Official Report: Monday 30 September 2024

Mr Speaker: Before we move to today's business, I inform the Assembly that the Defective Premises Bill received Royal Assent on 20 September 2024. It will be known as the Defective Premises (Northern Ireland) Act 2024 and it is chapter 3.

Mr Speaker: I advise Members that Lord Elliott of Ballinamallard resigned as a Member of the Assembly for Fermanagh and South Tyrone last Friday, 27 September. I notified the Chief Electoral Officer in accordance with section 35 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998. I have been informed by the Chief Electoral Officer that Diana Armstrong has been returned as a Member of the Assembly for Fermanagh and South Tyrone to fill the vacancy. This morning, Ms Armstrong signed the undertaking and the Roll of Membership and entered her designation in my presence and that of the Clerk of the Assembly. She has now taken her seat. I welcome her to the Assembly and wish her every success in her role.

Mr Speaker: As a result of Lord Elliott's resignation, the office of the Chairperson of the Committee for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs became vacant. The nominating officer for the Ulster Unionist Party has informed me that Robbie Butler has been nominated for that office. Mr Butler has accepted and will take up the role from 9.00 am on Wednesday 2 October 2024. I am satisfied that the requirements of the Standing Orders have been met.

Mr Speaker: Before we move on, I want to deal with some other matters. First, on 23 September, Mark Durkan MLA raised a point of order about the First Minister's answer to his question about the independent review of the Department's approach to the Peacemakers Museum, Foyle.

Standing Orders make clear that Ministers should give answers:

and, as I said last week, it is not acceptable for Ministers to mislead the House. Members will be aware of the long-standing parliamentary position and the previous rulings that say that the Speaker cannot be expected to give a definitive view on whether the answers that Ministers give are satisfactory and accurate. The Speaker has no ability to access all the materials to investigate such a matter, establish the facts and reach a definitive conclusion.

Members, however, have the ability to pursue and probe answers with which they are unhappy, including through further questions, in order to establish the detail of an issue to their satisfaction. Indeed, it is the duty of the Assembly and its Members to conduct thorough scrutiny of the Executive.

From an initial review of the Official Report last week, it seemed to me that the Member and the First Minister were arguing on slightly different points. In his point of order, the Member clearly felt very strongly that a letter from the former permanent secretary indicated something different. I anticipate that the Member will want to pursue and probe those questions further in order to establish a clear account of events to his satisfaction.

I call Mr Gaston for a point of order.

Mr Gaston: On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Following on from that and from the ruling that you made earlier this year, on 12 March, regarding a Minister's responsibilities, I ask you and your office to have a look at the answer to AQW 14683/22-27, where the Minister for Communities has partially answered the question and has left out the detail that I would request. On that basis, I would like you to follow on from what you have been doing and to make a ruling to ensure that the Minister provides a full and frank answer to all the questions that have been asked.

Mr Speaker: I thank the Member for the point of order and for giving me advance notice of it. I have already highlighted that Standing Orders require answers to be full and clear. While it is in order for a Minister to report the information that an arm's-length body has provided to them, I fully appreciate that the Member has an issue with the detail of the question not being answered. I understand that he has tabled a further question for written answer, and I encourage him in that approach to obtain the information that he has asked for and the arm's-length body to ensure that it provides that information to the Minister.

Mr Gildernew: I raise the issue of property management companies and shared area maintenance contracts in residential estates across the North. It has been raised recently with me as a constituency MLA, with me outside my constituency in my Committee role and, as of last week, with the Committee for Communities. It appears that a huge number of issues have arisen from those contracts and that there is a dearth of regulation around them.

The issues that have been raised with me include the performance of the contracts and the work that is or is not being done; accountability and contact with the companies in order to raise issues or complaints; the fees and charges that are levelled against the work that do not seem to be in line with the work that is being done; and, it would appear at times, aggressive pursuit of late payments or non-payment charges where disputes arise.

In the case of one particular estate in my constituency, Beechville Heights, I have not been able to secure a meeting with the management company, so I have a keen understanding of the difficulties that residents must face in that regard.

I want to flag the issue today. The Committee and I will be taking forward additional work on it. The Assembly will need to look at where improvements can be made.

Mr Clarke: I want to talk about the ongoing inquiry into Muckamore Abbey Hospital, which many of us are aware of. Last week, I was shocked to read that the inquiry heard that a former consultant psychiatrist and clinical director at Muckamore Abbey Hospital was "absolutely horrified" by allegations of the abuse of patients. Dr Colin Milliken described his "shock, anger and despair" at the revelations, but he said that he had never been aware of poor treatment of some patients.

If my memory serves me correctly, I represented a constituent who is a resident of that establishment and was under that same doctor's care. That patient, whom I can only describe without his parents' permission, is about 6' 4" in height and was regularly brought new clothes by his family. When the family came to visit him, however, he was wearing clothes that would probably have suited someone about 5' tall. Quite often, the family would have been in contact to try to speak to their loved one in the hospital but were told that he was sleeping. On a number of occasions, we questioned the young fella's medication. With a lot of work, we contacted the hospital via his mother, who was his next of kin, but we were denied any information on the patient under Dr Milliken's care.

We were told that the young lad had capacity. We then met the young lad, got his signature, made a further submission, and, again, we were denied. Let us just say that they were very obstructive, but eventually we got that information, which proved that that young fella was on medication that was keeping him in a state that the parents had witnessed, a state that was unnecessary and could only be described as a form of abuse.

To say that I was shocked last week, when I read the newspaper article on Dr Milliken's recollection, would be an understatement. Dr Milliken should have been very aware, because many of the patients under his care were abused. To keep persons dressed in inappropriate clothes is, in my book, a form of abuse. To prescribe medication to keep them in a comatose state rather than working with them is a form of abuse. All of those things happened when, if my memory serves me correctly, Dr Milliken was the said doctor.

I can only hope, as the inquiry concludes, that others will give evidence to disprove the evidence given by Dr Milliken and other senior clinicians and that, whatever went on in that hospital, we come to a good conclusion, there is a just outcome for the patients who were mistreated and they and their families will get satisfaction.

Ms Egan: I rise to bring attention to a monumental scandal that was brought into sharp focus for the public on 'Nolan Live'.

The fraudulent activity that appears to be conducted through the Just Eat delivery app has lost businesses across Northern Ireland, including in my constituency of North Down, hundreds of thousands of pounds. Numerous food partners that joined the Just Eat server appear to have fallen victim to a cybersecurity breach. That led to the bank details of enterprises being altered to those of an unknown third party, resulting in the theft of income that should have been made through working with Just Eat. That has left a large hole in the pockets of businesses trying to pay rent, pay staff and cover running costs.

In my constituency, I would like to draw particular attention to Bokhara, which has lost £19,000, and Lili's, which has lost £7,500. While Just Eat makes a percentage in commission on each order, I would ask whether it has profited while the theft occurred. I spent time with the owner of the Bokhara on Thursday night and heard from him about the absolute impact and lack of trust that this has left between business owners and the delivery technology providers. They are devastated.

Those businesses deserve their funds back. Instead of acting with compassion and taking responsibility, Just Eat originally stated that, upon investigation, there had been no breach of security. Instead, the press statement insinuated that fault lay with the businesses that were victims and stated that they had shared their access codes, although many of them have said that they absolutely had not.

The Northern Ireland Food To Go Association has been working tirelessly in representing businesses across Northern Ireland that have fallen victim to this. However, the whole circumstance raises multiple questions about how it was allowed to happen, the regulation of online delivery and service providers and their cybersecurity. In my opinion, Just Eat can more than afford to reimburse the food establishments affected, and I call on it to do so immediately. Also, I urge the Minister for the Economy to look into the issue and give clarity to all those impacted so that they know that the Assembly stands with them.

Dr Aiken: I would like to put on record some remarks about the events in Lebanon last week:

Those are not my words, but I think that most right-minded people who understand the malign hand of Iran in the horrors of the Middle East will agree with them. For those who do not recognise the quotes, they are the words of President Joe Biden and, secondly, Vice President Kamala Harris. We should all welcome their unambiguous clarity. Rather than write letters of support to Iran's leadership, like some political leaders on this island have done, we should reflect on the clear lead shown by the United States on the reality of the situation in the Middle East and, rather than seeking to appease the perpetrators, take a firm stance against terrorism no matter where it is.

Mr Sheehan: I want to make a statement about the decision by the Education Minister, Paul Givan, to meet the Loyalist Communities Council (LCC), which is made up of a number of loyalist gangs, narco gangs and so forth.

The Minister's decision was wrong on a number of levels: first of all, given the state of chaos in the provision of special educational needs. We heard the independent autism reviewer say on BBC last week that she has been asking for a meeting for quite a while and the Minister cannot find space in his diary to meet her. One would think that the Minister would at least make space in his diary to meet advocates from the community and voluntary sector and that particular woman, who was appointed by the Department of Health as the independent autism reviewer. I also know that Conradh na Gaeilge has been asking the Minister for a meeting since last February. Again, the Minister could not find space in his diary to meet that organisation, which is the main advocate for the Irish medium and the Irish language in the North — in fact, in the whole country.

I wonder what priorities the Minister has and why he cannot meet advocates from different education sectors but can meet loyalist gangs who, after 26 years, still have not packed up and gone away. I am all for meeting and speaking to people and trying to get them to move away from what they are doing, but no Education Minister should take direction from those gangs. The LCC said that it wanted to meet on a number of issues, including educational underachievement, but it was also demanding that Scoil na Seolta, the Irish-medium school in east Belfast, should not be given any support from the Education Department. It is absolutely outrageous that those gangs would demand of a Minister not to support a school for children whose parents want them to be educated through the medium of Irish. It is absolutely outrageous, and the Minister should make it clear that in no circumstances will he give in —

Mr Speaker: The Member's time is up.

Mr Sheehan: — to that outrageous demand.

Ms Brownlee: I rise to speak on behalf of a family facing an incredibly challenging and heartbreaking situation.

On 10 September, Lesley Poots, a beloved mother and grandmother from Northern Ireland, flew from Dublin to Dubai to support her daughter, who was going through a difficult pregnancy. Sadly, just a few days into her stay, the whole family, including Lesley, contracted a severe sickness bug. After she initially showed symptoms on 15 September, Lesley's condition deteriorated rapidly, and she was rushed to hospital on 20 September, where she was diagnosed with sepsis, blood poisoning and multiple organ failure. She was minutes away from losing her life. Thanks to the swift actions of paramedics and the outstanding care from the A&E team in the Mediclinic Parkview Hospital in Dubai, Lesley was stabilised and admitted to the ICU. She remains in a critical condition on a ventilator, receiving ongoing dialysis and fighting liver and kidney failure.

In addition to the emotional toll, the financial burden on the family is immense. Lesley, unfortunately, had no private health insurance, and the cost of her treatment is rapidly mounting, exceeding £15,000 in the first 24 hours alone. The family face what could be hundreds of thousands of pounds in medical bills, if not up to £1 million for a transplant. If Lesley recovers, her family will also need to fly her home to the UK.

It is with a heavy heart, yet strong hope, that the family have turned to the community for support. They are determined to give Lesley every chance to survive this horrible ordeal. Any contribution will not only ease the financial burden and strain but allow her loved ones to focus on what truly matters, which is being there for their mum. I urge everyone to keep Lesley and her family in their thoughts and prayers during this incredibly difficult time. A GoFundMe page has been set up online. If they can, I urge Members to share it and, of course, donate. The family would be deeply grateful for any assistance as they do everything in their power to save their mum. She is far too young to go, and they need her with them.

Mr O'Toole: I reflect on the important question of accountability and responsibility-taking in this place. It is a theme on which I have reflected on many occasions since we took up our role in opposition, and it is getting more and more important. There are more and more examples of Ministers and Executive parties seeking to shift blame and responsibility and not to take accountability for decisions that they have taken or could take. It matters, because all of us stand for election to this place and take the Pledge of Office. I welcome the new Member, Ms Armstrong, who took the Pledge of Office today. We all sign the Pledge of Office and join the Assembly as an act of responsibility to the constituents whom we serve and to Northern Ireland at large.

Over the past few weeks, we have seen examples of comic and grave responsibility-shifting. Last week, we heard from the Infrastructure Minister about how he could not install a few bollards in Hill Street, one of the most important thoroughfares in our hospitality district in the middle of Belfast, because of austerity. Austerity is a grave and profound challenge for this place, for the Executive and for these islands, but austerity is not to blame for his not being able to install a few bollards in the Cathedral Quarter. That is pathetic, and it is drivel for the Minister simply to shift blame in that way.

We have also seen Executive party after Executive party table motions about delivery when their Ministers are the ones responsible for the specific areas of delivery. Sinn Féin colleagues tabled a motion on ticket touting and secondary sales after the scandal with Oasis tickets. They did, however, not call on their Minister, the Minister for the Economy, to take any action. That is ridiculous. We saw the Alliance Party table a motion on green growth in which it congratulated and garlanded with praise its Minister, the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, for action that he had taken, yet the motion did not call on him to do anything to deliver the green new deal that is in the party's manifesto.

All of that, I am afraid, goes to the heart of responsibility-shifting in this place: the sense that all of us in here want a little power but no one wants to take responsibility or accountability. It is pathetic. We need to do better, and, through taking responsibility and delivering for them, we need to prove to the people who elect us to here that we are properly about our work.

Given the day that is in it, it is important to reflect on another area of accountability on which we need to see some clarity. In the past couple of days, we have seen in the news the grave reports about a former member of staff in the Assembly who was given references by employees of a party in the Assembly and went on to seek employment in another organisation. When it comes to accountability and responsibility, there are further questions to be answered about that. I and others will ask those questions, and we hope to get clear answers.

Mr McReynolds: I became a member of the Policing Board a few months ago. Since then, I have had the opportunity to hear from the police about their views on next steps on a variety of issues, to scrutinise officers and to hold them to account directly, all of which are essential functions of a Policing Board member.

On Friday, I arrived at 11.00 pm at Lisburn Road police station and had the opportunity to spend time with two local policing officers, Peter and Nigel. They impressed me with their diligence, empathy and desire to help, regardless of the situation. Moreover, they impressed me with their ability to adapt in real time to new circumstances. On getting there, I heard about the ongoing police response to a fatal car accident in east Belfast. We then left the station to assist with a potential missing person search. We were then directed to a potential domestic violence incident and helped a deeply distressed woman who was covered in blood get back safely to her family in Lisburn.

I then watched them adapt in real time, establishing that a badly parked car was worth closer inspection. It had no insurance, and the owner, for a variety of reasons, should not have been driving. They were intoxicated while two children were passengers in the back seat. Throughout all that, those officers answered the questions that I asked from the back seat about the challenges in delivering policing in Northern Ireland. It was an eventful evening. I was able to head home, bleary-eyed, at 4.30 am, and they returned to the station to begin the paperwork from the events that had just passed before clocking off at 6.00 am or 7.00 am.

Many MLAs will have had the opportunity to observe the police in action. That was truly one of the most rewarding, eye-opening and impactful evenings of my time in politics. My main takeaway was that the police play a crucial role across all our communities and that, yes, the resources are challenging. It was a reminder to me that, when the Assembly is functioning, we can do an awful lot more than when it is not. Like the police who support our communities and the group of neighbourhood watch coordinators whom I met the next day, let us — the Executive and Assembly — push on and support our police and all the Departments with consistency, diligence and an ability to adapt ourselves in order to deliver the safe, thriving and united community that Northern Ireland deserves.

Mr Butler: Some may be aware that today is National Nonspeaking/Non-verbal Awareness Day. I make the House aware of a vision called Love Needs No Words NI Hub. Its mission is clear: to create meaningful connections and to provide vital services for individuals who are nonspeaking and non-verbal, regardless of their disability, diagnosis or age. I ask everyone to imagine a world where every voice is heard, even those of people who cannot speak. Imagine the breakthroughs in understanding and the joy that we could cultivate by simply giving people the tools and space to communicate in their own unique way. That is what should drive us: the belief that communication is more than just words and that every individual deserves to have their own way of expressing themselves. Advocates for and parents of non-verbal children have unwavering optimism for what can and should be, because they know that together we can build something special and something that truly matters. Their approach is guided by kindness, care and a deep sense of responsibility to foster inclusivity in all communities. They are not just creating a hub of support but changing the way in which the world understands non-verbal communication.

I invite members to join us in celebrating this important day — National Nonspeaking/Non-verbal Awareness Day. Together, we can bring awareness to a world that often overlooks the beauty of non-verbal expression and build a community that is compassionate and open to the diverse ways in which people communicate. It is not just about raising awareness, however. More importantly, it is about changing lives and creating a place where everyone, no matter their ability or means of communication, feels valued, understood and heard. We can only do that collectively, so it should be our commitment, as legislators, to put our shoulders to the wheel. With our support, a truly transformative space can be built with the power to spark real change across all our communities.

I ask you to take a moment to visit the Love Needs No Words NI Hub website, learn about their vision and think about the difference that we can make together. It takes only one connection or one act of kindness to set off a ripple that can help many wonderful individuals on their journey to finding their voice. Let us join forces, lift each other up and create a community in which everybody belongs. I believe in that dream, and I hope that others can see it too.

Mr Buckley: Hypocrisy is never far from this place. We had a fresh dose today from Mr Sheehan. He questioned the priorities of an Education Minister who, since taking office, has hit the ground running in tackling the priorities that affect everyday citizens in Northern Ireland. Meeting over 70 schools since taking office, the Minister has set about an approach to tackle the huge childcare bills that face everyday constituents, to settle teacher pay issues, to create an additional 1,400 places for children with special needs and, yes, to tackle educational underachievement.

The House should be ashamed of its track record on that last issue. Sadly, working-class Protestant boys have borne the brunt of educational underachievement in this country.

Well, I have news for the House: the DUP will not leave behind its working-class, loyalist communities. Regardless of where they come from, like every other citizen in this place, they deserve the right to educational attainment.

Many parties have questioned the rule of law. Dare I remind the House that it was the DUP, in 1998, that opposed the release of prisoners on to our streets? That is why today's comments from Mr Sheehan are particularly alarming. Let us look at his history. In 1978, Pat was sentenced to 15 years in jail for trying to bomb a cash and carry. Mr Sheehan was released from prison in 1987. In 1989, he was sentenced to 24 years for leaving a bomb at a Belfast security checkpoint. He was released under the terms of the Belfast Agreement.

However, Members, even that did not spare the blushes of the bold Mr Sheehan. He was not quite done at that stage with insulting victims, and, around 2010, he described the Northern Ireland conflict as "probably quite civilised". In one chilling intervention, he said:

For those who perhaps felt that he had moved on with time, around 2006, he said that he was "proud" that he took up arms. What hypocrisy have we heard from the Member today?

What about Sinn Féin? In 2021, the PSNI assessment of the IRA army council's relationship with Sinn Féin maintained that it remained unchanged. Perhaps the party should take the plank from its own eye before it casts aspersions on Members who are committed to the rule of law —

Mr Speaker: The Member's time is up.

Mr Buckley: — and committed to delivering for every —

Mr Speaker: The Member's time is up.

Mr Buckley: — community across Northern Ireland.

Mr Dunne: I congratulate New Irish Arts on celebrating its 30th anniversary at the weekend with two very special performances at the Waterfront Hall.

For over three decades, the New Irish Arts group has been equipping and giving opportunities to musicians, churches and organisations right across the country and beyond. New Irish Arts was set up in 1994 by renowned local hymn writer and musician Keith Getty, who has gone on to achieve incredible success around the world and is a great ambassador for Northern Ireland. One year later, Jonathan Rea BEM got involved in New Irish Arts. Through his leadership, he has been instrumental in seeing the group grow from strength to strength: he has been creative director since 2005. Many years ago, Jonathan taught me how to play or not to play the recorder in Bangor Grammar School, with limited success, unfortunately.

The New Irish Arts group is made up of several hundred dedicated volunteers of all ages who make up the choir and orchestra. It also has a very vibrant and talented youth choir, youth orchestra and a committed audiovisual team. It provides wonderful opportunities for young people to develop and perform using their musical talent and skills. The group is always in great demand right across Northern Ireland and beyond, and it performs at many concerts, broadcasts and events throughout the year, with annual charity collections at its creative events.

New Irish Arts has had a very positive impact on church worship right across these islands for over 30 years. I warmly congratulate everyone involved in the New Irish Arts group, which is based in Bangor, as it celebrates 30 years and looks back proudly on its past. I wish the group very well for the next 30 years and pay tribute to Jonathan and all the dedicated volunteers who are involved.

Mr Gaston: I pay tribute to the life of Robin Kyle, who was suddenly called home last Wednesday while sitting peacefully in front of the fire in his living room.

Robin was well known in the farming community and in the Presbyterian Church, where he served as an elder. However, it was through the loyal orders that Robin gained respect from right across Northern Ireland. He served 39 years as county grand master of Tyrone Royal Arch Purple Chapter and 29 years as secretary of his own Orange lodge and a grand lecturer and grand master of the Royal Arch Purple.

Whether through the loyal orders or over half a century with the Department of Agriculture, Robin's life was one of service to others. Robin will be sadly missed in all those circles, but he will be missed most in the family home.

Robin was a husband, father and granda. I think today of his wife, Agnes, his son, Allister, his daughter, Pamela, and his two grandchildren, Eva and Isaac. The wisest man who ever lived reminds us in Proverbs 27:1:

Thankfully, Robin was a saved man and was ready when the call came.

Mr Speaker: We have two minutes. I call Deborah Erskine.

Mrs Erskine: Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Sadly, people in many homes across Northern Ireland are grieving today due to the tragic loss of a loved one on our roads. The shock of that never leaves you. There is an empty seat at the table and missed family events. Those people cannot be replaced. In my constituency of Fermanagh and South Tyrone, there have been three fatalities in the space of approximately 10 days. Communities and families have been plunged into heartbreak and grief. I publicly send my condolences to those families and to all those across Northern Ireland who are in that position.

Recently, the Executive launched their road safety programme. It is important that we take that seriously and implement it. Unfortunately, the level of fatalities on the roads brings it into sharp focus. I cannot say strongly enough from the Chamber that, as road users, we all have a duty to make sure that there is safety on the roads. Our choices on the roads can make the difference between whether you or someone else gets home safely to their family. Improving roads in order to ensure that they are safer can go only so far: it is down to each of us and our own decision-making.

I travel quite a bit on the roads — on the Westlink, the M1 and roads across Fermanagh and South Tyrone. It is astonishing to see people putting on their make-up, eating their breakfast and using their mobile phone while driving. Recently, somebody told me that they had seen somebody reading a book while driving. As an MLA, each week, I get a number of queries from constituents highlighting the speed of drivers on the roads. It is disgraceful that people disregard the regulations of our roads. Everything can change in an instant — in a split second.

We must make sure that no families have to suffer the pain and loss of a death —

Mr Speaker: Will the Member bring her remarks to a close, please?

Mrs Erskine: — due to a road traffic collision. We need to ensure that we send the programme's strong message to Share the Road to Zero.

Mr Speaker: Before we move to the next item of business, I have one other issue that I want to bring before the House. It is to remind Members of Standing Order 1(2):

When one of the Deputy Speakers or I are speaking, Members should resume their seats. When the Chair gives a direction that a Member's time is up or that they need to return to the subject of the debate, they should follow that direction without challenge. I recognise that we have a number of relatively new Members, but we will keep an eye on that area, and, if necessary, a Member will be asked to resume their seat and may not be called again for some time if there is a lack of cooperation.

Before we move to the next item of business, there will be a change of Chair. Members may take their ease.

Mr McGrath: I beg to move

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: The Business Committee has agreed to allow up to one hour and 30 minutes for the debate. The proposer of the motion will have 10 minutes to propose and 10 minutes to make a winding-up speech. As an amendment has been selected and is published on the Marshalled List, the Business Committee has agreed that 15 minutes will be added to the total time for the debate. Colin, please open the debate on the motion.

Mr McGrath: Thank you very much, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I welcome the opportunity to open this Opposition day and to present this motion on mental health.

