous occasions. I do not think that any of my unionist colleagues have a hatred towards the Irish identity.

Minister, in the briefing note provided, there is a comment from Deirdre Hargey, who was Minister Hargey at the time, about the budget. The overview that you provided states that a bid was submitted to DOF but no funding was provided. Can you help me understand this: what is the difference between the approach that you have taken and the approach taken by Minister Hargey?

Mr Lyons: There is, of course, no difference in the approach. I have the minute note here. It states:

That is what she wanted, and that was fair enough. That is what we would have liked to have seen happen as well. We would have liked to have seen that baseline transfer over. We did not get that. DOF ended the funding at the end of March 2026. We were then left to see if we could find a contingency, but, because of the staffing issues, that was not allowed to happen. My position on that is no different from Deirdre Hargey's.

Mr Allen: Thank you, Minister. That is certainly my view.

I have one final point. There has been a lot of reference to us being a scrutiny Committee, but it is also the role of a Committee to advise and assist the Minister. That is an important role of the Committee and one that we should reflect on. I do not agree with everything that Mark said, but I agree that this whole situation has been unedifying and does little to instil confidence on the ground. We need to reflect more widely in that regard. Thank you, Minister, for the clarity that you have provided.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): We are going to move on to the anti-poverty strategy. Minister, you should reflect on the fact that you are seeking to point out the views of members of this Committee. Your real difficulty, however, is convincing all the people out there in the Irish language sector who repeatedly see that the only effective actions that you have managed to take have been to, for example, remove logos from the Department and block additional funding from going into the Irish language. It is not about what you say; it is about what you deliver, and you have not delivered anything on that. We are the least of your worries. The problem is that there is an entire community out there that believes that you have failed to deliver on the Irish language.

Mr Lyons: I would say in response, Mr Chairman, that that is not a justification for you to fabricate statements.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I have not fabricated anything.

Mr Lyons: You have. You said that I blocked funding, and that is not —.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Minister, you stated that you provided the emails. You have admitted in this meeting that you provided only some, and you have asked your official to provide the rest.

Mr Lyons: Yes.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): We will, no doubt, seek to keep an eye on that.

Mr Lyons: I provided what you asked for. I am happy to provide everything on this, and that will paint an even clearer picture. However, throughout this process, I have been honest about what has happened; not everybody can say the same.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): OK. Moving on to the anti-poverty strategy: is it you, Minister, or the permanent secretary who will open?

Mr Lyons: I will make a few comments, Mr Chairman, to start off. This was originally planned to be an update session with officials, led by Grainia, but I wanted to stay to make a few opening comments at this important juncture in the development of the strategy, which will, I hope, provide, for the first time, an agreed, Executive-wide, holistic framework that addresses poverty across all ages and societal groups.

I have read with care many of the consultation responses. I have also continued to engage positively with a range of expert voices. It is clear that the draft strategy had much to commend it, but we have a duty to listen, reflect and change course where necessary in order to better deliver for the people of Northern Ireland. Therefore, I have asked Grainia and her team to look in detail to see how it can be improved. I have requested urgent and ambitious action to maximise all opportunities for collaboration and shared delivery across Government, local government and broader partnerships.

I want to fully exploit effective measures to prevent entry into, and support exit from, poverty. In my Department, that includes vital work on employability, housing and fuel poverty, all of which are priorities for me and on which officials are actively engaged. I want to deliver refreshed funding approaches. We are working on those and will give you detail on them as soon as we can. I want to put in place targets and indicators that are within our ability to deliver and that will measure progress and keep us accountable. I want to ensure that a costed and detailed delivery plan will be presented to you in due course.

To go back to Andy's point, the Committee is here to assist and advise, and I come in good faith to say that I want to hear from you. I want to know what improvements can be made. We have taken the right approach so far in putting together what can be agreed by the Executive. We have gone out for public consultation and taken views to see how we can improve that document. I believe that we share an ambition to alleviate poverty in our society. We also have an understanding of the complexity of the challenge, which is, of course, not helped by our constrained funding environment. This is one of the most important pieces of work that we can do together, so I want to work with you. I am happy to take any questions.