I pay tribute to the many organisations, groups and professionals with whom the Opposition engaged ahead of today. I am delighted that a number of them are here today with the mental health policy group (MHPG) in the Long Gallery. Many of those groups and organisations are truly at the coalface of the continuing mental health crisis across Northern Ireland. I do not say that lightly; we are truly in the midst of a crisis. The most recent data tells us that, in 2022, over 200 people lost their lives to suicide. Since 1998, more people have lost their lives to suicide than those who lost their lives in the Troubles. Two hundred lives lost: countless family members left to pick up the pieces of a life that was cut short; innumerable friends, colleagues or even strangers left wondering why, and whether they could have helped in any way. As an Assembly, we, too, must ask why. We also must ask whether there is something that we can do to help. That is the first step of the journey that we embark on today through our debates.

I have mentioned the many groups and organisations that are working in the crisis that are here today. Many of those organisations struggle, year-on-year, to put a proper budget in place. Recently, some have seen their core grant slashed by 50%. Addressing that has to be the second step of our journey. The third step is to examine how other Departments have a role to play. We propose one solid outcome that the Executive could take forward to help the most vulnerable in our society. That is the journey that we embark on today through our Opposition day motions. I say to every Member that this is not about blame, point-scoring or pontificating. With each contribution that you make, please keep to the forefront of your mind those who are struggling with their mental health and those families who have lost someone to suicide.

Today is an opportunity to improve people's lives. Let our responsibility, as legislators, and our empathy, as fellow human beings, be the twin lens through which we approach today's debate. I have mentioned that over 200 people lost their lives to suicide in 2022. Even one life is too many. As part of our response to the crisis, the previous Health Minister and the Executive launched a 10-year mental health strategy. The scope of that strategy, the associated action plan and the funding commitment were unprecedented and, like today, offer a unique opportunity to improve people's lives.

In that strategy sat 35 high-level actions for the development and transformation of services, with five standout actions identified: an action plan for early intervention and prevention; increasing the funding for child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS); changing the structure of service delivery; integrating the community and voluntary sector in that delivery; and developing a regional mental health service across our five health trusts. To date, approximately 20 of those key actions have started, which is positive and has to be welcomed, but, on the flip side, none of the actions has been completed, and the strategy has been failed and constrained by recurrent underinvestment. In the past year alone, over £24 million should have been allocated to the strategy's implementation; instead, it has received just over 25% of the necessary funding.

If we do not properly fund the strategy, it will fail. Clearly, we need to see it being funded properly if we want it to succeed.

I will be unequivocal in my remarks. I do not doubt for one second the Health Minister's commitment to the strategy or his desire to see it succeed. I say that of his predecessor, Robin Swann, as well, because it was the previous Health Minister who told the Health Committee that he had sought a commitment that, as part of any monitoring rounds, Health would be the priority for the Executive. However, the Minister for the Economy and the Minister of Education made the same ask, so no commitment could be given. I appreciate that funding comes from the Treasury and that the inclination of some is to point the finger at the UK Government while saying, "Please, sir, I want some more". However, the question of how much money the Treasury provides us is irrelevant if our Executive are not on one page, speaking with one voice in a spirit of commonality and shared purpose and with clear and measurable targets. That is what we seek today.

If I may, I will quickly address the amendment. I always welcome the opportunity to debate amendments. Often, they can complement and enhance motions and, indeed, legislation. However, the amendment is essentially a rewrite of the original motion with one strange omission. The amendment

as does our motion. It calls for the Minister to work with his colleagues to prioritise suicide prevention: so does our motion. It calls for support for those who experience suicidal thoughts: so does our motion. It calls for targets to support children and young people. The original motion does all those things, but the fundamental difference is that the amendment removes the request to include all those things in the Programme for Government. The draft Programme for Government already skirts the issue of mental health. The amendment removes it from the conversation entirely. I will not support that, and the SDLP cannot support that.

If we were to support the amendment, we would send a startling message from the House to all those who are struggling with mental health issues and all those organisations, members of which are upstairs in the Long Gallery and alongside whom Members will, undoubtedly, be photographed. The message will be for ever printed above the Building that our Programme for Government does not prioritise mental health, because we are just not going to talk about it.

We owe it to the many thousands of people who have lost their lives to suicide, the countless people who are seeking help with their mental health and the many organisations trying to fill the void that we, as an Executive and an Assembly, are not servicing to assure them that mental health will be a priority for the Executive. Let mental health be a priority when the Executive weigh up the question of budget cuts or revenue raising or when they consider working in silos as opposed to working together. Let mental health be a priority in the delivery of the Programme for Government.

I look forward to the debate and to hearing from the Executive parties' representatives and the Minister about how we will respond to the crisis. As I said at the outset, let us keep those who are most vulnerable at the forefront of our minds and our decisions today. Let us deliver something positive for them. Let this place offer some hope and not another reason for despair.

Mrs Dodds: I beg to move the following amendment:

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Diane. You have 10 minutes to propose the amendment and five minutes in which to make a winding-up speech. All other Members will have five minutes.

Mrs Dodds: Thank you, Principal Deputy Speaker. I rise to propose the amendment not to indicate that we do not want to talk about mental health, as the proposer of the motion suggested — I regret some of his remarks — but to slightly broaden the scope of the original motion to talk about general levels of mental health and well-being.

It is in that spirit that I offer the amendment and not in the spirit of shutting down conversation about the most important issue that we could address and one that, I know, the Minister has made a priority.

We are glad, Minister, to see you back today. We hope that you are feeling reasonably well after COVID, which can be very debilitating.

We felt that it was important to emphasise not simply what Departments could do but what other agencies, as well as our crucial community and voluntary sector, could contribute. Appropriate oversight of mental health services has been recommended in a number of important reports in recent years. My colleagues and I are contacted regularly about the lack of access to services for ADHD and autistic spectrum disorder, as well as mainstream general adult and children's mental health services.

There is little ambition in the recently published 'Mental Health Strategy 2021-2031: 2024/25 Annual Delivery Plan'. The 50-page document contains fewer than eight pages on what is planned to happen this year. What has been achieved so far is welcome, Minister, but it is a drop in the ocean compared with what the strategy envisages. A firm grip needs to be taken on the mental health strategy, with concerted efforts made on its dozens of actions, otherwise it will quickly become outdated.

Earlier this year, the mental health champion, Siobhán O'Neill, expressed significant concerns about the lack of investment in the mental health strategy, calling it "incredibly disappointing" that the Department of Health had invested only £9 million in the strategy. Around 7% of our Health budget is allocated to mental health, which is well behind the 11·4% in England, 9·4% in Scotland and 13·3% in Wales. While some criticise the broader Executive, it cannot be blamed solely on the Executive; it is also about prioritisation in the Department of Health The idea that the Executive could simply hand over £1 billion for a strategy on top of what Health already receives was never a realistic prospect in challenging financial circumstances.

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) made a number of recommendations to the Department of Health last year on mental health, and only a few have been acted on. The Committee said:

It recommended:

There was a recommendation to:

The Committee also said :

It further recommended that:

In the Northern Ireland life and times survey of 2023, only 50% of those aged 18 to 24 reported positively on their mental health and well-being. That is such a sad statistic for Northern Ireland. Research has shown that half of adult mental health disorders develop before the age of 18, which highlights the need to prioritise the acquisition of resilience and coping skills from a very early age. The youth well-being survey in Northern Ireland 2020 found anxiety and depression levels here to be around 25% higher than in the child and youth populations in other regions. That reflects a similar trend in Northern Ireland's adult population. Some 29% of respondents to the life and times survey reported that their mental health and well-being had been impacted by Northern Ireland's Troubles.

Last week, I had the opportunity to meet representatives of New Script for Mental Health, who have highlighted that one in five adults in Northern Ireland was prescribed an antidepressant last year. That is a shocking statistic.

In the poorest areas — this ties in with the Minister's focus on health inequalities — it was 27% of the population, which represents a fourfold increase in the past 20 years.

Forty per cent of females aged 45 to 64 were prescribed an antidepressant in the past year. There does not appear to be a plan from the Department to address that rise in prescribing rates, so, Minister, that is one of the issues that I would like hear about from you in your response, because those are fairly shocking statistics for Northern Ireland. In 2021, the Office for Statistics Regulation criticised mental health data, stating that it did not serve the public good. Last year, the Northern Ireland Audit Office stated that, as a result, it was not able to conclude whether mental health services were providing value for money. The data itself therefore needs to be improved as well so that we can better serve people who are experiencing mental health issues.

Mental ill health has a devastating impact on the individual, but it is also having an impact on the workforce and on growing the economy. The rise in work-limiting conditions across the United Kingdom in recent years has been driven by sharp increases in reported mental health issues, particularly amongst young workers. The number of workers aged 16 to 34 who report that their mental health limits the type or amount of work that they do has increased fourfold over the past decade. Mental health issues are now the most common cause of work-limiting conditions among those aged 44 and younger in the United Kingdom.

I have spent some time looking at the statistics and putting them on record in the House, because they are quite shocking. The more that I hear about and look at them, the more that I am convinced of that. It means that we have to tackle not only the awful number of suicides but the general mental health and well-being issues that our population is experiencing. I offer the amendment in that spirit, not in a spirit of hiding from any of the issues, because they are issues that I have spoken about and that I speak to individuals and groups about regularly. I urge the Assembly to consider amending the motion.

Ms Flynn: I thank the Member who tabled the motion. Colin and Diane mentioned some of the statistics around deaths by suicide. As Colin said, when we are talking about the issues and using numbers and figures, we are talking about the impact on people's lives and their families. There are over 200 deaths by suicide a year, with provisional figures for 2023 showing a slight increase, thus perhaps bringing the figure up to 221. We cannot have a conversation about mental health and suicide prevention without mentioning the 585 lives that have been lost as a result of drug deaths over the past three years, with the biggest killer being alcohol, which accounts for around 350 deaths every single year. The sad thing to note in this debate is that all those deaths were preventable somewhere along the line. Given that drug and alcohol deaths have doubled over the past 10 years, it is timely that we are having this debate today to try to refocus minds on how we can make some of this better.

Over the past number of years, Sinn Féin has gathered with families that have been bereaved through suicide and drug deaths. We met families at the front of Stormont around Christmastime, when the Christmas trees were going up. Those families have been calling for the same thing that the motion calls for: more action, more cross-departmental working and more investment in tackling addiction and mental health. The Alliance Party joined us last year at the front of Stormont, and if the families, who are from right across the North, gather there again this year, I hope that every party will come out and talk to them. They are the people who have already lost their loved ones, and we need to take guidance from them about what we can do better and about how we can do it better.

I thank the Minister for personally meeting some of the families a number of weeks ago. I look forward to meeting, alongside him, the People's Kitchen charity. It is about directly meeting the people who are impacted on by these issues. The People's Kitchen works with some of the most vulnerable people who are, sadly, homeless and who are injecting on the streets.

As for cross-departmental working, the structure for that is already there in the Executive subgroup that was set up a number of years ago on mental well-being, resilience and suicide prevention. That structure is there. It is about how we build on it. I genuinely think that the will is there, but how do we build on the cross-departmental structure that we already have in place?

I want to talk briefly on the responsibility of individual Departments. Health has a responsibility, as Diane said, in what it does with its budget and how it prioritises things. Do I think that people are getting health services at the point of need, be they for addiction, a mental health crisis or a mental illness? I do not. I do not think that we are there yet. There is much more that the Department of Health can, hopefully, do in the time ahead.

I will look at the Department of Education and what it's doing to address mental health. I welcome the Education Minister's recent announcement on reducing mobile phone usage in classrooms, which will have an impact on kids' well-being. Less screen time and more direct interaction are good things. Paul Givan has taken that positive step in Education, but hopefully he can take further steps, such as reintroducing the Happy Healthy Minds programme, which looked at the counselling provision that we have across our schools and youth clubs. It is about how you get into early intervention at the earliest possible stage.

What more can the Department of Justice do to address mental health and addiction in prisons? How can it improve wrap-around care and rehabilitation for people in the prison system? How can it tackle the circulation and use of drugs in our prisons? Are there any plans to try to prevent the production and sale of the vapes filled with spice that are circulating in schools?

I was at a mental health conference about two years ago, one of the speakers was asked, "What is the biggest cause of the mental health challenges here in the North?", and he just nailed it when he said, "Poverty, poverty, poverty". What more can the Department for Communities do to introduce an anti-poverty strategy to try to deal with homelessness and the people who are on the streets? It has been flagged up that there might be possible cuts to the Northern Ireland Housing Executive's out-of-hours service, which deals with those people who sleep on the streets and who inject drugs — the most vulnerable. When you talk about people with poor mental health, that is it. We need to be really conscious of all that. Hopefully, that is what the Executive subgroup can talk about and take on head first.

To finish, Diane mentioned the work of the New Script mental health activists.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Time is up.

Ms Flynn: Their approach is around the fundamental shift in how we deal with mental health. That is the place where we all need to get to.

Mr Donnelly: I thank the SDLP for tabling this motion. As one of my party's spokespersons on health, I welcome the focus on health and especially mental health in these Opposition day motions.

We have a mental health crisis in Northern Ireland, as has been pointed out. It is extremely concerning that the number of people whom we have lost to suicide is now higher than the number of people who lost their lives in the Troubles. Tackling poor mental health and suicide prevention must be a priority for the Minister of Health and the Executive as a whole. It is welcome that the draft Programme for Government references mental health in reference to other Departments. To give an example, the Programme for Government refers to the importance of sport to both physical and mental health and the development of local sports facilities, which is a responsibility for the Minister for Communities.

We need to address the causes of poor mental health and its overlap with deprivation and the legacy of the Troubles. In 2023, one in five adults in Northern Ireland was prescribed an antidepressant. The highest uptake — 27% — was in the poorest areas of Northern Ireland, which are, largely, the same areas that were most heavily impacted on by the conflict. That represents a fourfold rise in the prescribing of antidepressants in the past 20 years. There has also been a rise in the provisional figures for deaths by suicide, as mentioned by Órlaithí, from 203 in 2022 to 221 in 2023. As mentioned, we should be aware of the fact that these are people's lives and families. The percentage of suicides in 2022 was three times higher in Northern Ireland's most deprived areas than in the least deprived areas. We need a more urgent response from the Department of Health to address the crisis.

The mental health strategy was a welcome step towards reform and transformation of our mental health services, and we need to see its full implementation. Some progress has been made on its 35 actions, but not enough. We also need an update on the implementation of the Department's Protect Life 2 suicide prevention strategy, which was extended last year to the end of 2027. Restricting access to means is one of the most effective ways of reducing the risk of suicide, and, as part of the Protect Life 2 strategy, the Minister of Health must work collaboratively, particularly with the Minister for Infrastructure, to identify and progress any urgent work to prevent further loss of life to suicide.

Targets to address the prevalence of anxiety, depression and other mental health conditions must also be introduced by the Department of Health, along with actions that can be taken to address and reduce those conditions. They should address all relevant age groups, with particular consideration given to children and young people and to older people. We need to see clear evidence that these strategies and actions are having a positive impact on the delivery of services. The lack of data on mental health services remains a huge issue, as highlighted by a number of organisations, including the Office for Statistics Regulation, the Northern Ireland Audit Office and, most recently, the Assembly's Public Accounts Committee. We need to know that the decisions being made and taken through these strategies represent the best value for money and are improving necessary mental health services.

Overlong mental health waiting lists result in people who need support very quickly not getting it, and, inevitably, their condition gets a lot worse. We know that much mental health support comes from the community and voluntary sector. Action 17 of the mental health strategy is to:

That is being commenced, but agreement is being sought on the best way forward. As we will no doubt hear later, many of those community services also rely on funding, which, as we know, is very constrained.

Many Members will be aware of postnatal depression and perinatal mental health, and I commend Claire Sugden for speaking so openly on the issue this morning. Depressive symptoms are very common during and after pregnancy, and the recent study of maternal health and maternal morbidity (MAMMI) in Ireland by Trinity College in Dublin was discussed at last week's North/South Inter-Parliamentary Association meeting, which was the first since 2016. I congratulate the Speaker on his involvement in making that important meeting happen. The study showed that 9·3% of respondents experienced depressive symptoms before pregnancy, 12·2% during pregnancy, 17·7% three months after the birth of their first child and 12·8% a year postpartum. Yet, many women were not asked about feeling depressed or low by their GP, midwife or public health nurse.

Clearly, much needs to be done to support women suffering from mental health conditions related to childbirth, and, while we recognise the progress of delivering perinatal mental health services across all five trusts in Northern Ireland, we will continue to push for the delivery of an inpatient mother-and-baby unit in Northern Ireland.

As the chair of the all-party group on addiction and dual diagnosis, I am hugely concerned about the level of addiction and the number of deaths from drug overdose in our communities, as mentioned by Órlaithí Flynn. We need to progress to a harm reduction model, and we need to progress an overdose prevention centre in Northern Ireland to help to save the lives of people who are using drugs. In short, we know that we are in a crisis, and we need to focus on solutions.

Mr Butler: The very important motion and amendment, call on us to face the stark and distressing reality of mental health service provision and how people across Northern Ireland are suffering. As already outlined, regrettably, we find ourselves in a situation where more people have tragically lost their lives to suicide than to the Troubles. However, it would be absolutely remiss of us not to understand that the nature of our Troubles is being played out in intergenerational trauma, which obviously has an impact on the high prevalence of suicides, mental health issues and addictions in this country.

I ask the mover of the motion to reflect on what I will say. I understand fully why he and his party are reluctant to accept the amendment. However, when I read the next paragraph, I ask him to reflect on it and take me at my word, because having this gentleman, Mike Nesbitt, as the Minister of Health in the Executive is better than a rubber stamp on any Programme for Government in this sense, and I hope that the Member will listen in.

As we reflect on the magnitude of this crisis, we must also acknowledge the tireless efforts that have been made over the past number of years to address mental health. I will give the man sitting to my left the credit for that, because, in 2015, Mike Nesbitt, as the leader of the Ulster Unionist Party, commissioned the first stand-alone policy paper on mental health from any political party in Northern Ireland. That groundbreaking moment sparked conversations in the Chamber that I, with pride, will always be grateful that I was able to have, because, in 2016, he appointed me as the dedicated mental health spokesperson. I am not sure whether that was a first for any party in the UK, but it certainly was on this island. That demonstrated our commitment and that of this gentleman, the Health Minister and Ulster Unionist Party leader, to tackle the issue. However, we need to be clear that, whilst progress has been made, it has been painfully slow. Only through sheer determination and doggedness did the Ulster Unionist Party manage to achieve an agreement in 2020 on a 10-year mental health strategy as part of the New Decade, New Approach deal. We also secured the appointment of an independent mental health champion. Those were critical steps forward, albeit they were not enough, and they were taken in the face of objections to achieving them previously.

I stand before you today not to celebrate those milestones but to remind us of the work that still needs to be done. The motion calls on the Minister of Health to work with Executive colleagues to:

That is because one Department alone fulfilling responsibilities for the health service is not enough to address societal issues that require a whole-of-government approach. Mental health is affected by education, housing, employment, social services and, as has been picked out, poverty, to name but a few factors. If we do not recognise that interconnectedness, we are setting ourselves up to fail.

We must also recognise the particular vulnerabilities of different groups, such as young people, especially those who are affected by adverse childhood experiences, including trauma, poverty, bullying, particularly online, and unmet or undiagnosed mental health needs. The fact that those people remain on long waiting lists for essential services hurts us all. It is not just tragic. If people are left unattended, that is a dereliction of our duties. Women, particularly those who are in the perinatal phase and those who have been affected by violence or abuse, are at greater risk of poor mental health and suicide. Let us not forget the stark reality that men are four times more likely to die by suicide. Those statistics are not just numbers; they represent lives cut short, families devastated and communities left in mourning.

What underpins the failure to transform mental health services? Many will focus on funding, but — I am not pointing the finger here — we have to face the truth that, in some part, the failure to transform comes from the lack of effective government and governance. Between 2017 and 2019 and between 2022 and 2024, Northern Ireland suffered from political instability whereby government collapsed. Those five years without a functioning Executive have not just stifled progress but added to the burden on those who are suffering poor mental health. I will accept that it was, perhaps, without intent, but it is an unmitigated fact that I will face anybody on. We should be talking about health and suicide ideation until we have fixed them.

I spoke about the need for interconnectedness. This is where that comes from. The Protect Life 2 strategy provides a blueprint for action. It:

How can we achieve that if there is no functioning government to take ownership of those challenges? I call on everyone to recognise that today.

Mr Middleton: I thank the Member who tabled today's motion. From the outset, I join others in remembering all those who have died as the result of suicide and in thinking of their families and friends. I also think of all those who are suffering with mental health issues, be they our family, friends, neighbours or, indeed, people in the Chamber. Mental health affects us all. That is why mental health provision and access to help and support must be a priority for not only the Minister and his Department but the entire Executive and all of us in the Assembly.

Our amendment, which my colleague Mrs Dodds moved, speaks to the fact that we need to utilise every resource that we have in order to prioritise resilience and coping mechanisms from an early age. Whilst the motion is right to highlight the need for a cross-cutting approach to suicide and suicide-specific interventions, it is important that we look at poor mental health in the round.

That means cross-departmental working to tackle some of the challenges that bring about mental illness: socio-economic determinants, deprivation, online harms, addiction and trauma. In turn, by tackling those issues, which are mentioned throughout the draft Programme for Government, we can tackle the disparity between suicide rates in the most and least deprived areas and go some way to addressing the poor mental health that faces so many in our community. One of my questions to the Minister is this: what work is he doing proactively in his Department to bring Departments together and to lead the discussions on that front?

It is also alarming and unacceptable that over 1,026 children were waiting for more than nine weeks to see the child and adolescent mental health services at the end of March this year; that was 52% of the children who were waiting. We need to see a plan to address those waiting times. Those children deserve that early intervention. I note that there have been positive programmes, not least through the Department of Education and the Education Authority (EA). The resilience education assisting change to happen (REACH) programme is one such programme for children. It is about building resilience and helping them to deal with some of the challenges that are not only of the past but of the 21st century. We need to see more of that type of work.

When we talk about support for those struggling with mental health disorders, it is important to recognise that it affects people of all ages. We cannot progress the discussion without mentioning the issue of access to GPs: it is a fundamental issue that we must address. There has been positive work with the multidisciplinary teams, but we need to see our GP surgeries become hubs for people who present with issues such as mental ill health.

Mr McGlone: I thank the Member for giving way. My concern is for those who slip through the net. Last year, I dealt in person with three people who were suicidal. They either did not know where to go or could not get the services, and, fortunately, I was able to help them. However, for every person who gets help, other people slip through the net and, unfortunately, the outcome is not good. Will the Member accept that access to services and knowing where to get help is crucial?

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: The Member has an extra minute.

Mr Middleton: Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.

I thank the Member for his intervention. He is absolutely right: access and knowing where to go is vital. That is why GP surgeries should be one part of the mechanism and should be a hub to ensure that those who present with serious difficulties know that they have a place to turn to. It is also important to note, when we talk about people who slip through the net, that, in many cases, charities and the voluntary sector are vital in ensuring that people have somewhere to go.

On Friday, with Foyle MLA colleagues, I attended the opening of a fantastic new facility for a charity called HURT (Have Your Tomorrows), which was established in 2001. It was started through tragedy, but many lives have been saved through that charity. Another charity, which, no doubt, the Minister will have heard of, is the Men's Action Network (MAN). Unfortunately, after 30 years, it has had to close its doors, which means that the 750 men who availed themselves of those services, not least for mental health, have nowhere to go.

I call on the Minister to prioritise those issues. Terms such as "invest to save" are bandied about. Sometimes, I do not like that term because, effectively, we are trying to save lives, and we cannot put a value on the cost to a family.

I wholeheartedly support the amendment tabled by my colleagues, and I urge people to get behind it. Ultimately, however, whatever motions we pass in the Assembly today, it requires action, and there is an onus on all of us to deliver on those commitments.