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

Ms Mulholland: Thank you. I have been talking about the anti-poverty strategy since the day and hour that I became an MLA. Minister, if you had the budget for it, what would your anti-poverty strategy look like? What would your priority list be?

Mr Lyons: There are a number of things. It is hard to bring it down to just one, so here are a few things that, I think, are most important. Fuel poverty is a huge issue. The cost of fuel takes a lot out of people's disposable income or overall income, so I would want to ramp up work on that as quickly as possible. That makes a real difference. I would want to invest heavily in employment and employability programmes, because we know the difference that they can make. I would want to make sure that we have a fully funded disability and work strategy, because that is a massive issue that is coming down the hill towards us.

I also want to make sure that we invest what we need to invest in our health service to help those who are not in work at the moment because of disability or other health conditions to get back into work. Over 200,000 people in Northern Ireland are on personal independence payment (PIP). A huge number of people are economically inactive as a result of their health conditions. Half of those health conditions are psychological issues. That is a huge issue for us, and we need to ensure that we tackle it. We spend a huge amount on keeping people on benefits; we are not spending enough on getting people well again. That is a flavour of what I want to do.

Ms Mulholland: I agree with much of that. My focus is on children and families. Our 15-page response —

Mr Lyons: It was closed on impact.

Ms Mulholland: — to your consultation probably went into quite a lot of detail on that.

What is your assessment of the gap between the strategy that Northern Ireland needs and what you can deliver?

Mr Lyons: Different people will have different views on the type of strategy that we need, but we need to see progress on many key indicators, such as new housing, housing conditions and getting people into work and getting them into a condition that means they can work. We need to measure those things. A considerable amount of work needs to be done to cost them, and that is what we have committed to do.

Ms Mulholland: I want to ask about timelines. Have you seen an updated draft of the anti-poverty strategy?

Mr Lyons: Responses have been coming through from Departments. However, I am looking for significant changes to be made. Grainia will take forward that work and oversee the team that will do that. We expect that to be done over the coming months, and I want to be in the position to have that in front of you when you come back from your recess.

Ms Mulholland: Have you seen the action plans?

Mr Lyons: No, not at this stage, but that work should be going on simultaneously.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): OK, Sian.

Ms Mulholland: Do you think that we will have something tangible, such as a further or new draft, by the time that we come back from recess?

Mr Lyons: Is there any way that that would not be the case?

Mr Greenway: On the strategy? Absolutely. The action plan will be the responsibility of the delivery board, which will be chaired by the head of the Civil Service. That is being done in —.

Ms Mulholland: Has the membership of that been confirmed yet?

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Sian, I am going to have to go to other members.

Ms Mulholland: Sorry. Has the membership been confirmed?

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Go ahead, Maoliósa.

Mr McHugh: Minister, as local government spokesperson, I raise the fact that the Committee has had extensive engagement with local councils about the anti-poverty strategy. There is a great deal of frustration about how they have been sidelined on that issue. How will the strategy include local government?

Mr Lyons: Local government bodies are absolutely essential partners in it. We have been having a conversation recently, and we received the Committee's report on its deliberations on the issue. I have also asked to see whether there is a way for local government bodies to be involved in the governance and reporting as well, so that not only is there the perception that they are included but they actually are included.

Mr McHugh: From their representations to the Committee, there is a perception on their part that they have been sidelined.

Moving on from that, Minister, in your previous answer, you said that health and well-being are central to the strategy. I draw your attention to newspaper reports about language learning and its importance for people's health and well-being. Those reports were commenting on embracing the Irish language. Maybe you should consider encouraging and promoting the development of the language as part and parcel of the health and well-being section of the strategy. Is that likely to happen?

Mr Lyons: It is not something that has come up specifically in any of the proposed actions that I am aware of. We know, however, from our experience of working in the arts that involvement in the arts, whether it relates to musical instruments or another other area — I think that you can include language in that — is good for attainment, well-being and community cohesion and involvement. All those things contribute in part to how we deal with poverty. It is a good example of how the strategy is, and needs to be, an Executive strategy, because so many elements contribute to it.

Mr McHugh: Finally, the strategy is to be with the Executive by the summer. Is that likely to happen, or will it, a wee bit like the Irish language strategy, be put on the long finger?

Mr Lyons: That will depend on whether we intend to take it to the Committee first to get members' views before we go to the Executive. That remains under review, but I emphasise that we want to move as quickly as possible.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): We do not want to be part of any delay, so we are prepared to take it very quickly, and we will make space for it. We want to make sure that there is no further delay.

Mrs Cameron: Thank you, Minister. This is a very important subject. We look forward to seeing a new, refreshed version of the strategy. What engagement have you had with other Ministers on the strategy? What support, including financial support, have you been given to refresh it?

Clearly, the fuel poverty strategy is a key intervention in all this. What engagement have you had with the Department of Finance since the Executive agreed your fuel poverty strategy? How much has the Finance Minister allocated in the draft Budget to the warm healthy homes fund, which will be very positive if we can get it moving.

Mr Lyons: On the first issue of engagement with other Executive colleagues, the strategy is a priority for me, but, unfortunately, it has not seen the investment that I would like it to see. We have not been allocated any additional resource for the strategy at this stage. I hope that others will get serious about this and see how important it is and how it impacts on the work that they want to do. I hope that we get to that stage very soon and that, over the next decade, we will take a more strategic approach to make sure that funding is in place for that.

We have not received any allocation for the fuel poverty strategy yet. I will be pressing for that, because it is absolutely essential. That strategy is one of the ways in which we can ensure that we make the most difference to people's lives. I have seen that for myself when I have been out and about and in homes that have been improved through energy efficiency and other measures. It is life-changing, and it is hugely important for people's pockets. It is a no-brainer.

As I said in response to Sian, if I had money, that is where I would put so much of it, because we know the difference that it can make and how it can help. It helps families. Sian made the point about children. A warm, healthy home is good for everybody, particularly children, and if that is not in place, it can be particularly damaging for children. I therefore want to ensure that we have something that is effective, but I need others in the Executive to stand up and be prepared to give some additional funding for that. I look forward to having conversations with the Finance Minister about that.

Mrs Mason: Minister, thanks for that important update. You outlined the fact that, every minute we delay on this, people fall further into poverty and more people fall into poverty. I appreciate and welcome what you said about co-design, but what we need to see is action. You know better than I do the sector and its involvement in this. Its voice needs to be central.

I want to pick up on the issue of childcare, because the childcare strategy and the anti-poverty strategy need to go hand in hand. We do not see any Sure Start targets in the draft childcare strategy. As you will know, Sure Start is a wonderful organisation for children in disadvantaged areas, yet it has no costed plan and no targets attached to it. The subsidy scheme gives 15% towards the total cost of childcare. However, childcare costs have risen by 17%, so the payment is having no impact on families; it is being completely absorbed. The fact that families on universal credit still cannot get that 15% subsidy creates a barrier that stops them from getting childcare and getting back into work.

As the Minister in charge of the anti-poverty strategy, have you pressed the Education Minister on that? If you have not, why have you not? Maybe you have pressed him. Can you give us some detail on that?

Mr Lyons: It is important that we get co-design right. There have actually been positive indications in the poverty statistics; the most recent ones were going in the right direction. Although there is no room for complacency, it highlights that we are already taking many positive actions. We need to see more of that in the anti-poverty strategy as a whole; it needs to set out all the significant work that we are already doing. The strategy is one way of bringing it all together and seeing what else needs to be included to ensure that it is moved forward. Absolutely: I want to work with all those who were involved in the co-design groups. The most important thing for me, however, is getting something that actually works for the people of Northern Ireland.

You are absolutely right: childcare is essential. Indeed, the economic inactivity rate shows that a considerable number of people are not in the workforce who want to be in it but cannot because of caring and other responsibilities. That is why we need to have effective childcare support. You will be aware of the childcare support that the Executive have brought forward, and that was led by Paul Givan, the Education Minister. We want to see more of that. I am more than happy, if we can get the funding together, to ensure that we make a real difference. You are right about Sure Start. Those projects genuinely have a transformational impact.

Mrs Mason: Will you press the Education Minister for those targets? They are key aspects in tackling poverty.