Mr McReynolds: I welcome the opportunity to speak to the motion today, and I thank the Opposition for tabling it. It is not the most detailed or lengthy motion that I have seen — I do not mean that as a criticism — but it is probably one of the most important that the Opposition have tabled. It seeks to make sure that we in the Chamber never forget the high rate of mental health issues that many people in Northern Ireland live with and the need for the Assembly and our Executive to take mental health seriously.

I am an MLA for East Belfast, but I was born in north Belfast, which, tragically, has well-documented high rates of suicide and mental health issues. Thankfully, I have not had a friend or family member take their life, but, at one point in my brother's fourth or fifth year at school, sadly, four students took their life across one academic year. That had a profound impact on the school and the students. The gym that I go to is run by Rory Girvan, another person from north Belfast. He launched the 33 Til' Infinity campaign to raise money in honour of Michael Cullen, who, sadly, took his life in 2018. I remember being nudged during a Belfast City Council committee to be told that Michael had been found, after the community in north Belfast had rallied for over a week to try to find him. I echo Órlaithí's point about the families of victims of suicide. I was there for the vigil last year, and I encourage Members to attend it, if it is held again, for a truly humbling and insightful experience.

Asking the question, "Are you thinking about suicide?" is a sobering but important skill that can provide the right intervention at the right time, something that I learnt during a training session with the incredible East Belfast Survivors of Suicide in 2014. I did not expect to use that training the very next day with a constituent who walked into our constituency office to discuss housing issues when the conversation took a dark turn.

My work with the ADHD community is well documented. It will not surprise anyone to hear that people living with ADHD are three to five times more likely to attempt to take their life and, sadly, to be successful. ADHD is a more common condition in Northern Ireland than we think. It is treatable — medication is 95% effective — but the service that we offer here was recently described to me by a GP as "a pretend service". Unless someone pays to go private, our waiting lists are hitting eight to 10 years for a diagnosis, even if that person is lucky enough to get an appointment, as demand is surging. Unfortunately, that is another example of how we fail neurodiverse people and those living with mental health issues.

I outline those examples not for dramatic effect but because they are the realities that people have faced in Northern Ireland in recent years and face in the present day. We know the statistics. We know that prevention and early intervention work. We know that there should be a cohesive and comprehensive approach, from GPs to hospitals, because many people fall through the cracks even after approaching the right people for support. We know that investing now will save money in the long term and, crucially, will save lives.

I end my contribution by acknowledging the work of former Alliance councillor David Armitage. He recently told me that, if it had not been for his church, his friends and Claire Curran from East Belfast Survivors of Suicide, an intensely overworked charity that does life-saving work, he simply would not be here. That is what government is for, and it shows the importance of having the institutions functioning as they should all year round, for 365 days a year, with Ministers in post for key decisions to be made for everyone in Northern Ireland.

Mrs Guy: I thank the Member who tabled the motion. I will focus on mental health provision and support for our children and young people. The statistics tell a story. The results of the Northern Ireland youth wellbeing prevalence survey indicate that 12·1% of 11-to-19-year-olds in Northern Ireland have thought about or attempted suicide. The CAMHS waiting list from March this year showed that almost 2,000 young people were waiting for an assessment. Those statistics for adolescents are a particular worry, given that those are their formative years.

The World Health Organization (WHO) states:

That is a shocking figure. It further notes:

Statistics do no justice to the individual stories of pain that they represent or to the complexity of the circumstances that have caused the mental health condition to develop. Over the weekend, I took time to speak to Matthew Taylor, a young man living in Lisburn who has openly talked about his mental health struggles, which eventually resulted in inpatient care. He tells of an uneven experience. Matthew got help and is grateful for it, but, in some early interactions, he was simply not believed. He was told that he was selfish and that, if he was serious, he would have tried to kill himself already.

It is crucial that, when people take the difficult step to ask for help, especially when our resources are so constrained, our pathways do not fail from within. Excellent work is being done to help young people who are suffering with mental health issues. Parents, guardians, healthcare professionals, teachers, community clubs and more are working to ensure the well-being of children. However, the need is so great that more support is required. As Matthew's experience highlights, we have to ensure that services do not fail those in crisis. Staff who interact with anyone presenting in mental distress should have a basic level of training to ensure appropriate triage and referral. As with so many things, evidence tells us that early intervention is essential; cross-departmental working and multi-year Budgets are a must; and we need to not just keep producing strategies but to implement actions.

The Public Accounts Committee produced a stark report on our mental health services and where the mental health strategy stands. The disappointing progress on implementation to date that it notes is, in large part, down to the fact that only £10 million of the £35 million deemed necessary for 2023-24 was allocated. Perhaps it is time that we stopped saying, "We can't afford to do these things", and accepted that we cannot afford not to do them. The words that really jump off the page in the PAC report are those that note that the majority of the work that has been done to date would not be felt by users. The actions that we take must be felt by those who are suffering. The mental health champion identified clear ways for impact to be felt, the number-one priority being the workforce and the need to grow the CAMHS and therapies workforces, yet little appears to have been done directly on that.

While some good progress has been made through Education and Health working in partnership on the emotional health and well-being framework, for instance, we still have not had the funding for Healthy Happy Minds restored. Its absence can create unacceptable inequities within families. For example, a year 8 child in a family experiencing bereavement can receive counselling through school, but that child's sibling in primary school will receive no support. More fundamentally, the independent review of education noted clear examples where the system itself creates unnecessary stress and anxiety that can lead to or exacerbate mental health issues. Specifically, I refer to our SEN crisis and our current approach to assessment. I look forward to the Education Minister bringing forward an extensive departmental response to that review.

On page 44 of our mental health strategy is the line:

Those cannot be just words on a page in a strategy.

Mr Gaston: This is a motion that every Member will be able to relate to. Every Member will be able to cite examples of how the current system fails our constituents, who often turn to our offices for assistance and signposting. Prior to coming to the House, I spent four years in Jim Allister's constituency office, where I regularly encountered people spanning all age groups who were struggling with their mental health for a variety of reasons. I recall the mother whose primary-school child was self-harming with a pencil in the school toilet and an elderly man who, through failing health, simply lost his purpose and the will to live. I think of the young lad who had fallen into an addiction and the father who, through redundancy, struggled to provide for his family. That is the reality of Northern Ireland in 2024. The common problem that I have found when dealing with broken people is the lack of statutorily funded organisations with enough resources to meet their needs.

Over the past 15 years, Ballymena has had its fair share of heartache. I want to talk briefly about a local charity that has become a lifeline to many people locally. In May 2025, Turning Point NI will be 10 years old. That charity was formed by local people as a reaction to the many young lives in the area being lost through suicide. Throughout the past 10 years, the charity has depended on lottery funding, as well as the generosity of local communities, to sustain itself. Turning Point employs nine staff, with its lottery funding due to finish at the end of March 2025. I will put that in the context of the local demand: as of this morning, there are 90 people on Turning Point's waiting list to commence a six- to eight-week programme. Many of those referrals have come from statutory bodies, such as CAMHS.

In financial terms, Turning Point estimates that, last year, through statutory referrals alone, the counselling sessions that it provided saved the trust £70,000. Members, that work came about without any help or funding from the trust.

If we want to address the elephant in the room when it comes to mental health provision and suicide rates, we need look no further than that stark reality. Too much pressure is being put on the community and voluntary sector to pick up the crisis that the NHS is in. I asked the charity what key message it would like shared with MLAs today, and this — Turning Point NI's urgent call for support — is the response that I got:

My goodness. How did we allow our mental health services, and our health service in general, to get to that point?

When we make the case to Treasury for additional funding, we need to do so in a context that demonstrates why we have an additional need. Our failing mental health services and high suicide rates are one of the many reasons that we need, first, to be funded to the level of need at £124 a head for every £100 a head spent in England. Once we get funded to that level of need, we must, once again, look to the Welsh model, which was designed by Holtham, where not only has Wales been funded to the level of need since 2012 but it secured an additional 5% uplift in 2018, which has been worth an additional £1·17 billion to cover the additional need. That is a huge amount of additional money. We must secure the equivalent figure for Northern Ireland and use it to address our unique local need, including tackling the legacy of the Troubles as it relates to mental health and suicide. Unless we get serious and start to fund those services adequately, we will sadly be speaking to motions like this in the many mandates to come.

Mr Carroll: It is important that the Assembly and the Executive get to grips with the mental ill health epidemic that all our communities are facing but that is, obviously and always, more acutely felt by working-class and deprived communities, as has been said. The rich can avoid the daily grind and go on relaxation retreats when they want to, but everyone else has to focus on paying skyrocketing rents, paying for unaffordable childcare and being paid historically low wages and, of course, on dealing with depression, anxiety and suicide. As we have heard, those rates, tragically, are three times higher in more deprived areas.

I know that mental health workers, counsellors and other people in the sector are doing really important and, in many cases, literally life-saving work, but they are trying to push a boulder up a mountain. The system is completely broken and completely underfunded. The need is not reflected in the Budget allocations, and that situation needs to be addressed urgently.

We also have to ask — I am glad that the Minister is here — whether the Protect Life 2 strategy is ambitious enough and, more to the point, whether it has worked. Given the tragic suicide figures, I suggest that it has not. I have submitted some questions for written answer to tease out some information about that. We need to publish the review, which should happen ASAP. We had a rapid review, which was agreed in December 2023, but, like most things in this place, it is moving at a snail's pace and now needs to be published ASAP.

There are therefore massive questions about what the Department is doing around preventative mental health measures. We also have to ask whether decisions made by the Minister of Health and others in the Executive will increase anxiety and mental ill health, and possibly lead to worse. The previous Health Minister's decision to ban puberty blockers has already led to fear and anxiety shooting through the roof amongst our trans and non-binary community, which is a really marginalised and isolated community.

There are questions about that policy and whether it is doing anything good — it is not — for mental ill health. The decision by the Department for Communities and the Executive to cut the winter fuel payment for 250,000 pensioners is, I am sure, doing wonders for their mental health. A welfare system that dehumanises and literally punishes people in a Dickensian manner leads directly to more poverty and poor mental health.

All those issues and more are connected. We need to call out what the Executive have not done and have not committed to around mental health but also those economic and political decisions made by them that have battered people and led to worse mental health. People are products of their environment, they are shaped by it, and that is never more true than when talking about mental health. Having a no-silo mentality is always mentioned in Stormont but that is never more true than when talking about mental health.

Along with others, I recently met New Script for Mental Health, which is running a fantastic campaign. It is a family of campaigners and activists. I urge the Minister and his officials to meet the group, if they have not already done so. The main point taken from meeting them was that we are likely overprescribing antidepressants. No doubt, many people do need those prescriptions, but is society accepting the mass prescribing of antidepressants because it is cheaper than providing counselling, talking therapies and other labour-intensive but life-saving services? I would guess yes.

I commend those families that have been speaking out and holding people together through mental ill health and suicide crises. I thank all the campaigning groups that have been mentioned, but also others that have not but do that important work. Also, I want to mention West Wellbeing centre in my constituency, which does lifesaving and important work, including with members of my family, but which, despite a motion being passed in Belfast City Council a few months ago, is still waiting on the tens of thousands of pounds coming through from the council to provide extra counselling sessions and services. I call on those parties on Belfast City Council currently blocking that motion and money to get their act together and let the money be released.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: I call the Minister of Health to respond to the debate. Minister, you have 15 minutes in which to speak.

Mr Nesbitt (The Minister of Health): Madam Principal Deputy Speaker, thank you very much. Thank you, too, to the movers of the motion and the amendment.

Mr McGrath, the mover of the motion, began by reminding us that we have lost more of our fellow citizens to suicide than we did during the course of what we euphemistically call our Troubles. I remember making that point a few years ago on a live debate on BBC Radio Ulster, and the host reacted as if he had been given an electric shock. We are talking about a very well-researched journalist. The point about that is that there is a lot more that we have to do in raising awareness, and to the extent to which this debate raises awareness of suicide and poor mental health, so much the better.

Mr Carroll asked whether the Protect Life 2 strategy was ambitious enough. That took me back to a meeting that Órlaithí Flynn chaired with the all-party group in Derry/Londonderry at, I think, the Magee campus of Ulster University when Protect Life 2 had just been published. We were debating the policy and the idea that the target was to reduce the number of suicides by 10%. We thought, "Gosh, that's not very ambitious". To be fair to officials, that is internationally based by, I think, the World Health Organization. It is a practical, achievable target, but we all agreed that it was not a target to be celebrated if we achieved it. None of us wants to go to one of the families that continue to lose loved ones through suicide and say, "Haven't we done well by reducing the rate by 10%?", because, for them, the loss is 100%. So, crudely, one suicide is one too many.

I believe, because the experts have told me, that every suicide is preventable right up to the moment when it takes place. As is often said, suicide tends to be a permanent solution to what is often a very temporary problem, emotion, feeling or set of circumstances.

Mr McNulty: Will the Minister give way?

Mr Nesbitt: Yes.

Mr McNulty: The Minister referenced what others euphemistically refer to as "the Troubles" and the electric shock that the BBC host had when he knew and understood that more people had died by suicide since 1998 than died during the Troubles. How many of those deaths could be attributable to the intergenerational trauma from the Troubles and the consequences of and hangover from the Troubles?

Mr Nesbitt: I thank the Member for his intervention. I am on record many, many, many times saying that, if you take a map of Northern Ireland and put on that map the hotspots of the Troubles measured by shootings, bombings and murders and then superimpose a contemporaneous map of mental health issues — completed and attempted suicides, drug and alcohol abuse etc — you will have a match. I mean somewhere like north Belfast, to pick one area, so, yes, the Member's point is well made.

The Protect Life 2 strategy was launched on World Suicide Prevention Day, 10 September, back in 2019, and it has now been extended to 2027. At least £12 million is spent annually on suicide prevention in Northern Ireland, and the strategy is also supported by activities in the mental health strategy. Of course, when the strategy was first published, it envisaged much greater investment and Executive-wide buy-in than has actually been the case. I have to say that, when it comes to those who supported the Budget, the irony klaxon has not been silent during this debate.

Mrs Dodds referred to the mental health champion expressing her disappointment at the allocation, and I really welcome the fact that Professor Siobhán O'Neill made those comments and made them so explicitly and so publicly, because having a mental health champion — an independent assessor — was my idea. The fact that she can make those remarks proves that she is an independent assessor. Indeed, more recently, I appointed an independent autism reviewer, and Members will recall her remarks from last week. Again, that shows that, in Ema Cubitt, we have an independent person at work, and I really welcome that.

The strategy on suicide prevention has 10 objectives that I hope will achieve better outcomes. The first has great significance to today's motion. It seeks to:

The leader of the Opposition and Members will be aware of the Executive working group on mental well-being, resilience and suicide prevention, which Mr Middleton wanted me to refer to. The group plays an important role in ensuring that all Executive Ministers are informed of and involved in the governance of the Protect Life 2 strategy. The group was established in recognition of the fact that suicide is a societal issue and that it cannot be solved by the Department of Health alone but requires efforts across all sections of society. It requires each Executive Department to recognise and step up to the fact that it has a critical role to play.

It is widely acknowledged that many factors can impact on suicide — for example, financial difficulties, poor employment or a lack of housing opportunities — and the Executive group affords important opportunities for Ministers to hear at first hand from stakeholders about the impact of suicide and about exactly what is needed to improve outcomes and to prevent suicide and self-harm. The group also provides a forum for Ministers to hear about some of the great work being done in our communities, and I think that working in the communities is the key to better outcomes.

I have agreed that the group should be reformed, and we could usefully discuss having a wider remit to focus not just on mental well-being and suicide prevention but on the wider public health aspect. Some Members mentioned my commitment to tackling public health, including by tackling health inequalities, and I believe that that broader focus will help to address the wider social determinants that are linked with poor mental and physical health. On that basis, I affirm that I am a fan of Professor Michael Marmot, a man who talks about not just the causes of ill health but the causes of the causes. For example, we know that smoking causes cancer, but what causes people to smoke in the first place? That, I think, is how we unlock better outcomes for people.

The advantage of the wider group that I am talking about would be that the societal determinants of mental health are the same as those for physical health outcomes, including individuals' experiences in early years, education, housing, employment opportunities, the physical environment and exposure to pollutants, and access to a healthy diet. It is essential to address those social determinants in order to improve the physical and mental health outcomes of our population. The group will also ensure that there is greater synchronicity across strategies, given the close linkages between mental health, physical health, substance abuse and suicide prevention.

While suicide prevention is not explicitly mentioned in the draft Programme for Government, I always welcome the opportunity to work with other Departments in that area. Much excellent work is already being taken forward with other Departments, and I will take the opportunity to highlight some of it. For example, the Department for Communities has rolled out a mental health first aid pilot scheme across the Department. DFC has also ensured that suicide prevention training is mandatory for all front-line staff, and it has a six-point plan for managing suicide and self-harm declarations that are received from claimants, whether that is in person, in a phone call, in writing or via electronic media. The Department of Justice supports suicide prevention efforts through the PSNI's contribution to the multi-agency triage team. The PSNI has also developed an online mental health lesson plan for police officers. That is aimed at increasing awareness of mental health as a significant public health issue in Northern Ireland and preparing officers to deal with the sometimes challenging incidents that they encounter where no crime has been committed but an individual is experiencing a mental health or emotional crisis. The PSNI already trains all student officers in suicide prevention rather than in just suicide awareness. Some Members will be aware that the Chief Constable, Jon Boutcher, intends to introduce a policy called "Right care, right person" (RCRP) in recognition of the fact that police officers are not fully trained to deal with all mental health issues. I look forward to working with the PSNI to determine the best way to roll out the "Right care, right person" policy.

Ms Flynn: Will the Minister give way?

Mr Nesbitt: I absolutely will give way to the Member.

Ms Flynn: Thank you very much, Minister. You referenced training on suicide prevention. I met your officials about that, and I plan to bring a private Member's Bill to the House that will make it a statutory obligation for every Department to provide suicide prevention training for all their front-facing public staff. I know that that is a conversation for the time ahead, but, hopefully, the Minister and all Departments can take it on board.

Mr Nesbitt: I thank the Member for the intervention. I am in favour of Departments offering suicide prevention training. I pause at the idea of making it compulsory for every member of front-line staff, however, given that that person may have had experience in their family or community circles. I think, Principal Deputy Speaker, that the Member is sympathetic to that. I pay tribute to the Member, because, through chairing the all-party group on suicide prevention, her work on understanding and promotion is absolutely exemplary not just on this issue but on cross-party and cross-community cooperation. I commend the Member for that.

I go back to Protect Life 2, which contains a number of programmes designed to prevent suicide. They include Towards Zero Suicide, the multi-agency triage team collaboration between Health and Social Care (HSC) and the police; resilience building; counselling provision; the self-harm intervention programme; the "Flourish" church suicide prevention initiative; and Lifeline, to name but a few. We have undertaken extensive research and engagement to better shape the future of suicide prevention service delivery here. A review of Protect Life 2 has just been completed and is now available on the departmental website. That review has highlighted the need for a more focused and measurable action plan. To achieve that, work is well under way on revising the action plan in line with that report and to develop a new three-year delivery plan. That will set out the detail of how we will deliver actions and the targets that we wish to achieve.

The action plan highlighted a new strategic action area around a whole-of-government-and-society approach. As I bring my remarks towards a close, I want to talk about the need for a societal approach. Mrs Dodds asked me to comment on prescribing rates. They are shocking, and that is a sign — a symptom, perhaps — of the fact that, to some extent, we over-medicalise how we approach mental ill health. Pills and medication have their place, but so do societal interventions. For example, a community psychiatric nurse sitting in somebody's kitchen, offering the human touch and saying, "Let's go on this journey together. I'll walk with you. I know how to get you to a better place", is important. I have also felt that, for a long time, societal interventions, empowering communities to understand the members of that community, to spot when they are not as they should be and to know how to intervene are important.

Órlaithí Flynn mentioned Christmas trees. I am a member of the Ards suicide awareness group, which I helped to set up a few years ago, and, last Christmas, we put a tree in Tesco on the Castlebawn Road in Newtownards. On the table, there were a lot of blank cards, and I sat one afternoon and watched individuals and families lift one of the cards, write a note on it and put it on the tree. There was a shockingly high number of people. For them, the importance of that simple gesture was exponential. It was out of kilter. It reminded me of the scale of the problem and the fact that, if we can tackle it as a community, we have a chance.

It seems to me that, if we really want to make a difference, there are three things that we need to do. First, we need to raise awareness, and, once again, I thank Members for using the debate to raise awareness. Secondly, we need agreement on how to cure the problem or, at least, how to address it and take a bite out of it. Thirdly, we need to devise a policy with a fully funded and resourced action plan that gives meaning to our determination to cure or tackle the problem. If we can do all three things, we will achieve better outcomes, and, if we achieve better outcomes, we will offer hope. Hope, for me, is success.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Minister. I call Alan Robinson to make a winding-up speech on the amendment. Alan, you have five minutes.

Mr Robinson: It is with profound regret that we have had to debate the state of mental health provision in the Province. Despite the progress that we have made in some areas, the state of mental healthcare remains deeply troubling. The sour truth is that the number of lives lost to suicide in Northern Ireland exceeds the number of those who lost their lives during the Troubles. Its trajectory tells us that those figures may indeed get worse. Figures from December 2023 tell us that 17,500 people are waiting for a first appointment. I have no doubt that we would be staring at even starker figures had it not been for the £10 million that was secured by my party via the confidence-and-supply agreement that allowed additional investment in mental health services over a five-year period. As has been stated on the Floor many times, without timely interventions, people's conditions will descend into further decline, and, ultimately, their conditions will become more costly to treat or they will be lost to suicide.

The Department tells us that, without additional funding and the ability to invest in the workforce, it will struggle to address waiting lists. On top of that, the Secretary of State tells us that we must live within our means. For someone on that long waiting list, if we were to be honest, very sadly, as things stand, there is no extra money and little hope.

Emergency departments will continue to be the fallback position for so many in desperate need, placing further strain on an already struggling health service and adding further pressure to our education and justice systems. Then, we have the situation where those on the outer fringes, such as the community and voluntary sector, which has picked up the slack in providing support for those with mental health issues, have had their funding slashed. It is like a never-ending circle of despair. I fear that we will be having these conversations in a debate on a similar motion before the end of the mandate and that those who come after us will debate these issues in a new mandate just like those before us debated them.

I turn to some of the points that were made. Gary Middleton talked about using everything in our power to deal with the issue and about how 1,026 children are on mental health waiting lists. He also called for greater access to GP services. The proposer of the motion rightly paid tribute to groups that are at the coalface of the mental health crisis and said rightly that one life lost was too many. Diane Dodds spoke eloquently, as she usually does. She mentioned that only £9 million had been allocated to the mental health strategy. She also referred to the impact of the Troubles. Órlaithí Flynn highlighted how drug- and alcohol-related deaths have doubled. Danny Donnelly talked about the importance of sport in dealing with health. Robbie Butler referred to the impact of our violent past and to how men are four times more likely to die by suicide. Peter McReynolds said that the motion was one of the most important to have been tabled by the Opposition. Michelle Guy talked about a young constituent, Matthew Taylor. She also referred to the findings and recommendations of a recent PAC report. Timothy Gaston talked about how he has met people of all ages who are affected. He praised the work of Turning Point. Gerry Carroll said that, for groups, it is like pushing a boulder up a mountain. He rightly talked about the cut to the winter fuel payment, which will affect people's mental health.

We know that the devastating impacts of mental health disorders, anxiety, depression and other mental illnesses affect people of all ages across Northern Ireland, and the burden of those conditions does not discriminate. It affects children, young adults, parents and grandparents. It affects us all. Every one of us in the Chamber can point to a family member who has suffered or is suffering. Despite the scale of the problem, our mental health services are simply woefully inadequate to meet the growing demands.

I hope that the Assembly can support my party's amendment. It is broad in nature — we get that — but the meaning is there. I thank everyone who has contributed to the debate. It has been a worthy debate and has set the right tone.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker: Thank you very much, Alan.