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

Mr Lyons: It is important, when we bring all that together, that, again, we ask, "What makes the most difference here?". Obviously, each Minister will bring forward to me — it is important to say that it is an Executive strategy, so it is for us all to bring that forward.

Mrs Mason: You are right that large amounts of Executive funding have gone into that. However, when we see that schemes such as the subsidy scheme are not having an impact on parents — a lot of money has been pumped into it, but parents are not seeing their childcare fees decreasing — alarm bells should be ringing about their design. We need to ensure that that does not progress when we see the final anti-poverty strategy.

Mr Lyons: It would be far worse if there were not that intervention [Inaudible.]

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I have to move on to other members. Maurice, Mark and Kellie, I ask you to be brief. I am conscious that we have another briefing on the draft anti-poverty strategy afterwards. Maurice, go ahead.

Mr Bradley: Thank you, Minister. You mentioned economic inactivity and the provision of opportunity for someone to work their way out of poverty. How can the Executive work towards implementing their own regional balance strategy to provide investment and employment opportunities in areas that are, sadly, lagging behind at the minute in order to allow people to work their way out of poverty and, at the same time, contribute to society and have better well-being because they have a better belief in their life and are actually contributing to society and bringing money into the house, not just for basic living but for added extras? You need employment for that. What will the Executive do on regional balance?

Mr Lyons: First, work is really important. However, when it comes to poverty, there is not one silver bullet that solves everything. Different people will have different needs. Work is important. We cannot continue on the trajectory that we are on. Our welfare system is broken and out of control. We have one of the highest levels of welfare need anywhere in the UK. It continues to grow. We continue to put more and more money into it, and we are not seeing results. Clearly, the system is broken and something is not working. Therefore, there are lots of things that we need to do, but, in order to do some of them, we need to ensure that we have the tax base in place so that we can provide the additional support that is necessary.

On nearly every metric, someone's getting into work counts as an improvement to them and their life. How do we do that? You are right: we need to ensure that we have the right jobs in the right places for the right people. Part of that is about ensuring that people are healthy enough, so that they can get into and sustain employment. Sometimes, it is about ensuring that they are given additional support to get the skills that they need to get the jobs that are there. In some instances, it is about ensuring that we have the jobs there and that we attract investment.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Minister, I will have to move on.

Mr Durkan: Cheers, Chair. I appreciate, Minister, that you have spent a bit of time talking about your focus on getting people into work, and the disability work strategy is a core component of that. However, it oversimplifies things a wee bit if we consider that, here in the North, 60% of working-age adults in poverty are employed and nearly two thirds of children living in poverty are in households where at least one adult is in work. How do you start to square that circle? What role can and will other Departments play, or what role have they played, in doing that?

Mr Lyons: First, the reason why I started my answer to Maurice's question by saying that there are many things here that need to be done is that I am trying not to oversimplify things. It is not just about getting more people into work, although people not being in work is a significant part of the overall problem. The number of people receiving benefits is getting out of control, and if you are constantly funding that, there is less resource to put in elsewhere.

You make an important point. How do we help those who are in work and are struggling? In my view, those are some of the most hard-pressed people in our society. They seem to miss out all the time on the support that is available to others. You are absolutely right. What do we do? That is why we need to look at how we lower costs for people and how we make it easier for them to heat their homes. That is why the fuel poverty strategy is so important. That is why support should not just be available to certain types of housing tenure. We need to make sure that it is available to those who need it most. That is why we are working on improving housing stock, why work is being done to help with childcare costs and why we need to make sure that we spend the money that we have well so that we can give relief to those who find themselves in that situation. Those are the things that we need to look at.

I want to be clear, and that is why I answered Maurice's question in that way: this is not a question of, "Do one thing, and everything else will work"; it is about making it simpler and easier for everybody. That is why housebuilding is vital. Look at people's big outgoings: mortgage or rent, and the cost of heating their homes. If we want to help people who are struggling, we should have a laser focus on building more homes, ensuring that we build more social homes, and making sure that those are good-quality homes. Those are some of the most important things that we can do, and that is how we help those who find themselves in work poverty.

Mr Durkan: Maolíosa spoke about local government and the important role that the councils play —

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Really briefly, Mark.