As Question Time begins at 2.00 pm, I suggest that the Assembly takes its ease until then. The debate will continue after Question Time, when the next Member to speak will be Mark Durkan, who will make the winding-up speech on the motion. The Assembly will take its ease.

Mr Speaker: Question 11 has been withdrawn.

Mr O'Dowd (The Minister for Infrastructure): It is an operational decision taken by Translink. However, my Department has taken the time to request the information from Translink. Translink has advised that the 10J and 10K services were extended from Glencolin some years ago in order to have a through service from Twinbrook and to replace the original 10E feeder service. Translink recently acknowledged that that model did not work, hence the return to the previous version of the 10J and 10K, with the reinstatement of the 10E service throughout the week.

Mr Carroll: Thank you, Minister. This is not the first time that a transport change has been made in West Belfast without the people impacted being consulted or notified. There used to be four hourly bus services going up the Suffolk Road; there are now two. Minister, there was, reportedly, a heated meeting between unions and Translink about the specific decision regarding 10J and 10K. Are you aware of that meeting? If not, will you investigate and report on the issue?

Mr O'Dowd: I am not aware of the meeting. I am happy to make enquiries to Translink in that regard. As I said, it is an operational decision by Translink. The legislation sets out what is Translink's role and what is my role. While I am happy to follow up on the Member's request, he will understand that it is not my responsibility to manage everything that goes on in Translink day-to-day. I expect it to have good a working relationship with the unions, but that is an ongoing matter between Translink and the unions.

Mr Blair: With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will extend the interest in the Belfast bus routes slightly towards the South Antrim boundary but staying within the city. Will the Minister give us any further information or updates on the introduction of the anticipated north/south Glider route?

Mr O'Dowd: The Member will understand that it is difficult for a Minister at Question Time to discuss every bus and Translink route across the country. I am not sure that that would benefit Question Time either. I am more than happy to —

Dr Aiken: Oh, Minister.

Mr O'Dowd: Well, I am sure that there are several thousand Translink bus routes. I could stand here all day and read them out, but that would test the patience of the Speaker. I am more than happy to get the information that the Member has requested and forward it to him.

Mr Speaker: It is normally me who does the rebuking, Mr O'Dowd, but I will allow you away with it this time, because you were right. [Laughter.]

Mr O'Dowd: I recognise the inconvenience caused by the temporary closure of one lane of the Shore Road, Rostrevor, and the Kilkeel Road, Hilltown, due to landslips caused by the unprecedented weather in November 2023. My Department has appointed a specialist geotechnical engineer to assist in design solutions. However, the scale and complexity of the work required at both locations means that it will take time to deliver permanent and cost-effective solutions.

Regarding the A2 Shore Road, a temporary design solution has been developed to allow two-way traffic. We await environmental approvals from NIEA to allow the work to go ahead. Our contractor is ready to carry out the work as soon as approval comes through.

The landslip on the Kilkeel Road in Hilltown is likely to require a complex solution, as the embankment on either side has become unstable. It will therefore take additional time to investigate it thoroughly, complete a design and implement that design. I assure the Member that my Department will continue to prioritise that work to allow two-way traffic as soon as possible.

Ms Ennis: I thank the Minister for his response. I know that he understands the disruption that this has caused, particularly on the A2 Shore Road. Will he guarantee that he is giving the necessary push, especially to the NIEA and the other Departments that have responsibility, to make sure that the A2 Shore Road is opened permanently to two-way traffic as soon as possible?

Mr O'Dowd: The Member has raised that issue with me on a number of occasions. We will organise a visit to the site at some stage. The initial landslide was quickly cleared, but there remained a risk because the embankment was unstable. As a result, my Department installed temporary measures.

The land in the area is of outstanding natural beauty, with several environmental designations. That restricts the work that can be undertaken. My Department, DAERA, the Forest Service and Environment Agency officials have had regular engagement to progress the matter. Engineers are now content that a temporary solution can be put in place to allow a full recovery of the road. My Department is awaiting environmental approval to proceed with the work.

Mr Speaker: I call Sian Mulholland. I want to hear what you have to say about Rostrevor or Hilltown.

Ms Mulholland: I was going to say that there are not that many landslides in Northern Ireland, so hopefully I will not be rebuked for talking about a different landslide.

Minister, as you know, an entire farming community was cut off owing to a landslide on the Glenshesk Road. It has been nearly a year for that community, so can the Department provide any updates? Sorry to Rostrevor and Kilkeel. Much as they are of interest to me, I will focus on the landslide in North Antrim.

Mr O'Dowd: I dare not rebuke you, given that the Speaker did not.

The landslide in the area to which the Member refers is significant. It is another one that requires a significant engineering solution, if one can be found, given the scale of the landslide and the undermining of roadworks in the area. My officials continue to work to see whether we can identify a solution. Both incidents came about as a result of torrential rainfall. We have seen a significant change in the pattern and intensity of our rainfall. That is a reminder of the impact that climate change is having on our society.

Mr O'Dowd: The proposed A1 junctions phase 2 scheme from Hillsborough to Loughbrickland has been developed to address the most prevalent safety issues on 25 kilometres of the dual carriageway, particularly focusing on the closure of all gaps in the central median, including the installation of a concrete safety barrier, the provision of four grade-separated junctions, the closure of nine minor roads that connect with the A1 and the altering of all remaining roads and accesses to operate on a left in/left out basis only.

Preparation for the procurement process is now under way, involving the finalisation of the contract documents in readiness for a formal procurement competition. The process is due to commence next month and last between 12 and 15 months. Construction is planned to begin in February 2026 and continue to completion over the following three years.

Mr Butler: I thank the Minister for his answer. I hope that he will forgive me as I pay tribute to two people who died on the road. One was a former Fire and Rescue Service colleague and one a friend with whom I grew up.

I know that the Minister is wedded to delivery. The Minister outlined the time frame for the completion of the project: will he also outline the cost implications and say whether there are any budgetary pressures? Can we get a commitment that the project will be delivered on time, regardless of budget?

Mr O'Dowd: I am not sure that I can say "regardless of budget", because a procurement exercise is going on and we want to get the best value for the public purse. The current cost estimates for the scheme are around £110 million to £120 million. That will come out of my Department's budget. I have already made a commitment to move ahead with the scheme, and that commitment remains.

Mr Buckley: I appreciate the Minister's update on the A1, which also travels through our constituency of Upper Bann. There are huge implications for life and safety along that route.

The wider issue surrounding Hillsborough has been long in the press as to the severe traffic congestion that it faces, particularly as a rat run for many large heavy goods vehicles. I know that the Department has looked at the issue: is there any further update that the Minister can provide to the House?

Mr O'Dowd: This has been raised with me on several occasions, and my officials have carried out studies to see whether there is a solution for Royal Hillsborough. We have not as yet found a solution that would not cause significant traffic congestion and disruption on outlying roads. I am due to meet the Member's party colleague, the deputy First Minister, in the coming weeks, and we will have further discussions about it.

Mr Honeyford: Thank you for outlining the time frames of what we are doing. This is a vital upgrade of the A1, and, as others have said, the safety element is paramount. Is there anything that the Department can do in the short term to improve safety on the road now?

Mr O'Dowd: We will constantly keep under review any measures we can take to improve road safety, particularly on the A1, given its horrific traffic accident history. As I have said to Members before, the most effective way of improving road safety is changing road user behaviour. We have to ensure that, when we use the road, we act in a way that keeps us and others safe along that road.

Mr O'Dowd: I am pleased to confirm that the review of the part-time 20 mph speed limit at schools initiative, which saw the facility introduced at 216 schools, is complete. I have had the opportunity to consider the review report and am content. However, I want to share the report with the Infrastructure Committee before it is published and have asked officials to make the necessary arrangements. I wish to explore how we introduce 20 mph speed limits in general and have requested a paper from my officials in regard to that matter.

Mr Dunne: I thank the Minister for the answer. Will the Minister reiterate his commitment to improving road safety around our schools and provide a wee bit more on the time frame? When does he think he can move forward, and will he commit to increasing the number of 20 mph speed zones around our schools?

Mr O'Dowd: I thank the Member for that question. As I said, I want the Committee to be given the opportunity to review the report before I publish it. I expect that to happen within the next number of weeks. The report's findings have been positive, however, and it is good to see such feedback from teachers, pupils and parents in regard to the matter. It raised questions and perhaps even challenges as to how we move forward with the introduction of it, but I will leave that detail to another time.

Mr Sheehan: Will the Minister tell us whether he has plans to roll out the School Streets initiative?

Mr O'Dowd: For Members who are not familiar with the scheme, the School Streets initiative means that a designated street is closed off to all traffic at certain times of the day — obviously, the opening and closure times of the schools. We are looking at it as part of broader work on active travel and how we promote more active travel. Schools are a good example of where and when we can promote active travel, so it is part of that formula, and there will be discussions and consultations around it.

Mr O'Toole: Following on from the theme that Mr Sheehan has raised — the School Streets initiative — there are in my constituency, South Belfast, umpteen examples of schools that would really benefit from at least testing the School Streets model, which is not just about safety but about air quality and, as you say, active travel. Will the Minister give us a specific timeline for when the Minister expects to be able to update us on whether it will be tested, at least in pilot, or rolled out further across the North?

Mr O'Dowd: I hope to be able to launch our active delivery plan for consultation in November. Links to schools and other attractors are priorities in that plan. Work in the area also includes consideration of measures that can be used in the vicinity of schools, such as we have discussed, to improve the environment for parents and young people, walking, wheeling or cycling. Operations are taking forward pilot projects that will inform the future direction in the area.

Ms Egan: Minister, I was due to ask about the School Streets scheme, so I thank you for your answers about that. If you will indulge me, I will say that there is a school in my constituency where a child has been involved in a road traffic collision while walking to school. With the next roll-out —.

Mr Speaker: With respect, it is Question Time, not the time for statements. If you do not have a question, we will move on.

Mr Chambers: Does the Minister agree that inconsiderate and careless parking outside schools can provide as big a threat to the road safety of children as vehicle speed?

Mr O'Dowd: Yes, and schools struggle with this every day. I am a parent, and I know from going to my local primary school that some of the parking and behaviour, by a minority, is totally unacceptable, and it presents a danger to children leaving and entering that school. I appeal to everyone to be considerate of how they park around our schools and to slow down when passing our schools.

Mr O'Dowd: As the Minister responsible for promoting and improving road safety, I want to work actively with partners to reduce deaths and serious injuries on our roads. I believe that the targeted provision of infrastructure at local schools can go a long way to making our roads and communities safer.

I am aware of the ongoing issues at Edward Street, Downpatrick, particularly in the immediate vicinity of Our Lady and St Patrick Primary School. My Department has taken forward a study to establish what options are available to introduce engineering measures to improve road safety and traffic progression along Edward Street in Downpatrick. Due to the recent opening of a new Eurospar and the merging of three schools to form Lecale Trinity Grammar School, we have now commissioned further traffic surveys for inclusion in that study to inform other options. After we receive the study's conclusions, my officials will arrange another meeting with district electoral area (DEA) representatives, including MLAs, to discuss a way forward.

Mr McGrath: During the collapse of these institutions, I asked the Department for a resolution to the issues. Since the Minister has come back to office, I have asked him, written to him and spoken to him. Each and every time, we are told that something will happen at some point in the future. What message does the Minister have for the primary-school child who, on 18 September, was pinned up against the railings in fear when a vehicle had to mount the footpath in order to be able to maintain the traffic flow in the street?

Mr O'Dowd: My message is this: the driver of the vehicle should have been taking all precautions to protect the pedestrians on the footpath. There is no, "I have to mount the footpath". You drive at a speed that is appropriate to the area, and you respect other road users. The Member is pointing his question in the wrong direction. The answer to his question is like the answer to Mr Chambers' question: if you are driving past a primary school or any school, you drive appropriately to ensure that you do not present a danger to other road users.

Mrs Mason: I welcome the fact that there are now further studies to include the changes that have happened in the area. You mentioned consulting local representatives. How and when will that happen?

Mr O'Dowd: That will happen when we have firm proposals to bring forward. I understand the frustration of elected Members and members of the public, but, changing the traffic going through a town or a village has implications for the roads and networks in and around that town or village. Therefore, we have to rule out taking actions that may have damaging impacts elsewhere on the road network. We want to make sure that, when we take an action, it is the right action. Once we are in a position to ensure that we have a workable proposal to bring forward, we will bring it forward in consultation with local councillors, MLAs and the MP for the area.

Ms Nicholl: Will the Minister provide an assessment of how the active delivery plan that he mentioned will better support active travel on the way to school.

Mr O'Dowd: Schools are a rich source of promoting active travel, if we can provide the proper infrastructure and a safe environment for pupils and parents to walk to and from school. Schools will be a central part of the plan. As I said, I hope to launch that consultation in November, and there will be much discussion. If young people can be encouraged to start walking to and from school, that will set a pattern in life that will, hopefully, stay with them for the remainder of their life. It will be a central part of our active travel strategy.

Mr O'Dowd: Storm overflows are a critical part of any waste water system, and, during periods of heavy rainfall, are designed to allow diluted sewage to spill into water bodies in accordance with regulations set out by NIEA. Spills from storm overflows are made up of waste water from households and businesses that is heavily diluted by rainwater. The vast majority of what is spilled is made up of rainwater. However, NI Water estimates that approximately 1% to 2% of what is spilled is raw sewage. NI Water publishes on its website information on predicted and actual spill volumes. From the information that NI Water provides on predicted spills into Belfast lough, that 1% to 2% equates to approximately 28,000 cubic metres per year.

Mrs Dodds: Thank you, Minister. NI Water estimates that around 20 million tons of untreated sewage spills into our waterways annually. That includes around 10,000 septic tanks that are on the inner boundary of Lough Neagh. Does the Minister agree that the issue with Lough Neagh is not just for those in the farming community, who are easy to blame in this situation, but is wider and multifaceted and must be tackled in the round? Will he commit to funding the devices that are necessary to allow us to ascertain just how much raw sewage is in our waterways?

Mr O'Dowd: I thank the Member. I agree. The Lough Neagh issue is multifaceted. Finger-pointing and blaming will not get us anywhere. We have to identify the issues and find resolutions to them.

In regard to my responsibilities as Minister of the sponsoring Department for NI Water, I am working with my Executive colleagues and others to ensure that there is proper funding for NI Water to put in place waste water treatments works and spillage monitors so that we know exactly what is happening and where it is occurring, and to work with others to ensure that we restore Lough Neagh to its full health and well-being.

Miss Hargey: On the back of that, why can storm overflows not be removed? What would the implications of that be?

Mr O'Dowd: Removing storm overflows completely would cost billions upon billions of pounds and may not be the best, most effective usage of public moneys in that context. There is no question about it: we have to operate and install new waste water treatment works. However, the most efficient waste water treatment works will always have an overflow built into them, because when a deluge of rain comes, the system becomes overpowered and you have to release the water somewhere. If you do not release the water, it will go back up the system and into schools, homes and properties.

As I said in my answer to the original question, while the volumes of water that are being released are quite significant, they usually contain between 1% to 2% of raw sewage, which is not ideal. I am not suggesting that that is ideal. That 1% to 2% of raw sewage is released into watercourses, which are also heavily influenced by storms, and is therefore further diluted. Every system, no matter how modern and well invested in it is, will have an overspill facility built in.

Mr McReynolds: In order to improve our water quality, Northern Ireland Water will have to maintain its waste water treatment sites to an acceptable and high standard, and to do that, it will need to be able to spend above its resource departmental expenditure limit (RDEL) and capital departmental expenditure limit (CDEL) allocations. Has the Minister explored how it may be able to do that?

Mr O'Dowd: I have. I have a constant course of engagement and discussion. As I said in answer to one of the previous questions, I am engaging with my Executive colleagues to see if we can have more financial capability in this financial year. I am looking at legislation through a sustainable drainage system (SuDS) Bill. That will be about trying to hold back some of the rainwater and releasing it into the system more slowly so that it does not become overpowered as quickly as it can in some circumstances. I am also looking at developer contributions. That may require legislative change. I am exploring that to see whether it will be part of the suite of solutions that we require to provide a sustainable funding model for NI Water.

Dr Aiken: Minister, in a previous answer, you mentioned extreme weather events, which seem to happen with monotonous regularity now. Are there any plans to improve the modelling that we do with the Met Office for such extreme weather events, given their implications in overpowering our sewerage system and other areas of our infrastructure?

Mr O'Dowd: The spillage monitors, which Mrs Dodds referred to, will give us evidence-based information on the areas that are under the most pressure from overflows and spillages. I also hope to be able to invest in a flood forecasting centre for here, which will be hugely beneficial. It is quite a significant investment, but, for our forward work programme, it is something that we have to invest in to ensure that we have a suite of knowledge in front of us that allows us to plan, predict and react in a way that protects homes and businesses moving forward.

Mr O'Dowd: The 'Review of South East Flooding Autumn 2023' contains 22 recommendations that cover a range of measures, including the provision of flood forecasting, the development of additional flood risk management infrastructure and further improving communications and resilience.

My Department is progressing a study to assess the viability of further flood alleviation measures to reduce flood risk in Newry. The project team is also engaging with Newry, Mourne and Down District Council with a view to potentially accelerating a section of the proposed flood alleviation works through the council’s theatre and conference facility suite.

My Department continues to work closely with the Newry business community to establish a regional community resilience group for them and others to improve preparedness for any future flooding.

To alleviate the impacts of flooding from rivers, my Department will continue its inspection and maintenance regime for designated watercourses and associated infrastructure within the Newry and South Armagh catchments. An extensive programme of desilting works is also scheduled to be delivered this financial year in Newry for designated underground culvert infrastructure.

Ms Kimmins: I thank the Minister for his answer, particularly as we approach the first anniversary of the flooding, which decimated Newry city and parts of South Armagh. Will the Minister give some more information on the regional community resilience group, please?

Mr O'Dowd: The regional community resilience group has been set up, in discussion with other agencies, to see how we can work with other agencies and communities to assist communities in their response to flooding and how they can assist when flooding incidents happen, particularly in the distribution of sandbags etc and in storing sandbags in certain locations so that they are easily accessible. As the Member and everyone else knows, we do not always get significant warning of when a flooding event will take place. It is very difficult to predict where exactly the major flooding incident will take place. Working with local communities and businesses, we want to be in a position to ensure accessibility to some of the materials that are required for the first, initial emergency response, working in conjunction with all the partners who respond to flooding incidents.

Mr McNulty: Minister, as a result of flood events, flood risk and inadequate mitigation measures, households and businesses in Newry and South Armagh are being crippled by the cost of extortionate insurance premiums. What specific actions, bar cutting down ancient Irish oak trees, does your Department propose to take to address flood risk factors in a manner that will ease the burden of crippling insurance costs for my constituents?

Mr O'Dowd: The Member makes a flippant remark, but the reality is that, had I followed the Member's advice and not carried out the necessary works in Newry, the flooding in Newry last year would have been worse than it was. Had I followed your advice and your campaign, it would have been to do nothing, because you did not come forward with an alternative solution. You think that you can run a Department through headlines; you cannot.

Mr Speaker: Through the Chair, Minister.

Mr O'Dowd: You have to be able to run a Department through evidence-based interventions. My Department had an evidence-based intervention for Newry. We carried it out and, as a result, protected thousands of homes and thousands of businesses in Newry. Does more need to be done? Of course, it needs to be done. Some of those decisions will be difficult, some will be unpalatable and some will require a Minister to make an evidence-based intervention, and I will continue to do that.

Mr O'Dowd: Major road schemes are an important part of the work that is delivered by my Department as we seek to reduce journey times, increase reliability and improve road safety. In October 2022, I published a placemaking and active travel review report on the scheme and asked my officials to carry out further work on three scenarios that were recommended in it.

The work to prepare a placemaking and active travel development report has now been completed. Due to underinvestment in major road schemes and to the constrained budget position, the scheme was considered in the prioritisation of major schemes, and further work on it was paused as part of the outworkings of that review.

I plan to meet officials in the coming weeks to review the scheme, which will allow me to consider the way forward for the entire major roadworks development and the placemaking scheme. Any subsequent decision to proceed with the York Street interchange project can only be made when I am confident that there is budget certainty for the scheme and that its delivery is in line with my Department’s emerging transport plans.

Mr Brett: The Minister will be aware of the traffic chaos in our city centre at the weekend and of the need for major roadworks to take place, but, given the budget constraints that he has outlined, will his Department commit to delivering smaller-scale projects such as the pedestrianisation of Hill Street in my constituency, which has also been paused? That would have little financial requirement of his Department but would have a big impact in our capital city.

Mr Speaker: Very briefly, please, Minister.

Mr O'Dowd: The weekend traffic chaos that you refer to is the result of a £3·2 million road improvement scheme being carried out in Belfast. I suspect that people in rural Fermanagh, rural Tyrone and elsewhere are aghast at people complaining about £3·2 million being spent on their area.

Mr Speaker: We move to topical questions.

Mr O'Dowd: The electric vehicle charging network is a commercial operation that is driven by commercial entities. It has had significant success in recent times, and we are seeing more electric vehicle charging points being made available to members of the public on that commercial basis.

Mr Durkan: It seems as though this is another of these issues: it a commercial operation until there is something positive to announce, and, when there is not, it goes back to being a commercial one. Given the Minister's stated commitment to electric vehicle improvements, will he explain why, 25 months after he announced £1·3 million funding from the Office for Zero Emission Vehicles for on-street residential charge point schemes, the tender for that project has not been released?

Mr O'Dowd: I do not have the full details of the scheme in front of me. Perhaps the scheme that the Member refers to is the scheme in conjunction with councils — I am trying to catch the Member's eye. I am more than happy to follow that up for the Member, but, moving forward, this will be a commercially driven operation. The Department for Infrastructure does not provide access to petrol or diesel stations; that is not part of our function or role. It might be nice to have the financial backing to nationalise the electric vehicle charging network — I could be tempted to go down that road — but I simply do not have the financial wherewithal to do that at this time.

Mr O'Dowd: I agree with the Member: there is serious traffic congestion in Belfast in the mornings and during the evening rush hour. Part of it is as a result of a £340 million investment in the new Grand Central station, and part of it is as a result of the £3·2 million that is being spent on upgrading the Sydenham bypass. The reason that some of it is happening is that we are investing in our infrastructure for the economic well-being of us all.

I have asked my officials to monitor the Belfast situation closely to see whether there are interim measures, such as changes to traffic light operations, that we can take while the work in and around Grand Central station goes ahead, to help to alleviate the traffic there.

I accept that there are circumstances in which public transport is not suitable, but, when we are sitting in traffic, one question that we need to ask ourselves is this: could we use public transport to get here? When you are sitting in traffic, you are the traffic. I accept that public transport is not always accessible or available for everyone.

Mr Buckley: Tourism is important to our city. For buses to be able to bring tourists into the city and access hotels, it is important that DFI works in conjunction with private bus companies. I was informed today that DFI has put a ban on private bus companies allowing their passengers to get off at the Europa Hotel, which is forcing visitors to have to cart their bags through the city centre. Will the Minister commit to looking at how that regulation is impacting on tourists coming to our city? The Europa Hotel, the most bombed hotel in Europe, has not only survived but is now thriving. Let us not let it die from DFI over-regulation.

Mr O'Dowd: I do not know whether DFI has issued a ban, but there has to be appropriate parking for coaches in Belfast city centre; that is without doubt. My officials and others are working with Belfast City Council to see how we can best regulate coach parking in Belfast city centre. If we had unregulated coach parking, the traffic congestion that the Member referred to would only get worse. Let us work towards a solution. I have no doubt that we will reach a solution.

Mr O'Dowd: There will be consultation with the PSNI in that regard, particularly if there is a history of collisions on the stretch of road where the reduction or increase in the speed limit, whichever it may be, is requested.

Mrs Dillon: Go raibh maith agat.

Will you outline any work that your Department is undertaking on speed-management policies and measures, particularly in built-up areas?

Mr O'Dowd: As I mentioned earlier in Question Time, as part of the review of 20 mph speed limits around some of our schools, the question of whether it would be appropriate to introduce 20 mph zones in certain other areas, particularly residential areas, has arisen. We need to explore that further. I am aware of the clamour in Wales to reduce the number of 20 mph speed limits. The approach taken in Wales was much more general than I would propose. I would propose that we look at residential areas that have no through roads to see whether a reduction of the speed limit to 20 mph would increase safety for whoever happens to be using the road. We need to explore that further.

Mr O'Dowd: Your rural colleagues are looking on in envy at Belfast's receipt of £3·2 million for road improvement and a £340 million bus and rail station. Your rural colleagues are asking, "What are you complaining about?". However, I accept that there has been traffic congestion in Belfast. We are reviewing that. If lessons need to be learned from the weekend, they will be learned. We are resurfacing a major arterial route into Belfast. The reason that we are resurfacing it is that it is such a high-volume part of the road network. I suspect that most Members travel on it daily. It needs to be upgraded and resurfaced — that is why we are doing it — but, yes, if lessons can be learned, they will be.

Mr Brooks: I thank the Minister for his answer. My rural colleagues will probably benefit more from those works than the residents of Sydenham, who felt locked into their residential streets at the weekend. I impress on the Minister that, at the weekend, there were events taking place in the wider area that involved road closures and so on. I ask that, in future, those things are taken into account and consideration is given to doing more of the work in the evenings.

Mr O'Dowd: We try to coordinate the work as much as we can. In scheduling a major work scheme, we must take the opportunity to do it with our contractors who have been involved in a number of other major road schemes, and to do it when the weather is reasonably good. We have to time it. This week's work was carried out between 10.00 pm and 6.00 am. There will be further works in the weeks and months ahead.

We will look at what happened, and, if lessons need to be learned, they will be learned. There will be inconvenience — we cannot completely plan out inconvenience — as a result of that scheme and others, but I have no doubt that, when schemes are completed, people will welcome the fact that the work has been done.

Mr O'Dowd: As I said to one of the Member's colleagues, I will allow the Committee to see the full report before I make detailed comment on it, but I welcome the feedback received from teachers, pupils and parents. The 20 mph zones have clearly had benefits, and we understand those benefits much more as a result of the consultation and the work that has been done. It is only right and proper, however, that the Committee be given its place.

Ms Kimmins: I thank the Minister for his answer. There have certainly been benefits where the zones are in place in my area. Will the Department consider Killean Primary School in my constituency as part of the roll-out of any future tranche of such zones? We have been lobbying for some time.

Mr O'Dowd: Yes. I am aware of the Member's lobbying in regard to that school. It will be taken into consideration in any future launch of the scheme to include more schools across the North.

Mr O'Dowd: I do not have the details in front of me. I recently met the taxi industry. I had discussions with representatives a couple of weeks ago. In true taxi driver style, the conversation was frank and straight-talking, which was OK. I have had discussions at ministerial level with them in recent weeks.

Mr Allen: The Minister will, no doubt, be aware that many in the disabled community, me included, face challenges in accessing accessible transport. Indeed, the media recently covered the broad range and scope of those challenges. Will the Minister advise what work his Department has undertaken to increase the availability of and options for accessible transport in Northern Ireland?

Mr O'Dowd: Taxis are a step aside from my Department. I have certain responsibilities in relation to licensing, regulation and other matters, but I do not control the industry as closely as I control Translink. However, in discussions with the taxi industry and others, I will ensure, as far as my powers allow, that there is full accessibility for people with disabilities on our public transport system in particular.

The treatment that the Member recently received at, I believe, Birmingham Airport, was totally unacceptable. Fair play to him for highlighting disabled people's needs and bringing them once again to the forefront of discussions about their right to access public transport fully. We have made huge strides forward in recent years on public transport, and I intend to continue that work. The taxi industry is one step aside from my Department, but I will continue to engage with it to see what support we can offer. It is a challenge for that industry as well, financially and otherwise. I understand the challenges that taxi companies face, and I will work with them in any way I can.

Mr Speaker: Question 8 has been withdrawn.

Mr O'Dowd: I referred to MOT tests when I attended the Committee for questioning last week. If the significant reduction in correspondence on MOT tests coming to my office is a measure, there has been some success. We will understand the full implications of the temporary exemption certificates and their success or otherwise by the spring of next year. Our target was to reduce waiting times to around six weeks by next spring. Thus far, the indications are that we are seeing improvement across the board.

Mr Dunne: I thank the Minister for his answer. I appreciate that progress has been made. In my local centre, in Newtownards, the waiting time is still over two months, which is over the Minister's target time. Is there any update on the Hydebank MOT test centre, which was due to be reopened over two years ago?

Mr O'Dowd: The reopening of Hydebank is still causing us huge frustrations and challenges. I hope to make further announcements or to have engagements on the matter in the coming weeks, because we have to bring it to a conclusion one way or the other.

Mr O'Dowd: I have not had direct engagement as Minister with it, but my officials from the section office will have had engagement with the council in that regard.

Mr Tennyson: Thank you, Minister. Given the significant public concern at the potential for those changes to cause traffic chaos, will you commit to engaging with the council urgently, before the changes take place?

Mr O'Dowd: I am happy to write to the council and establish its views on the matter. I am aware of the issue, as a resident of the borough, but, as I said, I have had no direct engagement. I will follow it up with the council.

Mr Speaker: Congratulations, Mr O'Dowd, on getting through all of your topicals.

Mr Speaker: We move now to questions to the Minister of Justice. That is something for that Minister to follow. Questions 2, 3 and 8 have been withdrawn, and questions 6 and 10 are grouped.

Mrs Long (The Minister of Justice): The Prison Service requires the resources that it needs to keep people who live and work in prisons safe and secure and to support the rehabilitation and resettlement into the community of people in its care. Earlier this year, the Prison Service reviewed its operational staffing levels due to the significant and sustained increase in prisoner population. In keeping with the findings of that review, I agreed to an increase in the Prison Service's staffing complement of 75 prison officers. The Prison Service is currently working with NI Civil Service (NICS) HR partners to confirm recruitment arrangements for a custody prison officer campaign that will launch in October.

Mr Bradley: I thank the Minister for her answer. In view of the circumstances that abound in England because of overcrowding, prisoners are being let out early. Does she envisage anything like that in Northern Ireland?

Mrs Long: I have learned in this job never to say, "Never", but, at the moment, we are not in that situation. We currently have adequate capacity in our prisons for prisoners to serve the entirety of their sentence. We also have adequate staff, so we are not in an overcrowded situation. However, I am conscious that the numbers are significantly higher than was anticipated with the current complement of prison officers, and that is one of the reasons why we are going out to recruitment. In order to keep people safe and ensure that the regime operates effectively, it is important that we have the prisons properly staffed, and the new custody prison officer recruitment will go a long way to help that.

Dr Aiken: The Minister will be aware of the morale problems in the Prison Service at the moment. One of the things that may be affecting the recruitment process is the fact that many prison officers feel as if they have not been listened to, particularly on issues to do with NICS HR. Will the Minister commit to an independent review of the Northern Ireland Civil Service HR process to make sure that our prison officers are not badly treated, as, they believe, they are?

Mrs Long: Review of Northern Ireland Civil Service HR would be a matter for the Department of Finance, not the Department of Justice. However, I have done work to try to add support for prison officers. For example, serving and former officers now have the opportunity to avail themselves of the Police Rehabilitation and Retraining Trust (PRRT) and its facilities. We have also put in the "Prison's Well" system and provided well-being hubs at the prisons. There is considerable work going on to support prison officers in what is an increasingly complex job.

We also have already discussed issues with respect to the HR issues around prison officers and the fact that many prison officers feel that their jobs are distinct and different from many of the others in the Civil Service. However, it is sad that, at times, when Members get up in the Chamber, they do not acknowledge that when they are talking about levels of absenteeism, injury and sickness but make spurious claims about the high levels of absenteeism without recognising that our absenteeism in DOJ reflects the number of people who are deployed in Prison Service.

Mrs Long: All types of violence are linked, and we know that there is still much to do to support women who face paramilitary harm. It is completely and unequivocally unacceptable. At ministerial and official level, we are in close and regular contact with those delivering the ending violence against women and girls strategy and the domestic and sexual abuse strategy. It is essential to see those as complementary efforts that work together to support those who continue to face harm but also ensure that we prevent this happening in the first place.

Miss McAllister: I thank the Minister for her answer. She will be aware of the recently published report by Dr Aisling Swaine that highlighted the prevalence of paramilitary violence against women and girls. What is her assessment of that publication?

Mrs Long: First, I commend Dr Swaine and Foyle Women's Aid for the important research that was produced on the topic of paramilitary-related gendered coercive control. I was pleased to be at the launch of that report to signal my clear support for the work that is being done on the subject. The research was timely and important. It provides real insight into the experience of women who have faced paramilitary-related gendered coercive control. The report and the testimonies of victims and survivors makes for harrowing and sobering reading. Those women have faced horrendous physical and sexual harm, including threats, surveillance and displacement and in relationships where they should have felt safe.

Violence against women and girls and paramilitary violence are linked, and the new ending violence against women and girls strategy, the strategic framework and the draft Programme for Government, which was published this month, speak to the importance of addressing those issues. We recognise that violence does not happen in a vacuum and that violence against women and girls and ongoing paramilitary violence are linked. We now need to take this real opportunity to ensure that there is a comprehensive and joined-up response.

Ms Bunting: The Department made a transformation bid with regard to ending violence against women and girls, but, unfortunately, that did not move to the next stage. What are the Minister's plans for the next steps, as that bid was unsuccessful?

Mrs Long: That was a cross-departmental bid by the Department of Justice — it bid for the justice elements — and TEO. We will still have to deliver on the ending violence against women and girls framework. Obviously, significant parts of that will fall to my Department. However, the most important parts of that are now around early intervention. We have made many changes following the Gillen review to how the justice system responds to violence against women and girls, but there is still much work to be done in that space. I hope to address some of that in a victims Bill later in the mandate.

We will continue the work that is being done jointly between our Departments. It is important that we are not competing for the same resources when we work on ending violence against women and girls and on the domestic and sexual abuse strategy. From my perspective, the two are distinct. There are synergies, but the Minister of Health and I, whilst leading on the domestic and sexual violence and abuse strategy, are considering all victims, not only women and girls. We are also considering male victims of those issues. There are synergies, and we want to make the most of those.

Mr Beattie: You have answered my question for the most part. We have the DOJ's tackling paramilitarism, criminality and organised crime programme, TEO's ending violence against women and girls framework and the PSNI's tackling violence against women and girls work, which has been running for two years now. Does the Minister think that it is now time to have a single, strategic lead on this so that we are not duplicating resources?

Mrs Long: First, I proposed that the Executive Office take forward the ending violence against women and girls strategy. It is not just a matter for Justice or policing; it is a matter for the whole Executive. Every Department has a role to play, whether that be Health, Education, Economy or Communities. We all have a role to play in ending violence against women and girls, which is much wider than the domestic and sexual violence and abuse on which Health and Justice take the lead.

It is important also that every strand in every Department has its own internal strategies to deal with those issues. It is important, however, that that is not about duplication; it is about learning from best practice. One of the strong things about the tackling paramilitarism programme is that we have found out what works to reduce harm in the context of paramilitary violence. There is an opportunity to apply that in other areas where we want to reduce harm.

Mrs Long: My Department currently faces stabilisation pressures of £48 million. That projected potential overspend was reported to the Department of Finance as part of the recent in-year exercise. In addition, the Department faces exceptional pressures of £227 million in relation to legal claims for McCloud injury to feelings, data breach and holiday pay. Those costs are not affordable within my Department’s budget under any circumstance.

Whilst my Department has been proactive in taking actions over the last few years to ensure that we live within budget, we are now at the point where all options have been exhausted. Given the severity of the financial position and the demand-led nature of Justice expenditure, there is no scope for my Department to absorb the remaining level of pressures.

Mr Tennyson: I thank the Minister for her answer. What is her assessment of how the relative needs of her Department and the PSNI have been accounted for in the proposed needs-based factor from the UK Government?

Mrs Long: Not very well. That would be the best way to describe it. In measuring need, they looked at the allocation that was made to the Department in 2017-18. By then, the ring-fencing of the Department's finances that had existed from 2010-14 had been removed and there had been a bit of a raid, I suppose, on the Department's finances. Rather than reflecting what we needed to run the Department and provide the services that we are required to provide, it reflected what we actually had to do that and the envelope within which we were working.

It is important to recognise that certain elements of policing and justice here, including their very nature, our geographical location and without any reference to special circumstances, require a higher level of investment. One example is the cost of mutual aid in comparison with other forces across the UK. We cannot provide that as cheaply. That is one reason why we need to look at that, and the Department of Finance and my officials are working hard to raise it with Treasury in order to ensure that our situation is properly reflected on the basis of evidence around the higher needs-based factor, which, I believe, Northern Ireland should achieve.

Mr McNulty: Will the Minister agree that ongoing underfunding of the police will continue to erode faith in the justice system to the detriment of victims? Will she also agree that the Chief Constable should take every measure possible to secure adequate funding to keep people and communities safe?

Mrs Long: It is important that we all take every possible opportunity to ensure that policing and justice are properly funded. I have the dual duty of ensuring that not only is policing properly funded but so too is the remainder of the justice system. There is no point in funding one at the expense of the other. That will not enhance victim confidence or confidence in the community. If people are arrested and then have to sit for five, six or seven years before they get to court, that will not help victims. It is important that, when I get resources into the Department of Justice, they are properly allocated in a balanced way to ensure that the entire system is able to function. At the moment, we do not have the resources to do that across the board.

Mrs Long: Mr Speaker, with your permission, I will answer questions 6 and 10 together.

The Northern Ireland Prison Service prioritises rehabilitation by supporting and challenging those in its care to change and address their offending behaviour. That includes providing opportunities through a wide and progressive curriculum for individuals to develop skills and attain qualifications that will give them the best chance to secure and sustain employment on release. The Prison Service offers a varied curriculum of accredited training from entry level to level 3 in educational, vocational and employability skills in addition to further education opportunities that have been designed to meet the diverse needs of the prison population. The curriculum is kept under continuous review to respond to the changing needs of the prison population, emerging industries in the labour market and labour market shortages, including current and future skills gaps.

The provision of learning and skills is outsourced to our professional delivery partner, Belfast Met, which recently completed a substantive curriculum review that included the education provision at Magilligan. The recommendations from the review will be used to inform the strategic direction of learning and skills provision over the next five to 10 years and respond to the challenges presented by a rising prison population.

Mr McHugh: Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a freagraí go dtí seo.

Will the Minister provide an assessment of the courses that are available in prison for offenders?

Mrs Long: As I said, there is a wide range of curriculum offer from essential skills such as numeracy and literacy to vocational skills ranging from barbering to bricklaying and employability skills, including soft skills such as writing CVs and interviewing techniques. We are also trying constantly to enhance the learning experience in line with what is offered in the community and to support future-proofing of that learning so that we can develop, for example, the use of digital technology with all the challenges that that presents in a prison system.

Plans are at an early stage, with a pilot due to commence shortly in Maghaberry to test the viability of virtual delivery across the prison estate, which may also enhance opportunities. That has the potential to maximise class numbers and expand the learning and skills curriculum. However, most learners prefer a blended approach, so they like the human touch, and it is important that we get that balance right not only in access but in support.

Ms Ennis: I thank the Minister for her answers thus far. Does her Department have any plans to introduce specific rehabilitation courses for offenders who have been jailed for a domestic violence offence?

Mrs Long: We do have specific programmes to work with people who have offended, and those programmes are tailored to their offending behaviour. The Probation Board provides some of those schemes, and there are ones for perpetrators of domestic violence and abuse. One of the challenges that we face in the prison system at the minute is that many of the people are there on remand and therefore tend not to want to engage in programmes that are about challenging their offending behaviour, because most of them are still trying to maintain the position that they are not guilty ahead of their trial. That makes it very difficult. While we can offer general education to those prisoners and many will avail themselves of that, they will often avoid the kind of perpetrator and behaviour change programmes that, I think, are critical to successful rehabilitation, particularly in the space of violence against women and girls and domestic abuse.

Mr Dickson: Minister, I particularly welcome the review of education services by Belfast Met. Can you assure the House that that will not only future-proof those courses but will look at how we broaden the type of education service that can be provided to prisoners?

Mrs Long: It is very important that we do that. We are committed to ensuring that, when people leave prisons, they are rehabilitated in the truest sense in that their attitudes and their offending behaviour have been successfully challenged and changed, but we also need to ensure that they have skills to be able to seek employment post release. We are working on a series of skills academies where we can train people up in particular areas where we know there are job shortages and where prisoners may benefit from the additional skills training that we can provide in the prison system.

We also need to work with people in the community, and one of the things that I have been doing since returning to office has been engaging with the business community and talking to its representatives about, first, the opportunities that exist in prisons to train people up for specific lines of work; secondly, the positives that come from employing people who have an offending background, because many of them are very grateful for the opportunity to get a job and very keen to make a contribution; and thirdly, how we can test with the business community where the key areas for new opportunities are so that we can then adapt our training. We need to be agile to ensure that, whatever we produce for the prison system, we are producing skills that are actually of value in the workplace.

Mrs Long: The Northern Ireland Courts and Tribunals Service (NICTS) has provided £500,000 of additional resourcing to the Planning Appeals Commission each year since 2021. NICTS officials continue to meet the PAC chief commissioner to consider any resourcing pressures, including vacant posts. At present, there is only one vacant post in the commission, which is due to be filled in January 2025. The Northern Ireland Audit Office has recently initiated a strategic review of the PAC. That will consider the overall role and function of the commission, the challenges that it currently faces and options available to improve performance and wider planning outcomes in Northern Ireland.

Mr Dunne: I thank the Minister for the answer. It is widely recognised that the performance of the PAC is not where it needs to be, and I think that everybody will concur with that. What more can be done to improve its efficiency? I would also like an update on the Audit Office review, if that is possible.

Mrs Long: The Audit Office review has only been announced, so no update can be given on that.

With respect to the performance and whether it is effective, the chief commissioner specifically addressed performance matters in the Planning Appeals Commission and Water Appeals Commission (PACWAC) annual review for 2022-23. From the initial statistics prepared in advance of the chief commissioner's annual report 2023-24, performance continues to improve, with the commission's performance showing the highest increase in decisions over the past five years. The final report will be published later in the autumn, and, hopefully, Members will be pleased at the progress that is being made.

Mrs Long: My Department is committed to delivering its responsibilities under the Climate Change Act (Northern Ireland) 2022 and in supporting DAERA in the development of the first Northern Ireland climate action plan. While the Department of Justice is not a sectoral lead under the Act, we aim to contribute to the sectors of buildings, transport and energy. Our 2023 outline sustainability strategy sets out our goals and supporting actions to reduce our carbon footprint. For example, we have established 2021-22 as our baseline year for measuring our energy consumption and reducing our reliance on fossil fuels. We have an active information programme in place to encourage behavioural change with our staff, both in the workplace and at home.

Mr Donnelly: Thanks to the Minister for her answer. Will the Minister give some detail on the scope of her Department's sustainability strategy?

Mrs Long: The Department's strategy covers the core Department and its agencies. Central to the delivery of the Department's strategy are the respective strategies of NICTS, the Northern Ireland Prison Service and the PSNI. They have their own goals and targets, and they are reported on separately.

The Department's agenda is progressed under three sustainability pillars: economic, social and environmental, each with its own supporting actions. Key to the delivery of the strategy was the establishment of that baseline year as 2021-22, so we can manage our energy consumption and measure it against that particular aspect.

We have some key initiatives in progress. The solar farm at Hydebank Wood is now operational and has the capacity to reduce electricity bills by up to £60,000 per year. The Prison Service is also working in collaboration with the Northern Ireland Environment Agency, RSPB and Woodland Trust to develop biodiversity action plans for each of our sites, because one thing that we do have is space and land. It is also playing a leading role in sustainability in prisons. An international conference was held in York on 24 and 25 September, to which Prison Service staff made contributions.

Finally, we have solar panels installed on several courthouses, including on Laganside. Most importantly, the modernisation of the Royal Courts of Justice project aspires to make the Royal Courts of Justice, a building of the same era as this one, the first fully decarbonised, grade A listed building in Northern Ireland. That includes refurbishment of the old town hall building when it reopens. It will make a significant impact in to the heritage and the environment.

Mrs Long: I will consider the findings and recommendations of the review in due course and publish the findings, as appropriate, following consultation with key stakeholders, including the Justice Committee.

Mr Beattie: I thank the Minister for her brevity. We have said that we will finish the review by December. However, if the Policing Board is so key to policing, have we pushed this in far too early and should the independent reviewers be given time to finish the review as they require and when they deem to be fit?

Mrs Long: I am aware of the Member's concerns around the time frame, but I think that it is appropriate, given the scope of the review and the urgency of the report. If the independent reviewers consider that they need additional time, I will, of course, be open to considering that.

I am also aware that it is important to get results from this review and that we are able to look forward. From the point of view of the Policing Board and the Department, it is important that we try to keep the review short and tightly focused, dealing with the main issues that instigated it in the first place.

Mr Blair: The Minister, just at the end, answered the question that I had anticipated asking. To try to clarify the time that it has taken up to this point, is it not the case that some of the toing and froing from the Policing Board to the Department caused the delay until this juncture, and that none of the delay was caused by the Department itself?

Mrs Long: There are a number of things. First of all, when I came back in February, I reflected on the fact that the Policing Board had intended to take forward a review itself. I decided, on balance, that, to ensure that that was as independent as possible and could command as much public confidence as possible, it would be better for the sponsor Department — DOJ — to take that forward. We then had to look at the terms of reference of the review. Obviously, things have happened in the interim. As a result, the terms of reference needed to be slightly wider than originally anticipated. Finally, we had to find the correct people to take the review forward and to do it in a timely fashion.

That might sound like a lot of words to say that it was not as straightforward an issue as people perhaps expected it to be. The key thing for me is that it is under way. The board is content with the terms of reference, and engagement with the panel has already commenced.

Mr O'Toole: Minister, I welcome the fact that the independent review was announced. There has been an occasional challenge and pushback in this Chamber about your responsibility for policing. For the record, can you confirm that, should the independent review come back with substantive recommendations for legislative, regulatory or any other change, your Department will take those reforms forward?

Mrs Long: I cannot anticipate what it will come forward with. Therefore, I cannot anticipate which Department would take it forward. Many of the structures that surround the tripartite arrangements for policing and justice are not devolved. They are part of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 and would need to be dealt with at Westminster. Others are devolved to my Department.

I accept that, for some Members, it has been incredibly difficult to come to terms with the fact that I cannot answer questions on behalf of the police on operational matters. However, this is not an operational policing review. This is a review of the board and its relationships. It is entirely appropriate that it is done independently, but the report will also be presented to the board.

Mrs Long: The budget allocation attributed to the PSNI part-time Reserve is an operational matter for the Chief Constable, who continues to be accountable to the Policing Board. It is important that I respect the operational independence of the Chief Constable and of the Policing Board.

Mrs Dodds: I know that the Minister will agree that many of those in our part-time Reserve served through terrible times in Northern Ireland and face great personal danger as they continue, in their ordinary workplace, to serve our community and ensure our safety. Whether the funding is brought about by her or the Chief Constable, will the Minister ensure that there is, at least, a good discussion about a fair allocation being made to those brave officers?

Mrs Long: It is important that everyone who serves in the PSNI, whether as officers, part-time Reserve or members of staff, are properly remunerated for the work that they do and the risks that they take on our behalf. Ultimately, the Chief Constable, every arm's-length body and I as Minister all have to live within our budget. We strive to do so and to be responsible with public money, but we recognise that there are challenges. The part-time Reserve, and whether to strengthen it or reduce its complement, is a matter entirely for the Chief Constable and not for me as Justice Minister. I am, however, absolutely committed to those people, irrespective of which part of the PSNI they serve, being properly remunerated for the work that they do.