Mr Durkan: — in tackling poverty. However, there is a real problem here that the council areas with the biggest problems of poverty are those least resourced to do so. That brings me to my favourite subject: the rates support grant. I know that you made a bid in the multi-year Budget process for about £12·5 million or £12·3 million for a rates support grant each year. You did not get that. You got £3 million. Could you revisit that bid with an anti-poverty strategy sticker on it?

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): Very briefly, Minister.

Mr Lyons: That would depend entirely on where we get the most return for the investment that we make. I have lots of statutory responsibilities, some of which are a real struggle to meet. The rates support grant, at certain levels, is not a statutory obligation for us. That is why it has come under pressure recently. However, I re-emphasise the point that local government are partners, and local government could also be doing more to help us, although they do a lot already.

I talked about one of the biggest issues: housing and getting land zoned for development, getting planning permission in place quickly —

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): OK, Minister, I am going to have to close it

—. [Inaudible.]

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): I am going to have to move on. Thank you, Mark. Kellie, go ahead.

Ms K Armstrong: Thank you, Minister. It is not often that we hear from a Minister that they are changing course after consultation. Congratulations on that one. I welcome that completely.

You mentioned the fact that Communities will not be able to solve all anti-poverty issues; they are across Departments. Earlier, however, you said that measurement will be based on what can be delivered. I am worried that, unless we have a measurement for the other Departments that have a role in this, it will not be delivered. As this will eventually be an Executive strategy, is there a way of having an anti-poverty lens — a bit like an equality impact assessment or rural proofing — on all policies across the Executive, with the attention on reducing poverty levels?

Mr Lyons: First, thanks for your comments at the start. [Laughter.]

I would push back a little bit. Throughout this process, I have said that we would go to a consultation and that we would listen. People will say, "Oh, we have heard politicians say that before". I meant it when I said that. I had hoped that people would have gone down that road with us and engaged with us in that way. Some have, and I welcome that.

An anti-poverty lens should already be the focus of so much of what we do anyway. I want to ensure that we have the right governance in place in that regard. We already have governance in many ways. We have the Public Accounts Committee and the Audit Committee; we will have a board in place as well. I am aware, though, that the more we spend on governance and structures, the less money goes where it needs to go. We need to strike the balance, but I believe that that is the way that I already operate. I look at every project and every bit of spending and ask, "Is this value for money? Will it deliver real change? Are we doing things in a way that will make a difference to people?". I have not called it an anti-poverty lens, but, essentially, we are already looking through it in that way. Let us have the conversation about the best way to do that.

Ms K Armstrong: Is there a way to have that across the Executive and not just in the Department for Communities, if this is an Executive strategy? Can it be written into the strategy as a top line that we need that to happen, and have the Executive sign off on it?

Mr Lyons: I am happy to consider that. The other point is that a considerable number of targets and indicators will come through in that regard. It will be up to Ministers and Departments to ensure that they meet those targets. Hopefully, that will be that anti-poverty lens for them.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): OK. Thank you, Minister and the team, for taking those questions. I want to go back to the timing of the anti-poverty strategy. It is a crucial piece of work. You said that it would be ready when we come back after recess. I am going to speak to the Committee, but I believe that the Committee will be keen to commit to meeting during the recess in order to get it across the line. I am saying that you should not wait until recess. If we can facilitate a quicker passage of the strategy, we will commit to meeting during the recess, if we can arrange to do so, so that the summer is not lost.

Mr Lyons: You have just made a lot of friends among my officials who, I am sure, will be delighted to hear that. [Laughter.]

Mr Greenway: We will not let it clash with our summer holidays. [Laughter.]

Ms Grainia Long (Department for Communities): I am very happy to confirm that the Minister has been very clear to us that he wants urgency on this matter. He wants the teams to be mobilised, and that is what we are doing. We are being very clear on what needs to go into the strategy. You heard the phrase "significant change", and that is absolutely right. We will do that at pace. I appreciate that the Committee has said that it will work with us on that. Urgency is everything, and you have our absolute assurance on that one.

The Chairperson (Mr Gildernew): OK. Thank you. We will see you all again soon.