Mrs Long: Given the complexity of ASB, it cannot be addressed by the criminal justice system alone. Effective partnership working across local government and central government is required to identify the causes and put in place solutions to prevent incidents arising and tackle the cumulative impact of ASB on individuals and communities. That partnership approach is evidenced in the work of policing and community safety partnerships (PCSPs). Those PCSPs are funded by my Department and the Policing Board, for which tackling ASB is a key strategic priority. PCSPs lead on my Department’s operational response to specific concerns at a local level. They work with designated partners, including local statutory bodies and agencies and the community and voluntary sector, to tackle actual and perceived ASB in our communities.

At a strategic level, the community safety network, which is chaired by my Department, promotes shared and collective ownership by partners inside and outside the Department of Justice to ensure that there is a collaborative response to multifaceted community safety issues such as ASB. Additionally, where a criminal justice response is appropriate, and to ensure that the relevant authorities have effective and proportionate enforcement powers, my Department led a multi-agency, cross-departmental review of ASB legislation and launched a joint public consultation with DFC on potential legislative change. It is now progressing the outworkings of that consultation.

Mr Allen: I thank the Minister for her answer. She highlighted the impact that antisocial behaviour has on so many in our society. Will the Minister advise what steps her Department is taking, perhaps in conjunction with the PSNI, to clamp down on the illegal sale of fireworks, which can often be used in ASB?

Mrs Long: Significant work around fireworks is ongoing, and it takes place particularly at this time of year. We work with the PSNI and others on that. A strong regulatory framework on fireworks is already in place. In cases of the sale or purchase of fireworks where people fail to comply with that framework, penalties are available and are used. It is more important that we ask people to be responsible in their use of fireworks. The noise can be distressing for children, adults and particularly for animals. Low-noise fireworks are now available: they have all the pizzazz with none of the fear. People should increasingly consider using those.

Mr McReynolds: Will the Minister join in my absolute condemnation of the ongoing and sustained placement of objects at the Henry Jones playing fields in east Belfast and the disruption that that has on sports, education and the local community?

Mrs Long: I do. It goes way beyond antisocial and veers into the space of hate crime, given the intimidation effect that it has on GAA users of the pitch. It is not acceptable and is incredibly disruptive to not only those who play GAA but those who use the pitches for other purposes and other sports. It is also incredibly disrespectful and disruptive to the children of the local nursery and primary school and their parents. Those who are behind the campaign need to catch themselves on and recognise that there is space enough in this world for us all, and that we need to respect other people's traditions and allow them to get on with their lives in peace and quiet without that disruption.

It is also becoming a drain on PSNI resources. That is hardly helpful at a time when we need the PSNI to be actively preventing crime and dealing with serious issues rather than dealing with that kind of stupid behaviour, which is completely disruptive and unnecessary.

Mr Speaker: Mr Carroll is not in his place. That brings to a conclusion the period for listed questions. Congratulations on getting them all done, Minister. I think that that is a first. We now move to topical questions.

Mrs Long: I am grateful to the commissioner designate for engaging with victims of crime and seeking feedback on their experience of the criminal justice system. It is essential that victims feel confident that, when they report a crime, they will have their case investigated and prosecuted, where there is evidence to support a prosecution, and that they will be treated appropriately and sensitively throughout the system.

Across the criminal justice system, a lot of work has been progressed to improve the experiences of and support for victims of crime and to ensure that they receive the services that they are entitled to under the Victim Charter. That includes ensuring that victims can avail themselves of emotional support when giving evidence, which the Department funds through Victim Support NI and the NSPCC. My Department allocates funding of around £1·8 million a year for the provision of support services to victims and witnesses through Victim Support and the NSPCC's young witness service. I will say this, however: if we had more resource, first, the justice system would speed up; secondly, people would get a resolution to their case much more quickly; and, thirdly, we would be able to provide a better service, because it is often changes made at the last minute as a result of people not being fully prepared that cause delay. All those things impact on people's view of the system. There is a huge challenge ahead, if we are to ensure that our justice system improves. It will require investment, and I have been asking for that investment for some time.

Mr McNulty: I thank the Minister for her answer. The survey results show that satisfaction with treatment by the police was at only 8%, with respondents citing incidents, particularly of domestic abuse, being belittled and not taken seriously and saying that officers were not trained to deal with sexual assaults. Those statements are in direct contrast to the aims of the domestic and sexual abuse strategy that the Department launched last week. Does the Minister accept that the absence of systemic reform by her Department and the budget set by her Department actively harm victims and deter them from coming forward to report crimes?

Mrs Long: No. I do not agree that there has been a lack of systemic reform by my Department, quite the contrary. In the previous mandate, we led the way on the domestic abuse offence, legislating on domestic abuse and putting forward the need for training for police officers in that legislation. That training is ongoing. That is not, in any way, to answer for the PSNI and its role, which is something that, I am sure, the Member's colleagues will take up through the Policing Board, where the Chief Constable can be questioned about policing response.

It is disappointing when people have negative experiences, which is why I spend a considerable amount of my time listening to victims of domestic and sexual violence and other crimes. I do that so that I can be clear that the pathway that we have plotted is the one that is followed in real time. That is often not the case, and only some of that is down to resourcing. A significant role for my Department is to provide leadership, and we have not failed to show that leadership, supporting victims and witnesses, opening remote evidence centres and offering the support that we offer to vulnerable victims and witnesses. At the end of the day, I guess that the question is this: do people feel, at the point of sentencing, that they have got what they wanted? Unfortunately, that is often not the case.

Mrs Long: At the moment, the prison population sits at in excess of 1,800 prisoners. We have full capacity in Magilligan, at around 500 prisoners. We still have some capacity in Maghaberry and Hydebank. Over recent years, growing numbers of women have been committed to prison, and we are seeing a general upward trend. The reason that we have capacity in the system in Maghaberry is solely that we have been able to open two of the old square houses that had been closed. We have been able to repurpose them and bring them back into use, but it is not an ideal situation. It requires more intensive numbers of prison officers to look after the prisoners in those houses.

It is a significant challenge for the Department. We are not in the same situation as some other regions have been in in terms of, for example, having to consider early release or some of the more extreme measures, such as tripling up, in the prison system. However, we do have a prison oversight working group that is looking at how we can drive those numbers down. We also have a remand working group because, at the minute, in Maghaberry, 50% of those in prison have not yet been sentenced.

Ms Ennis: I thank the Minister for her response. As a follow-on from my last question, does she agree that access to education, training and rehabilitation should be the primary focus of our prisons? What plans does she have to increase the uptake of and access to rehabilitation and education courses so that we can drive down reoffending rates?

Mrs Long: We have been driving up the number of people who participate in the education system, particularly with, as I said, the more general kinds of education. We can often extend that for short-term sentencing and those on remand, but it is much more difficult, when we talk about offender-related programmes, where people are still maintaining that they are innocent and have not been sentenced. It is a challenge because, every time we move people from their cells to the education facility, it requires resource, which has to be found from somewhere. At the moment, in prisons, we are highly reliant on overtime. That is a short-term fix; it is not a long-term solution to the problems that we face.

Mrs Long: We operate a progressive regime in the prison system in Northern Ireland, so there are rewards and penalties, depending on people's behaviour. The adjudication process happens with the governors, and there is an appeal mechanism against that. Perhaps the best thing for me to do is furnish the Member with a copy of prison rules so that she can see for herself the issues on which the prison authorities regularly adjudicate and perhaps get a better feel for how the process works.

Ms Ferguson: Thank you. I would very much appreciate that. Has any consideration been given to a departmental review of adjudications by governors in prisons?

Mrs Long: There has not been at this stage. In its regular reviews of prisons, adjudications are one of the things that the Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland will look at in terms of the work that goes on in our prisons. We had a situation in 2005, when our prisons were considered to be fairly volatile and unsafe places. That is no longer the case. The progressive regime that has been put in place is one of the reasons why that has stabilised. Therefore, at the moment, it is not my intention to do a major review of that, but, if people have different experiences, we are always open to hearing about that.

Mrs Long: On 19 September 2024, my Department issued letters to 12 individuals to advise them that their convictions had been quashed by the Post Office (Horizon System) Offences Act 2024. We believe that, in total, about 116 convictions have been quashed to date. That will enable those individuals to receive their financial redress. Further to those letters, the Department is coordinating the process of updating criminal records databases to reflect the quashing of the convictions. The individuals will receive a further letter once that process has been completed. Work is ongoing to review the convictions of other individuals who may be within the scope of the Act. I encourage anyone who believes that they have a conviction for a relevant offence but has not received a letter to date to contact my Department to ensure that an assessment of their conviction is undertaken. Obviously, the Act will not undo the harm and distress that was caused, but I hope that it will go some way towards lifting the burden on those affected.

Ms Armstrong: Thank you, Minister. You mentioned the burden. When should those affected expect to receive their compensation?

Mrs Long: We are being as thorough as possible to ensure that no one is missed. However, despite extensive searches, we do not yet have enough information for some individuals, and it is important that they get in touch with us to see whether they are within the scope of the Act. As for when they should expect compensation, the financial redress schemes are managed by the Department for Business and Trade on a UK-wide basis. Our focus in DOJ is on overturning the convictions and deleting the cautions. If, however, there is undue delay in sub-postmasters here accessing financial redress, I would, of course, be happy to raise that with ministerial counterparts.

Mrs Long: There are many areas in the justice system where the Department of Health and the Department of Justice work together. For example, we already do so in the area of domestic and sexual violence and abuse: we launched a joint strategy last week. Along with the Department of Education, we launched a further strategy on child criminal exploitation this week. There is a lot of ongoing joint work, and mental health is a key part of that. As you know, in prisons, for example, all healthcare is provided by the health and social care trusts.

There is a challenge, however, in that early intervention, alternative placements and support for those with severe mental health issues are often provided in the community, and an absence of adequate funding in that space is leading to people who have serious mental health issues increasingly being committed to prison. That is a challenge for the prison system and, in particular, the PSNI, whose officers often have to interface with people who are having serious mental health breakdowns. Therefore, we can do further work together to resolve those issues.

Mr Dickson: Mental health pathways are vital, particularly for those in prison who have mental health needs. Will the Minister describe what happens once they have left prison and how they are reconnected with community mental health services?

Mrs Long: That transition has historically been one of the difficult parts of the system. Whilst we do a lot of work to ensure that there is a proper transition for people leaving custody, including having accommodation and support in the community, it is not always a seamless process. Unfortunately, for many prisoners, when they go back into the community, they have to find a GP, because they do not know where they will be living. They then have to be referred by their GP to mental health services. Prisons are trying to look at how we can streamline those processes with the Department of Health. The same is true when it comes to housing. The ideal situation would be that we know in advance where every prisoner will live and have them preregistered with a GP so that, when they leave, they can receive any medication and have access to the therapeutic services that they received in prison. Unfortunately, however, that is not currently the case.

Mrs Long: On 25 September, the Minister of Health and I announced the launch of the seven-year domestic and sexual abuse strategy, jointly led by the Department of Health and the Department of Justice. It was launched at an event hosted by the NSPCC and attended by those in the voluntary and community sector who helped to shape the strategy, along with departmental officials. One reason that we went to the NSPCC was that we recognise the impact that domestic and sexual violence has on children and young people. The strategy is closely aligned with the Executive's ending violence against women and girls strategy, but, importantly, it is gender-inclusive.

I also announced the introduction of a small grant scheme that we will build on if and when further funding becomes available. It will offer members of the voluntary and community sector the opportunity to apply for funding to support new ideas and initiatives that align with our strategic objectives in the strategy. The grants will initially be drawn from our cross-cutting domestic and sexual abuse funding, with the goal of supporting vital work carried out by front-line organisations. We will also work closely with Executive Office colleagues to ensure that there is no duplication but, rather, that we reinforce the same messages as we try to end harm in our communities.

Ms Egan: Thank you, Minister. The successful sexual offences and legal advisers (SOLAs) scheme, which is run by your Department, is relevant to both of those strategies. Are there any plans to develop the scheme further?

Mrs Long: Yes. Sir John Gillen recommended that publicly funded, independent legal advice should be made available to all victims in cases of serious sexual offences. We introduced the SOLAs scheme as a response to that. Feedback has been overwhelmingly positive. I was really pleased to confirm that, as part of the recommendations of the strategy's action plan, we will now launch an equivalent but specific service for children and young people. The application process for the legal adviser positions that are available closes on 1 October.

The impacts of such violence on children are, understandably, more extreme. When I met families of young victims, I was told directly how challenging it was to engage with the criminal justice processes. Without access to advice on what the legal system might involve or require and on their rights as they navigate it, we add to victims' anxiety and contribute to their reluctance to engage. It is important that we are able to provide that access. Beyond that, we will look at how we can have a right to be heard in the court itself. At the moment, it is for pre-trial, so, for specific pre-trial hearings, those legal advisers would be able to attend court and be heard with the victim.

Mr Speaker: That brings to a conclusion questions to the Minister of Justice. Members can take their ease, and we will resume the previous debate.

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

Mr Durkan: Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

I thank everyone for their contribution to the debate. I am sure that there is not one person here who has not been affected by poor mental health in some way or other or even by the scourge of suicide. I am sure that most of us struggle with stuff ourselves, and I also commend Claire Sugden for speaking out this morning about her own issues and for reminding others that they are not alone. We talk about how bad things are, but we should never forget that there is help out there and that people should seek it if they need it.

While advocates speak up every day to raise awareness of their mental health battles, their work is not being backed up by adequate financial investment from government. It is deeply concerning that, in a time of relative peace here in the North, the number of lives that are lost to suicide now exceeds the number that were lost during the Troubles. While we have moved away from the violent conflict of the past, many now face a silent crisis — a mental health epidemic that continues to claim lives. While the suicide statistics are shocking, they are the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the lives that are lost and destroyed due to poor mental health.

Fostering reconciliation and true peace is about more than the absence of conflict. It is about creating a society where people feel more resilient and can access help when they need it. It is completely unacceptable that, today, half of the children and adults who are in crisis are waiting longer than nine weeks to access mental health support.

The escalation both in the numbers and severity of illnesses has been heartbreaking to bear witness to. Those who are at the coalface are buckling under the weight of demand, and I place on record my gratitude for the invaluable work of organisations in my constituency and right across the North and beyond who are shining examples of the approach that we need to take to tackle the crisis head-on. I would start naming names, but I am fearful that omission might lead to offence.

Yet instead of expanding government funding to meet rising demand, we see some of those lifeline services shrink or disappear altogether. I recently raised the plight of Men's Action Network in my constituency. That double blow leaves vulnerable people without the support that they desperately need, pushing them further into crisis. Mr Middleton referred to the success of local charity Have Your Tomorrows, and I joined him at the opening of their brilliant new premises on Friday. That is a remarkable achievement, particularly so given that it achieved it without one penny of government support.

A key issue that has been touched on is the need for tailored services. One of the areas that I am concerned about — I have raised this before in the Chamber — is the lack of bespoke mental health services for individuals with autism. As we know from the devastating statistics, autistic adults are nine times more likely to die by suicide and autistic children are 20 times more likely to self-harm, yet we still have mental health professionals who are not trained in autism working with autistic people, which is potentially negligent.

There is no mention in the autism strategy of plans to support autistic adults with their mental health. I will no doubt return to that with the Minister to try to establish what autism-specific support we will see for people with autism and to see whether he will work to introduce mandatory autism training for all mental health practitioners. I do, however, accept that this is just one piece of an absolutely massive and complex puzzle.

Another vital element of this discussion is the co-occurring conditions of addiction and mental ill health and the need for a dual-diagnosis approach. Both conditions remain a harrowing feature in the lives of so many people here, and it is a cycle that can prove difficult to escape from, especially for those suffering socio-economic disadvantage. Those brave enough to seek support often find themselves passed from pillar to post in efforts to find meaningful and appropriate services and support.

The lack of clear targets, comprehensive data and transparency remains a significant barrier to effective care and accountability. It makes assessing needs, allocating resources and tracking progress extremely difficult. I commend, as others have done, the work of Participation and the Practice of Rights's New Script campaign, advocating for these improvements, which would ensure that services are effective and targeted. The amendment would, in our view, remove that accountability from the Executive. If the DUP agrees — it does — with making the prevention of poor mental health and suicide a priority across all Departments, why remove reference to the Programme for Government? Our concern is that, if the amendment passes — we hope that it does not — will we merely be paying lip service again, without any real intention to act, or will we be removing accountability for not acting?

Mr McGrath: Will the Member give way?

Mr Durkan: Certainly.

Mr McGrath: The Minister, in his contribution, talked about the importance of a mental health champion. It was his idea, and it was important that we have that independent voice. That independent voice was standing out in the Great Hall today saying that it was a priority that does not appear much in the Programme for Government. If we approve and agree with the amendment, we are removing something that the mental health champion is asking us for. What is the point of having the independent voice if you are not going to listen to it?

Mr Durkan: I thank the Member for his intervention. I certainly agree with his point.

It is crucial that we tackle the siloed approach. Collaborative work, involving Departments, the PSNI, the public and local organisations, is the only way to achieve meaningful results for people who are suffering. It is not all bad news. Progress has been made, and that has been referred to today. Like others, I am pleased to see the roll-out of perinatal mental health services across the region and the long overdue recognition of the importance of maternal mental health, helping to build healthier families and stronger communities. We must build on that model across the vast spectrum of mental health need.

A few Members spoke about early intervention, which is key. The earlier, the better. One example is the Healthy Happy Minds counselling programme for primary-school children, which Michelle Guy mentioned. It is a tragedy that the programme was cut with seemingly no hope of return. Teachers, parents and children alike felt the positive impact of the initiative. Mandatory mental well-being should be ingrained at an early age. The earlier we invest, the earlier we can empower children with the tools and skills that they need to become resilient adults. That will not only identify issues before they escalate and reduce future strain on the health system but will mean that people will live healthier lives, building the foundation for a healthier, more resilient society — the kind of prosperous and peaceful society that we dreamed of for the peace babies generation.

This issue is about so much more than investing in mental health services. It requires a whole-system approach, a system that does not force working families, or any families, to queue for food banks, where children have somewhere to call home and where people are not shifted from hotel to hostel to B&B, unable to put down roots. Building families and societies on such an unstable footing means that an entire generation has been left without the village that they need to raise their children and the support networks from which they can build their lives. Creating a bonded, thriving society requires shared responsibility in communities and collaboration across Departments. A refusal to enshrine improved mental health and suicide prevention in a new Programme for Government is a refusal by the Executive to take that responsibility.

Mr Durkan: I beg to move

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

Mr Durkan: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I start by putting on record my thanks and the SDLP's thanks for those community and voluntary sector services that provide vital support to all areas in our society, and many of the people from those sectors were present today in the Long Gallery. I particularly pay tribute to the teams behind the mental health services, who go above and beyond each and every day in our communities. Many of you will have met people from some of those teams today at the launch of the Mental Health Policy Alliance.

Northern Ireland is unlike many other places in Europe when it comes to the devastating and complex nature of mental health issues here. As Members said in the previous debate, our society is still recovering from decades of some of the most barbaric tragedies. It is little wonder that, in recent years, we have still recorded the highest number of people with PTSD in the world. The toll that that takes on our mental health services, not only currently, must not be underestimated.

In the absence of effective government delivery from Stormont, our voluntary and community sector has stepped into the breach, providing key services that have become core. However, the cut to core grant funding in 2023-24 had a devastating impact. It was a huge blow to those organisations, which are the first line of defence against poverty and inequality in communities. I cannot speak to that without mentioning the fact that the cut left Women's Aid NI as the only Women's Aid federation in the UK without state funding. That is unacceptable. We already see other vital community-based services having to close their doors: in the previous debate, I mentioned the Men's Action Network (MAN) in my constituency. We continue to see report after report about the health service calling for a "Prevention first" approach to health. If we are serious about that, we must also get serious about how we utilise and fund the vital services in the community and voluntary sector. From the care provided to young people suffering with their mental health to the support given to those in the later years of their life, the sector plays a vital role.

At the publication of the mental health strategy, the Minister stated that he wanted to:

If that is, indeed, the case, Minister Nesbitt must appreciate that the preventative approach will be possible and effective only if mental health services receive adequate funding. As the Health Minister's colleagues will, no doubt, articulate, that cannot be a job for Minister Nesbitt alone: the entire Executive must get serious about their approach to the sector. In the newly published draft Programme for Government, the community and voluntary sector is barely mentioned, and neither is mental health. I appreciate that stakeholders are involved in the development of the new core grant funding scheme, but that will come as cold comfort to those left behind in the here and now.

It would be remiss of me not to mention the elephant in the room regarding funding, namely the fact that this is the tenth year in a row that a single-year Budget has been agreed, despite the repeated calls and professed support from all parties across the Chamber and from those in the health and social care sector for multi-year Budgets. How can we expect our community and voluntary sector to thrive if we do not give it stable assurances in the form of multi-year funding? I am fully aware of the context in which the Budget was signed, after more than a decade of brutal Tory cuts and the long-term scarring caused by the underfunding of the health service relative to our huge level of need, but we will only add salt to the wounds if we do not reinstate the core grant funding to its previous level and evolve the way in which the community and voluntary sector is funded. The current funding scheme is clearly not fit for purpose, and it is right that it be reformed. I know that the Health Minister will take that forward.

The scheme's current failures risk souring beyond repair relationships between the community and voluntary sector and the Department of Health or government as a whole. I ask the Minister to do his best to rectify that and to ensure that no more damage is done, that no more trust is eroded and that all organisations in the community and voluntary sector are afforded equal opportunity to access funding.

It is also important for us all not to lose hope. There are examples of successful funding models that have adequately supported mental health services. For three years, the Department of Health ran a successful mental health support fund that brought together 80 charities and organisations that were tasked with supporting people in their mental health and well-being. Not only did that scheme encourage greater collaboration between mental health services but it granted them further funding, which allowed them to carry out their services and provide support to an ever-expanding audience. Unfortunately, that scheme, like so many others, was discontinued due to funding constraints. If we are to explore more schemes like the mental health support scheme, we must ensure that adequate funding is available to do so.

The community and voluntary sector can provide the key that we need to unlock the deadlock that our health service finds itself in. However, it is only through an adequate and stable source of core grant funding that that can take place. I call on the Minister today to reinstate that core grant funding as a matter of urgency. People everywhere and from all backgrounds appreciate the thankless work that the community and voluntary sector organisations undertake day in and day out. They are the best of our society. People know, understand and value their work, and it is time that the Executive did the same.

Mr Butler: I beg to move the following amendment:

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): You have 10 minutes to propose the amendment and five minutes to make a winding-up speech. All other Members who wish to speak will have five minutes.

Mr Butler: Before I go into the main thrust of what I want to say, I want to speak to the Opposition across the Chamber to let them know why it was so important that we got to propose what I would call a significant, technical amendment to the motion. It is incumbent on us all to recognise the pressures that the Department of Health specifically finds itself under, and I think that we have done that in previous months and since last year. You realise that when you see the number of motions on the matter that have come to the Chamber, how often the Health Minister is here and how often he is called on to deliver better health outcomes, but, in reality, if we do not have the budget to meet that need, there is little that he and the Department can do.

The voluntary and community sector is a key partner in the delivery of many of the core Health and Social Care (HSC) strategic aims. For instance, certain sectors, such as those for young people, mental health, vulnerable families and elderly care are greatly dependent on the work and commitment of the sector and its organisations. For many years, the Department of Health has provided financial assistance via a core grant scheme to help many local voluntary organisations meet some of their costs, which, in this instance, are their central administration costs. That was a very small investment when you look at the significant return that most, if not all, of those organisations made over time.

Of course, the historical and existing scheme is far from perfect, as it gives the same organisations the same money year after year whilst excluding others from even applying. Mr Durkan spoke about Men's Action Network, for instance, which would have been barred from even applying, given the conditions of the existing scheme. Those have led to the scheme no longer being as efficient or targeted as it should be. There is a fundamental unfairness in that. Until that is addressed and there is some recognition of the evolving nature of community and voluntary groups and the services that they offer, the scheme will remain unfair.

Again, pointing to some of Mr Durkan's comments, COVID has brought that into sharp focus. We learnt the value of our community and voluntary sector and the amount that they carry for us. It has been clear for some time that the scheme needs to be reformed. That is why my party and I very much welcomed the most recent consultation a number of years ago. I think that Robin Swann, as Minister, embarked on that. Unfortunately, however, instead of the process identifying the solutions, the application process and its eventual unsuccessful outcomes only heightened the uncertainty and frustration that many of the groups that will have contacted MLAs experience. Shortly after the previous attempt to rerun the scheme fell flat — in the absence of a functioning Assembly and in light of no agreed Budget and major funding challenges — the Department, in 2023-24, deemed it necessary to reduce the core grant funding by 50%. That was a hammer blow to the sector, which, we recognised, was both financial and psychological. Whilst there was then some hope following the restoration of the Executive, unfortunately the budgetary reality, along with the Assembly and the Executive's decision to pass a below-need Health budget, compounded the situation.

I recall that the removal of all core grant funding was one of the options set out by the Department in the response to the 2024-25 Budget, but, thankfully, no doubt with some internal challenge, the Minister worked to avoid such a scenario, and we can be somewhat grateful for that.

Even when the core grant scheme is fully funded at £3·6 million, it is still only a small fraction of the investment that is made by core-granted voluntary and community sector organisations. Whilst core-granted organisations alone may hold annual formal contracts to the tune of almost ten times the £3·6 million, there is no doubt that the sector provides value for money hand over fist in everything that it does. A pound invested in the community and voluntary sector often goes so much further than the same pound would do in the health and social care system.

Every day, I see the innovation as well as the efficiency on display in the sector, but it needs clarity. That is why, whilst I welcome the retention of some of the funding this year, in reality we need a new scheme. I very much hope that the conversations that are happening currently, including the one today in the Chamber and those across the sector, lead to a successful outcome for everyone. Let us be in no doubt, however, that, if the Health Minister had the money to deliver, he would deliver the asks of the Chamber. I ask the House to reflect on the fact that those conversations need to be had in conjunction particularly with the Minister of Finance and Executive colleagues.

Ms Kimmins: The community and voluntary sector is a crucial part of our health service. It delivers services that not only fill the gaps in service provision but are often a lifeline to the many people whom they support at the grassroots in all our communities. In my constituency of Newry and Armagh, we are lucky to have a community and voluntary sector that is extremely vibrant and plays a significant role in strengthening our communities and supporting some of the most vulnerable people in our society. It often does that on a shoestring budget, time after time demonstrating value for money and effectiveness in tackling the core issues that affect people's lives. Not only that, but the community and voluntary sector is extremely agile and, more often than not, can shape the services that it provides to meet the changing needs of the communities that it operates in. We saw that during COVID, and I see it every day on the ground in my constituency and across the North. That is particularly important in mental health provision, where statutory services are stretched beyond capacity and the community and voluntary sector has stepped in to deliver bespoke mental health services to meet the needs of the people in the area.

We have some of the most effective and impactful services, such as the Crisis Café and PIPS Hope and Support in Newry and The Well in the Mournes in South Down, which recognise the serious crises that are affecting the communities around them. They responded by developing bespoke services that, I have no doubt, have saved many lives since their inception. Just last Friday, I was delighted to attend the Crisis Café's open day in Newry. That service is led by young people to deliver mental health support to other young people. We heard the testimonies from some of the young people who had previously engaged with the Crisis Café's services when they were struggling with their mental health. Following the success of the support that they received, they are now helping to support others when they experience similar difficulties. To me, that shows the real value of our community and voluntary sector. We simply cannot afford to lose the professionalism, the expertise and the efficiency that the community and voluntary sector delivers, needless to say, often at low cost. It is not only changing the lives of thousands of people for the better but is undoubtedly saving our health service huge amounts of money in the meantime.

The cuts to the core grant funding programme have, once again, left the sector under intense pressure, and we all saw how detrimental that was when the European social fund ended last year. We run the huge risk of losing excellent services and, even more importantly, experienced and highly skilled staff who cannot be expected to continue living with the uncertainty that stop-start funding brings. In the grand scheme of things, this is a relatively small amount of money that goes a long way, and it is essential that it is protected; otherwise, the cost to society and to our health service will be much greater.

Ms Forsythe: The voluntary and community sector in Northern Ireland is delivering front-line health services to the public. It fills the gaps in need where public services, through the Department of Health and local trusts, do not reach. Without the sector, tens of thousands of people across Northern Ireland would have no mental health services at all. In my area, the sector includes great organisations such as Mourne Matters, the Regenerate project, the JIMS youth centre, MyMy and many more.

The huge problem that we face is that the Health Minister and Department of Health officials do not fully appreciate the scale of the healthcare services that the voluntary and community sector is providing. It is widely felt that the Health Minister and his officials do not fully appreciate and value the sector. As chair of the all-party group on voluntary and community sector, the main theme from the groups is that they do not feel valued.

At a recent Public Accounts Committee hearing, I asked Health officials how many people in Northern Ireland were receiving mental health services from the voluntary and community sector. They had no idea. In June, I asked the Health Minister how many healthcare patients in Northern Ireland were referred by his Department, the trusts and GPs directly to the voluntary and community sector for mental health services. He advised that that information was not available. I do not believe that he has an idea of the number, and we want to see him take steps to value the sector enough to find out. I know that the figure is tens of thousands. In my constituency, health workers panicked at the financial cliff edge last year, contacting me to say that they were referring thousands of people every month directly to voluntary and community sector groups such as Mencap, and that, without them, those patients would have nowhere to be referred to. No pathway for those services exists.

We want to see the role of the voluntary and community sector valued and extended, not diminished. The cut in core grant funding has meant that many service providers that support the health and social care system have been forced to divert resources from supporting people in order to cover running costs. In April this year, 51 community and voluntary groups wrote to the then Health Minister to appeal for reinstatement of the core health grant as it would keep them existing. Nothing was done. The core health grant was £3·6 million per year, and it was cut by Robin Swann to £1·8 million per year. We are calling for a reinstatement of only £1·8 million per year — small in the overall scheme of the Health budget.

We do not support the amendment because we do not accept that it is the Finance Minister's role to find extra money to take from other Departments for items in the Health budget. It is for the Health Minister to accept responsibility for the delivery of healthcare in Northern Ireland. He needs to recognise that for just another £1·8 million in the core health grant, the return on investment is huge. Reinstatement of that funding would keep in place and secure the many voluntary and community sector organisations and keep tens of thousands of people receiving services.

The Health Minister needs to take steps to quantify and appreciate the value and contribution of the sector. He needs to identify £1·8 million within his budget, which would be better used in this way. We still await transformation plans, and I ask whether the Minister has taken steps to review the health service for obvious inefficiencies. In a place like Northern Ireland, where we have five area-based health and social care trusts, I imagine that some steps could be taken to make simple efficiencies. Well over 100 directors on significant salaries, duplicating administrative tasks across Northern Ireland, comes to mind, and from practical examples of inefficiencies presented in my constituency office on a regular basis, I am sure that £1·8 million could be identified.

We support the motion to reinstate the funding for our much-valued voluntary and community sector organisations and the work that they do to deliver mental health services, but we do not support the amendment calling for the Finance Minister to respond rather than the Health Minister.

Mr Donnelly: I thank my SDLP colleagues for bringing the motion, and I reiterate the positive decision of the official Opposition to use their three Opposition day motions to focus on health, especially mental health.

As was highlighted in the previous debate, it is clear that community and voluntary sector organisations provide an invaluable resource through the provision of mental health services for the most vulnerable in Northern Ireland. That is particularly important here because, as was raised in the previous debate, we are continually dealing with the legacy of the Troubles and its impact of poor mental health. As I and other Members mentioned during the previous debate, it is concerning that more lives have been lost to suicide here since 1998 than were killed during the Troubles. Community and voluntary groups in Northern Ireland and their hard-working staff and volunteers deserve to be acknowledged, and it is right that we use this debate and others to do so. I know of many such groups in East Antrim, and I am sure that other MLAs will know groups in their areas that do fantastic work to support people in need.

The 50% reduction in core grant funding in 2023 was extremely damaging and led to staff redundancies, a reduction in services and some organisations no longer being able to operate at all. At the time, a Children in Northern Ireland survey of core-funded organisations showed that 62% were at risk of collapse if the grant scheme was not restored. It is important to remember that that decision was taken in the absence of Ministers, because there were no Ministers in 2023 as a consequence of the one-party veto over the operation of the Assembly and the Executive. It is worrying that that veto remains in place; it has been used by both the main parties and therefore could be used again. We need only look at the 2023 Budget and its devastating impact on core grant funding as evidence of why that cannot be allowed to happen again. As Mark mentioned, we need to move to multi-year budgets in the health service, but, first, we need to secure a multi-year Government. We also need to acknowledge that many brilliant community and voluntary organisations, whose hard work we all regularly see in our constituencies, have, in many respects, filled the gap left by an absence of political leadership and, in the case of the Department of Health, a failure to embrace necessary reform and transformation.

The loss of funding has reduced the likelihood of the Department's mental health strategy being implemented. For example, action 17 in the strategy requires the Department to:

How can that be actioned and implemented when the sector is struggling to survive?

That also calls into question the sustainability of our existing funding model. We cannot fully address that issue in the Assembly, but the new UK Government and the House of Commons must consider it. We all know that Northern Ireland is underfunded relative to need. The Fiscal Council estimated that that underfunding has been by £300 million to £400 million per year since 2022 versus what we would receive if an appropriate fiscal floor was in place. However, we cannot just turn to Westminster to solve our problems. In addition to the obvious need for institutional reform here, we need to reform how we approach our public finances and our health service, seeking to reduce the costs of division across every Department and reforming the mental health sector to prioritise early intervention and prevention. We need a collaborative approach between the Minister of Health and the Minister of Finance. Together, they should work to identify the necessary funding to ensure that valuable community and voluntary sector organisations can continue to provide those essential services.

Funding alone will not fix the issues facing the community and voluntary sector. Fundamental reform of our health and social care sector is necessary to ensure that our public services are equipped to deal with mental health crises and to deal with individuals in a caring and compassionate manner. As I have mentioned, organisations are fulfilling responsibilities that should be completed by the Department and local trusts, but, in some cases, they cannot do so due to the unprecedented pressures on our health service, specifically in relation to waiting lists. We cannot continue with the status quo. We must do what we can to support our community and voluntary sector and urgently reform how we deal with mental health services.

Mr Robinson: Like others, I commend the incredible work of the community and voluntary sector in providing vital mental health services to some of the most vulnerable members of our society. Those organisations are certainly the lifeblood of the place that we call home. They offer support and care and give hope to those who often feel lost or unheard. Members in every corner of the Assembly have witnessed the impact that those organisations have. Whether it is a small charity offering support to the elderly or helping vulnerable children, a group providing counselling services to people in crisis or a community group helping people manage anxiety, depression or trauma, those groups stand at the forefront of our mental health care and fill the gaps in our health service with compassion, dedication and expertise.

I stand not just to praise their work but to highlight that our community and voluntary sector faces an existential threat. The decision to cut community and voluntary sector organisations' core grant funding by 50% last year has placed many of them on the brink. It has led to staff being laid off and has forced those organisations to change the way in which they operate. The cut is not just a budget line but a lifeline that has been severed for countless individuals and families who depend on those services for their mental health and well-being. One children's charity called the decision to maintain the cut "short-sighted". Indeed, were the grant scheme to cease, it is predicted that 62% of those organisations would be at risk of collapse. Let us not forget that we are still recovering from the widespread mental health challenges that were exacerbated by the pandemic. Isolation, financial stress, grief and uncertainty have all taken a toll on our people. We are seeing the long-term effects of that crisis on mental health.

The demand for services is higher than ever. Imagine what is happening now that half the funding for those essential services has disappeared. The results are not good. Waiting lists are growing, nervous staff are being let go, and people who are in desperate need of support are being left to fend for themselves. The pressure on our already overburdened health system is being added to. The voluntary sector is often the first point of contact for individuals who may be hesitant about approaching formal health services. It provides a safe space for them to share their struggles and an access hub without stigma or barriers. The health service simply cannot fill the void that will be left by the cuts. In fact, we are setting ourselves up for an even bigger crisis. Without timely intervention, many individuals will end up in emergency departments or, worse, in tragic situations that could have been prevented with early support. We all know that prevention is better and more cost-effective than cure. Surely it is far cheaper to fund community services than it is to deal with the long-term consequences of untreated mental health issues. We often hear the phrase "penny wise and pound foolish" in here. The evidence is clear that, for every pound invested in mental health services, we save multiples of that in future costs to our health system, our economy and our society.

I agree with Children in Northern Ireland, the umbrella body for the children's sector, which has stated:

and:

The questions that we must ask are simple. The Department of Health's budget is well north of £7 billion, with £122 million having been added in the June monitoring round. Are we so far gone that we cannot afford £1·8 million to reinstate community and voluntary sector core grant funding?

I ask the Minister whether he has already submitted, or is going to submit, a bid to uplift that core grant funding. I look forward to his response and urge him to do everything in his power to reverse the cuts to core grant funding and to reinstate, please, the financial support that those vital organisations need in order to continue their good work.

Miss McAllister: I will speak in support of the motion and the amendment. I thank the Opposition for tabling the motion, and all today's motions, which are very important and will play a role in shaping how we discuss World Mental Health Day at our Committee meeting on 10 October.

I put on record our support for the sector, which, over the past few years — before, during and after COVID — has had to deal with its services being inundated. Every day, more and more people are turning to the community and voluntary sector for matters relating to their health because they know that the health service cannot support them. It is not that it does not wish to support them but that it simply does not have the capacity to do so.

I recognise the fact that the 50% cut in community and voluntary sector core grant funding is not matched by a 50% cut in the services that are needed. We would like to see services being funded at the level of need. Of course, I recognise the situation in which all Ministers find themselves, but I echo the point that has been made by many across the Chamber that, in the grand scheme of the Department of Health's budget, to ask for £1·8 million is not asking for the world.

I respect the fact that the Minister claims that mental health is a leading priority of his, so I genuinely want to hear feedback on a number of the points that I will raise in my speech.

There are so many groups across Northern Ireland that plug the gaps in the health service when it comes to mental health. The core grant funding was able to provide some level of sustainable service, but let us be perfectly clear that, before the cut of 50% to core funding, it was not perfect and there were services that struggled. I also highlight the fact that the funding for services that operated in the community and voluntary sector did so often under strict assistance, guidance and policy from the Department of Health. Many organisations that we speak to across our constituencies highlight the number of hoops that they must jump through and say that, too often, it is not a subjective approach to mental health provision when it comes to that support from the Department and all the trusts.

We all know that what may work for one individual does not necessarily work for all. That is why we must listen to the experts — those who carry out the service across Northern Ireland — on what can actually help individuals in need. Therefore, I have questions for the Minister. One of the mental health strategy's actions is to:

I would like to hear a little from the Minister on where we are with that action, particularly with regard to the delivery plan for 2024-25, in which the Department highlights that:

is ongoing. If we had implemented previous provisions in the mental health strategy, I would like to have seen us a bit further along. I look forward to hearing from the Minister on that aspect.

We have heard from many organisations that have been in touch both when the Assembly came back earlier in September and before that, when all parties got together to finally establish an Executive. My colleague pointed out the need for reform. Otherwise, the stop-and-go merry-go-round of politics will just further exacerbate the problems in the community and voluntary sector. Community Foundation NI has said that the mental health support fund benefited an estimated 150,000 people. Children in NI said that two thirds of the respondents to its review told it that they would have difficulties in sustaining their service levels with the funding cut in 2023-24. Given that the organisations are already providing feedback, I would also like to hear from the Minister about what his Department has done to evaluate the impact of the cut to core grant funding. I understand that it is a priority for the Minister, but my party would like to see actions even with regard to policy. We will support the amendment, because we believe that the Finance Minister also has a role to ensure that Health —

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

Miss McAllister: — is overseeing its efficiencies in the best way that it can in order to, perhaps, reinstate and use that £1·8 million of funding.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Members, all those who are listed to speak have done so. I now call the Minister of Health to respond to the debate. Minister, you have up to 15 minutes.

Mr Nesbitt (The Minister of Health): Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker.

For Members who put a premium on accuracy, let it go into the record that the decision to cut the core grant by 50% was taken not by Robin Swann but by the permanent secretary at the Department of Health. The reason that it was not taken by Robin Swann or a Member of the House is that the Democratic Unionist Party refused to practise devolution. I ask the Member for South Down to reflect on that. In doing so, she may also care to reflect on the fact that the biggest financial blow to the voluntary and community sector in recent years has been the loss of the European social fund; lost because of Brexit, a policy supported by her party.

Ms Forsythe claims that I do not understand or appreciate the community and voluntary sector. I did not hear a particularly robust evidence base for that claim, but I became closely involved with aspects of the community and voluntary sector as a commissioner at the Commission for Victims and Survivors, where the task was to be a champion for the most vulnerable: those who had suffered most during the 30 years in which we inflicted such terrible pain on one another. Dozens of community and voluntary sector groups are involved in supporting victims and survivors. By and large, they emerged because somebody saw a loved one, a neighbour or a friend get hurt and tried to help. Their doing so resulted in other people saying to them, "Well, you're helping your cousin", or, "You're helping your neighbour" and, "I have a cousin who was hurt", or, "I have a neighbour who was hurt. Can you help them too?". Suddenly, they were in charge of a voluntary and community group looking after victims and survivors. Suddenly, they became chief executives, human resource managers or financial directors, and, because they never started out to become such, they needed help. That, to a large extent, was the genesis of the core grant scheme. As the mover of the motion said, they are among the very best of our society.

As a commissioner, I became very aware of the impact of cuts and changes to budgets; the impact of a single-year budget; and, in particular, the impact of constant delays in confirming state funding. If, for example, a group thought of a new service for its service users, it would advertise for an expert to deliver that service. That expert would get a one-year contract, and, after six or nine months, they would ask, "Is my contract being renewed?". The answer was, "Well, we're waiting to hear from government". In the meantime, that person would see a safe, permanent job in the statutory sector, and off they would go, leaving the service users in a worse position than the one in which they had begun. In the game of snakes and ladders, they had gone up a lovely ladder to a better place but had then hit a snake and gone back down again, so they knew that there was better to be had.

I believe that I understand and appreciate the work of the community and voluntary sector. My Department has supported and relied on the sector for many years. In some cases, the sector provides services under contract to Health and Social Care (HSC) bodies, including the trusts. The Department of Health has also supported the sector through the core grant scheme. That system is intended to be an enabler by covering core organisational costs. It is not intended to cover the full cost of service delivery; rather, it makes it possible for organisations to function and, potentially, to bid for other funding. I have had it described to me as a lever or a way to demonstrate to other funders that the organisation is worth investing in because we, as a devolved Government, believe in it and back it financially. It is important to the organisations that receive it, to the Department of Health and to government in the round that we continue the core grant.

While I recognise the valuable role that the sector has to play and the importance of investing in it, all Members will be aware of the funding position that the Department of Health found itself in last year and again this year. I am nearly deafened by the irony klaxon coming from my right in particular. The budget position has made it necessary to take incredibly difficult funding decisions and choose between the things that need to be funded to save life and limb and the things that we would like to fund. Having to choose between funding critical statutory services and supporting the voluntary and community sector because it is a good, productive and proper thing to do is a very unpleasant place in which to find yourself.

The sector faces an incredibly challenging financial landscape at the minute, but, let us be honest, so do all Departments. We all know what has been going on. Permanent secretaries and senior leadership teams have been looking at everything that their Department does that costs money and putting those actions into one of two columns: statutory responsibility and non-statutory. If you are in the second column, you are struggling.

Mrs Dillon: I thank the Minister for giving way. I understand the financial position that he is in. Minister, do you accept that some of the preventative work would be much more cost-effective and would, hopefully, result in people not ending up in hospital or needing greater psychiatric input, which would provide a saving to us? I wonder whether we can look more at that approach.

Mr Nesbitt: I thank the Member for her intervention. Many times a week, if not daily, I am given a presentation that says, "If you invest in preventative measures or put some money into transformation here, that relatively small amount of money will release a comparatively large amount of money down the line". Where is that transformational money to come from? It does not exist, and the Members who voted for the Budget must take their element of responsibility for that. I say this to the Member: yes, one thing that I want to do is move from care in hospitals to care in the community. That would be a cost-effective way of doing business. I also want to move from a health service that is primarily about curing the sick to one that keeps the healthy healthy. If we can find the funds for those transformative issues, we will release money at the other end or, as they say, on the right-hand side.

Despite the financial challenges, I decided in July to maintain my Department's core grant scheme in 2024-25. Much as I would have liked to restore the full grant, that was simply not possible in the circumstances. I understand that Members will say, "But look at your budget of £7·9 billion. How can you not find another £1·8 million?". That is a measure of how constrained the budget is. Yes, I am looking for efficiencies. For example, I have sat down with the trust chairs, and we have had some uncomfortable conversations about the need to be more productive and efficient, but will that yield significant financial savings in the rest of the financial year? It is very unlikely.

There could have been an outcome whereby, in order to ease the huge financial pressures that to this day weigh down my Department, nothing at all was invested in the core grant scheme, but, to me, that was unacceptable. I was clear that, despite the difficulties that it created elsewhere, I wanted to maintain at least the same level of funding as last year. I hope that that has made a positive contribution towards the financial sustainability of the 61 organisations in receipt of the grant. While I was able to reinstate it in part, I was able to protect the investment in the front-line services that the sector provides.

It is important to note that the majority of organisations in receipt of core grant funding also hold service delivery contracts. Those are with my Department's arm's-length bodies. Core grant funding is not their only source of HSC income. Indeed, in the financial year 2023-24, 52 of the 61 recipients held service delivery contracts, and the total value of those contracts was £53 million. I am fully committed to supporting the sector financially going forward, but that commitment will take me only so far. I need a budget allocation that permits me to do so, and I welcome my party colleagues' amendment. The reality is that the budget for the past two years has fallen significantly short.

Miss McAllister: I thank the Minister for giving way. I want to go back to his comments about core grant funding being only one aspect of funding. I touched on that point, particularly where service delivery contracts are concerned. Will the Minister commit to looking at that specific element of the bureaucracy in what I mentioned? It is often described as "jumping through the hoops" of various organisations, with the Department trying to use a one-size-fits-all approach, rather than those organisations being able to prescribe what is best for the individual patient's needs.

Mr Nesbitt: I thank the Member for her intervention. It speaks to a belief that I have formed rather quickly in my time as Minister of Health, which is that, as a generalisation, we have grossly overcomplicated healthcare delivery. That goes right across health and social care. Asking people to jump through hoops because we have a process and leaving a community and voluntary group believing that the process is more important than meeting its needs is something that we need to be aware of. Being aware of it, we need to address it. Even if it is a perception, it is potentially debilitating.

In the time remaining, I want to address another aspect of the issue. In addition to inheriting a grant scheme that is extremely challenging in financial terms, I have inherited a scheme that I consider to be inherently unfair. The scheme has been mostly closed for the best part of two decades, with no route for an unfunded organisation to access financial support. Through no fault of their own, the same organisations — there are around 60 of them, as has been said — have been receiving core grant funding in all that time. Attempts were made to redesign the scheme between 2015 and 2017 and, again, as recently as 2022, but we kept coming back to the old closed scheme. The latest attempt, in 2022, failed because of design flaws, which my Department now accepts were its responsibility.

Do not get me wrong: the organisations currently supported under the current scheme work with and alongside some of the most vulnerable children and adults in Northern Ireland. To offer a few examples: current recipients provide treatment and support services to people with drug and alcohol addictions, children who are in the care system, older people, victims of domestic and sexual abuse, adults and children with disabilities and those living with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions.

The scheme needs to change. In 2010, the Northern Ireland Council for Voluntary Action (NICVA) and Chief Officers Third Sector (CO3) indicated that it was no longer fit for purpose. Furthermore, the Department of Health is operating in a much-different policy and strategy environment and the sector itself has evolved and continues to do so. To signal my commitment, I have asked NICVA to facilitate a co-design process through which my officials are working with representatives from the sector to redesign the core grant scheme, and, hopefully, that will be for implementation at the beginning of the next financial year. Again, I must add, that is budget permitting.

I am running out of time, so I just want to say that I have had a brief on how discussions are going between the Department and NICVA and NICVA's member organisations. Without going into fine detail, I will say that some of the discussions and conclusions have been very surprising. Some of the groups are proposing a way forward that would not have been our first guess, if I may put it that way. That affirms the value of undertaking the review of the core grant scheme to try to do something better and, importantly to me, to make sure that it is opened up. Over the past 20 years, obviously, the landscape of community and voluntary sector groups has changed in some ways rather significantly, and it is not fair that some groups have access and others do not. I look forward to the fruits of that consultation and the advice that NICVA finally brings to me.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Thank you, Minister, for that response. I call Steve Aiken to make a winding-up speech on the amendment. Mr Aiken, you have up to five minutes.

Dr Aiken: Thank you very much. I thank all the Members for the mostly good-natured tone of the debate.

As the Minister said very clearly, the main issue that we have to deal with is the irony klaxon. The Minister and the Department of Health made these decisions only in the worst possible cases. The cut was made not by the Minister but by the permanent secretary when the Assembly was not sitting.

Let us just focus on that for a second. Here we are, an Assembly debating. Nobody here thinks that the community and voluntary sector does not do a good job or that it does not add significantly to what we do for health outcomes across Northern Ireland. It is a vital part of what we are trying to achieve. Nobody here, I believe, does not consider the fact that we need to look at other members of the voluntary and community sector and not just at the ones that have previously been in that sector. We need to look at what is the best value and the best approach for us to be able to do that, but we cannot do it without the necessary funding. That is why we tabled our amendment.

This issue is about funding, and our party took the decision not to support the Budget because the funding is not there for Health. Some Members spoke eloquently and some did not, but some of those who spoke eloquently talked about, in the overall size and context of the Health budget, the small amounts of money that should be available to be able to do that. Other Members will be aware that we have similar situations with policing, Infrastructure and Education. Every single penny has to be scrutinised and looked at effectively. Finding extra funds is not just a matter of pulling them out from wherever they are, and that is why we tabled our amendment. We are calling on the Finance Minister to make sure that, when additional funds come through, they do indeed come to Health.

Mr Butler: I thank the Member for giving way. I do not know whether he has been in the Chamber when the Education Minister has, on multiple occasions, been challenged on the transformation needed for special educational needs. Every response that he has given has been, "Give me the money, and I will make the changes". Does it not seem hypocritical that the DUP seems to be talking out of one side of its mouth on Education and out of the other on Health?

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

Dr Aiken: I thank the Member for his intervention. Much as I feel quite happy to talk about the Education Minister and some of the other issues with the DUP, we have had similar issues on Infrastructure, Justice and Economy, and we go on and on. The reality is that the funding is not there, and funding must be put there correctly and be appropriated for Health. Many of us sat around the table at Hillsborough Castle less than a year ago, and every party that is now in the Executive agreed that Health was the number-one priority.

Mr O'Toole: I thank the Member for giving way. Does he agree with me, as a fellow member of the Finance Committee over some years, that one of the things that we were expecting was a Budget sustainability plan? I believe that that should have been published by today. We do not have it. It would be helpful because it would allow other Ministers to understand the basis on which the Finance Minister is making her plans.

Dr Aiken: I fully agree. It is a pity that other members of the Finance Committee are not here, although we do indeed have the Deputy Chair of the Finance Committee here. Where is the sustainability plan? It was supposed to be here by the end of the month. I believe that the month finishes at 23.59 tonight, and we have not seen a sustainability plan, so I am not quite sure where that is going. I welcome the Member's comments.

The most important thing that we need to appreciate — this is why I encourage all Members to support the amendment — is that finance has to be found. Finance has to be found for our number-one priority, which is Health. I do not believe that anybody disagrees that the community and voluntary sector needs more resources, but we can only allocate those when we have them. Unless we are given an adequate funding mechanism and support, we are not going to be able to do that. I ask all Members to support our amendment.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Patsy McGlone will wind up and conclude the debate on the motion. Mr McGlone, you have up to 10 minutes.

Mr McGlone: Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

As I listened to the debate, I was reminded of some of the meetings that many of us attend where somebody says, usually from the back of the room, "Somebody would need to do something about that". [Laughter.]

You know what that means; it means "somebody", but not them. Listening to the debate, I have heard everybody laud and praise the community and voluntary sector, everyone has talked about the valuable role that it plays, and everyone has talked about how important it is in dealing with people's mental health and being there as a support. Of course, it is. The level of priority and commitment given to mental health and of funding for the community and voluntary sector in the Programme for Government tells me that it was a case of, "Somebody had better do something about that".

I will move my way through Members' comments. My colleague Mark Durkan, who proposed the motion, referred to the importance of the core grant. There were numerous references in the debate to the legacy of the conflict and the Troubles in our society and to the fact that people are still living with PTSD. Many other services are required in the community. In an earlier debate, we mentioned suicide prevention and what can be done on that. The Minister mentioned many core services such as those for elderly people and to tackle isolation. The list of services is endless. The gap has been filled in many instances by community and voluntary services. There was reference to the fact that schemes have been discontinued, and it is important that those are reinstated. Multiple references were made to the year-on-year funding, which means that there is no certainty and that — indeed, the Minister referred to this — people's employment is not secure, despite the fact that they provide vital services. People therefore leave those jobs and move on to other jobs that, in many instances, are in the statutory sector.

Robbie Butler referred to the financial pressures and budgets. He referred to, again, the community and voluntary sector. Liz Kimmins referred to her constituency and South Down, the voluntary sector and its important role in working with the most vulnerable in society. Diane Forsythe referred to issues with the Department and was somewhat critical of the Minister and his Department. However, that criticism was later rebutted very well by the Minister. The information that she referred to — she asked how many referrals were made to the sector — and which was not available would perhaps be useful and, indeed, helpful to the Department in its quest for reinstatement of the core funding.

Danny Donnelly referred to, again, the importance of the legacy of the Troubles, suicide rates, the 50% cut in funding, the gap that was left by the absence of political leadership and the need for institutional reform. Alan Robinson commended the work of the community and voluntary sector and the lifeline that it provides in many of our communities, including, indeed, rural communities where there is isolation as well as financial stress. We are all well aware of the problems that are faced by the people who come to our offices and the inordinate pressures that they live under.

Nuala McAllister spoke about support for the sector, the 50% cut and the fact that £1·8 million is not a lot to ask for. As a member of the Opposition, I will again say that £1·8 million is not a lot to ask for. I go back to the idea of, "Somebody would need to do something about that", and suggest that that be referred back to your Executive colleagues, given the need for someone to do something about it.

Mr McGrath: Will the Member give way?

Mr McGlone: Yes, sure.

Mr McGrath: It is obvious from the debate that a number of the Executive parties are on different pages on this. Does that not underscore the benefit of having some sort of plan that they could all get behind, like a Programme for Government, which all four parties just voted against, including in the vote on the previous motion? At least that would give the clarity and, hopefully, the funding that the various sectors need.

Mr McGlone: Indeed, especially if £1·8 million is not a lot. One would presume that a Programme for Government by the Executive parties could come up with that, given the inordinate pressures, needs and requirements in society and how important the community and voluntary sector is in the community. Again, it goes back to the Executive.

Over to the Minister. The Minister referred to the decision to cut the grant and was very specific about the fact that the permanent secretary did that at the time because the DUP was not participating in devolution. He also referred to the loss of the European social fund. Minister, I will happily give way to you if you can provide us with some further information on the quantity of the European social fund that was lost through that perturbed period and stupid vote. Do you have that detail?

Mr Nesbitt: I do not have that detail to hand. What is very clear, however, is that any promises from the UK Government that they would make up that shortfall were not delivered on to any significant degree, and the community and voluntary sector suffers as a consequence.

Mr McGlone: Indeed. Perhaps the Prime Minister from that time, who is on the very lucrative speaker circuit, could make up the shortfall out of his own pocket. I say that with tongue in cheek.

Minister, you referred to your role as a victims' commissioner, where you saw the issues at first hand. You recognised the valuable role that the core grant scheme played, the choices that the statutory services made and the funding provided to the community and voluntary sector. It is now a very difficult place to be in.

Minister, I will highlight your reference to the fact that potential exists through making a transition from care in hospitals to care in communities. In my experience, you have a long hard road ahead of you there. I represent a rural area where domiciliary care workers and care in the community are unavailable until some poor cratur dies and a slot becomes available for the next person on the list. All that I will say to you, Minister, is that it is perhaps not one to hang your hat on.

Incidentally, we are supporting the amendment. Given the consensus in the Chamber today, all parties represented on the Executive can hopefully make a case to the Minister of Finance to come up with the £1·8 million.

Mr Butler: Will the Member give way?

Mr McGlone: Yes.

Mr Butler: I thank the Member for saying that he will support our amendment. It is right to get into the technicalities. The Department of Health is still facing pressures of around £200 million, however. Although £1·8 million may not sound like a lot, if you are already £200 million in the red, it does not matter if you are looking for another pound, another £1·8 million or another £18 million, because you still need more money.

Mr McGlone: I was referring specifically to the motion that we are debating today, but I take the Member's point.

The Minister referred to the care system for older people, some of whom have life-threatening diseases or conditions, and the need for them to get the care that they require. We are debating today the loss of community and voluntary sector funding, and I have no problem supporting the amendment and making the case for it. I emphasise a really important thing that we all know in the Chamber, which is that the community and voluntary sector plays a vital role for people. It is actually life-saving.

On that note, we will support the Ulster Unionist amendment, and I ask that Members support our motion, please.

Some Members: Hear, hear.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Blair): Members, take your ease for a moment or two while we change the top Table.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Members, take your ease for a moment while we track down the Minister.

Mr McNulty: I beg to move

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): The Business Committee has agreed to allow one hour for the debate. The proposer of the motion will have five minutes to propose and five minutes to make a winding-up speech. All other Members will have three minutes.

Mr McNulty: At the outset, it is important to establish a critical fact: the North of Ireland is in the grip of a mental health crisis. Mental illness is indiscriminate, and it is influenced by so many factors, from access to housing and high levels of poverty and inequality to logjams in our education system, the trauma of our history and the challenges of our environment. People from every walk of life are struggling on so many fronts, and, sadly, that includes children and young people. The immense challenges of dealing with our mental health crisis are well documented. The cross-cutting and indiscriminate nature of mental ill health is well known. What we need in response to that crisis is a collaborative and joined-up focus on health and well-being, rather than siloed solutions that tackle the symptoms but ignore the cause.

In tackling the cause, nothing is more pressing than supporting the well-being of our children and young people in their formative years. So many Departments have a key role to play in upholding the mental health of our children and young people, most obviously Health and Education, which are on the front line of the issue, but it is equally important that the Communities, Infrastructure, Finance, Economy and Justice Departments engage in finding solutions to the underlying problems that contribute to mental ill health among our young people. Tragically, meaningful action on improving the mental well-being of our young people is being blocked by a dysfunctional Executive who would rather engage in sham fights and petty posturing than work together to address shared problems.

We have the tools to support a collaborative approach to the delivery of children's services, having previously passed ambitious legislation that created a duty to cooperate in the delivery of children's services. Rather than that legislation being used to its full potential, there has been little more than lip service and lacklustre implementation. It is true that Departments are impeded by financial constraints, but that does not explain why we are not using existing powers to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of services and improve outcomes.

The Programme for Government states:

We do not see much evidence of bravery, collaboration or focus on innovation and efficiency. Frighteningly, there is no mention of children's mental health in the Programme for Government. I will say that again: there is no mention of children and young people's mental health in the Programme for Government. Stakeholders working on the front line say that cooperation in the delivery of services for children remains the exception rather than the rule and that there is a minimal and piecemeal approach to the pooling of resources.

The SDLP's motion simply asks the Minister of Finance to use the powers of the Children's Services Co-operation Act (CSCA) to set up the appropriate mechanisms to make cooperation and collaboration across Departments easier and more effective in delivering effective action on children's mental health. We are asking for public money to be used more effectively in the pursuit of better outcomes. That simple step could make a significant contribution to improving the delivery of special educational needs provision, supporting a government-wide approach to eliminating child poverty and creating a better functioning children's social care system.

I fully anticipate financial constraints being invoked as a reason for the Executive's shortcoming. We all know that we need more money — that is no secret — but it is equally true that we already have powers at our disposal to tackle the issues head-on. We must use those powers to make things work for the better here and now. Nothing could be more important than safeguarding our children and young people, and the Executive must act accordingly. Financial constraints are not an excuse, and failure can no longer be the default outcome for the Executive. Children and young people deserve better. Children and young people need the Executive parties in the Government to do better.

Mrs Dillon: I thank the Member who tabled the motion. We can all agree that the mental health of our children and young people is an issue that many of us — all of us, I am fairly certain — are deeply concerned about. The mental health challenges faced by children in the North are not isolated in one Department, and that is clear. They cut across every aspect of government policy, as the motion recognises. Addressing the mental health crisis among our young people requires more than words; it requires coordinated cross-departmental action.

Mental health is not an issue that begins and ends with the Department of Health: it intersects with education, housing, justice and communities. It impacts on children in their schools, homes and communities. Without proper cross-departmental cooperation, our approach to children's mental health becomes fragmented and ineffective and, ultimately, fails to meet the needs of those who are most vulnerable.

Departments working in silos create gaps in care and coordination that directly impact on children's mental health. A joined-up approach is not a "nice to have" but a necessity. We need Departments to pool their resources, share funding and hold joint accountability for delivering children's services. We need to ensure that children's mental health is given the priority that it deserves. We can do that, whether it is in the Programme for Government or not. Today, we have agreement across the Chamber that it is a priority, and we cannot ignore that. We cannot afford to waste any more time working in isolation. It is a collective responsibility, and all arms of government must engage in delivering solutions.

Whilst we emphasise the need for cross-departmental cooperation, we need someone to take the lead. We must acknowledge that the Department of Health has a central role in addressing the crisis. The Ray Jones report provided a comprehensive review of children's services, highlighting serious deficiencies in how vulnerable children are supported. That report cannot be ignored. It outlines the failings and offers key recommendations, and we need to see a plan taken forward to implement the recommendations. We must look to the Minister of Health to take the lead on that. He cannot do it alone, but we need someone to take the lead and show leadership on the issue. We need to hear from him, particularly at the Committee where, last week, some members spoke about children's services and children's mental health, saying that we need to see the implementation of Ray Jones's recommendations.

Now is the time for concrete action. Children and young people —

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Will the Member draw her remarks to a close?

Mrs Dillon: — of the North deserve better, and they deserve to know what their Government will do for their well-being. Collectively, we need to move forward, and that does not mean just those in the Executive: every one of us in the House has a responsibility.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): I ask Members to keep their remarks to three minutes, please.

Ms Forsythe: I thank the Opposition for highlighting children's mental health in the motion.

Sitting with a family in tears over the lack of services available for a child who is facing a mental health crisis is, sadly, not unusual. There can be no doubt that children's social services in Northern Ireland face unprecedented pressures. That has a residual impact on the mental health of children who are in care or are regarded as being in need. The impact of the pandemic cannot be overstated: the number of children in care at the end of October 2023 was 17% higher than the last official figure prior to COVID.

The breakdown of children's services has also massively impacted on the mental health and well-being of many parents and carers. Unacceptable wait times for assessment, barriers to accessing services and, in particular, a lack of respite services have placed huge strains on many families. We want to see the Health Minister urgently set out his stall in response to the wide-ranging recommendations on structures, staffing and oversight of children's services included in the independent review report published last year.

Departments should, of course, work together. I recognise the Children's Services Co-operation Act and the lack of its uptake in practice. However, I agree with the previous Member, who said that the Health Minister should take the lead on cooperation with other Departments. We need to see a removal of the silo-working mentality between Departments, health trusts and local health services. Of course, the Health Minister may access and apply the Children's Services Co-operation Act in doing so. We fully support the aim of investigating an effective model of cross-departmental cooperation on children's services.

It is great to see the Finance Minister here, and I look forward to hearing her assessment of the lack of use of the Children's Services Co-operation Act, but, as we move forward, the key priority will be to address children's mental health. It is for the Health Minister to take urgent steps to lead that forward in order to address the crisis of the real devastation that many families here find themselves in.

Miss McAllister: I thank the Opposition for tabling the motion and welcome the opportunity to speak on it.

Children's services are a priority for me as a member of the Health Committee. Since joining the Committee, I, along with my Alliance colleagues, have pushed for the issue to be a priority for the entire Committee. I am delighted that the entire Committee is on board. Of course, children's mental health is a priority in that work.

I welcome the motion's particular reference to using the powers of the Children's Services Co-operation Act. The Committee has looked in detail at that and particularly at the implementation of the Ray Jones review. There are other issues to highlight, however. In particular, I want to speak about my role and that of the all-party group on mental health and the inquiry into mental health education and early intervention. It was quite a lengthy inquiry, and it took place in the absence of an Assembly, so it was important that organisations had an opportunity to give evidence and have their voice heard in the absence of Committees. We heard not only from different sectors, including teachers, teaching unions, the teaching colleges and, of course, the community and voluntary sector, but about best practice across the UK, including in Scotland and Wales. We can learn from that. I recognise that the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Health will lean on finance issues, but a lot of policy recommendations on children's mental health can be implemented.

I want to touch on the disaster that is the child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS) waiting list. That is not because of one particular individual; we all have people coming to our constituency office every week who need help. They need access to referral and services. I do not know about the other MLAs in the Chamber, but we do not refer those people to CAMHS. We do not refer them to that service, because we know that they simply will not be able to get it. Instead, we rely on the community and voluntary sector to offer that service to children and young people. Organisations in my constituency include PIPS and Lighthouse. Lighthouse in particular does amazing work with the schools in North Belfast to ensure that we tackle mental health issues, particularly among young men. PIPS has talked us through its services and highlighted how it works with children as young as four when it comes to mental health crises. That is a sad indictment of us as a society.

When it comes to the overall aspect of children's services, it is up to the Health Minister to take the lead. We want to hear from him. Perhaps, when the Finance Minister looks at the motion and takes it to the Executive, she can ask the Health Minister, as we have done in the Health Committee, what he will actually do about the implementation of Ray Jones's recommendations. Will he support the recommendation for an arm's-length body and a Minister for children to encompass all the work and bring all Departments together, rather than doing so just through the use of the Children's Services Co-operation Act?

Mr Crawford: Every opportunity to talk about mental health is welcome. That is especially the case today when we are considering the importance of good mental health among our children and young people. Mental health and well-being more generally is much better recognised and understood today than it was only a few years ago. As with many aspects of care, mental health and its impacts weigh heavily across many Departments. That is why it is so important that cross-departmental working is referenced in the motion.

Poor mental health can grip lives, test even the strongest of family relationships and destabilise and disrupt a young person's education, as well as being a major strain on our economic firepower. Indeed, on the latter point, the estimated cost of mental health in Northern Ireland is £3·4 billion. Mental health impacts young and old and everyone in between; it reaches across the full lifespan. As with so many issues, the earlier the problems are identified, the better the outcomes are for everyone, and it is better still if the problems are avoided. There is a mountain of evidence that supports the consideration of early intervention and preventative measures. That is why, when reading the 10-year mental health strategy, I very much welcome the clear focus on promoting the positive mental health of children and their families.

Whilst I am sure that we would all like to see the strategy receive the funding that it deserves, as well as the funding that was pledged by all political parties, it is important that we make sure that we use every penny in the best possible way. Nevertheless, the strategy is explicit in including such outcomes as better resilience among children and young people; helping people to cope with mental wellness and, therefore, preventing mental ill health; and all children and young people receiving the care and treatment that they need, when they need it.

Another important outcome in the context of children's mental health is the commitment to deliver a longer-term improvement in CAMHS. Thankfully, some good progress has been made through the allocation of additional funding to assist with increasing capacity and enhancing the current provision. Of course, the Ulster Unionist Party is fully supportive of the necessity to increase CAMHS funding to 10% of adult mental health funding.

As I said at the start, huge progress has been made in recent years, and those discussions are much more common than they were, but, of course, there is much more to be done.

Mrs Dodds: I welcome the Opposition's focus on mental health today. It has been useful, and the tone has been right. I hope that some of those involved in this sphere will take heart from the fact that we have spent the day talking about this important issue.

The motion refers to mental health and children and young people's mental health. I will quote the statistic that I quoted earlier: in the Northern Ireland life and times survey 2023, only 50% — only half — of those aged 18 to 24 who were surveyed reported positively about their mental health. That is a very sad statistic about young people in Northern Ireland. Many of those young people are found to have profound levels of anxiety. That is a difficult issue as well.

We are focused here on the Children's Services Co-operation Act (Northern Ireland) 2015. Since I came to the Assembly I have heard over and over again about collaboration and no working in silos. Folks, the honest answer is that people out there do not really care about any of that: they want action and their problems solved. That is the most important thing that we can focus on today.

We should look at cooperation between Education, Economy, Health and Communities to resolve the issue of a legal entitlement to education for young people with special needs up to the age of 25 in order to bring us in line with the rest of the United Kingdom. We should work with the voluntary and community sector to ensure that there are pathways for those young people.

In closing, I want to focus on arm's-length bodies and trusts because they cannot be absolved from this. We all watched the programme last week where mothers shared their really difficult journeys with young people in their homes and the lack of respite services. Lo and behold, in my office on Friday, we had another mother sitting in front of me. She said that she moved five minutes down the road, out of her health trust area, into another health and care trust that had no services. The first thing that happened was that her original trust pulled her respite services immediately. We have families at breaking point in Northern Ireland, and it is just not good enough for trusts to offer such a widely unequal variety of services for our children and young people.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): I ask the Member to draw her remarks to a close.

Mrs Dodds: I would like to see the focus put on the trusts as well as Departments.

Ms Mulholland: I thank the proposer of the motion. I welcome the opportunity to speak on the matter.

For me, it is unsurprising that, when we talk about mental health, we also have to talk about poverty. It plays a significant role in exacerbating the mental health challenges that we have discussed today. Around one in four children in Northern Ireland live in poverty, and those children are far more likely to experience anxiety, depression and other mental health issues. A recent survey found that children from low-income families are nearly twice as likely to suffer from those conditions than their more affluent peers, yet many families in those situations find mental health services completely inaccessible, perhaps because of physical transportation barriers. Another key point is the lack of ability to pay for further services once the initial health service provision period has ended. Unfortunately, that usually coincides with the young patient only starting to get to the crux of the issues that they face. We need to address the root causes of poverty, and that falls to other Departments. I believe that it was the Member for West Belfast, Ms Flynn, who mentioned in the earlier debate that different Departments all had a part to play, not just a single Department.

I want to focus on something that I have been really passionate about raising since I became an MLA, which is the Children's Services Co-operation Act. It really has the power to enable public authorities to share resources, pool funds and collaborate across their silos, but, thus far, we have failed to leverage the legislative framework to its fullest potential. It is nearly a decade since the Act was passed, and our services have remained fragmented, with many Departments not taking full advantage of the Act's provisions.

The recent Department of Education report on the Act was delayed by two years because of governmental disjointedness and there not being a Government here. That underscores the consequences of the failure. While there are occasional instances of great cooperation, like the Thrive project, which is coordinated by Barnardo's, they are far too rare. The reality is that Departments are not adequately aligning their resources or efforts.

The Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People (NICCY) and the Children's Law Centre have repeatedly voiced their concerns about a lack of meaningful progress in implementing the CSCA. We need a rights-based approach with the full incorporation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child into all areas of domestic law. That is something that Alliance has called for on multiple occasions. With those standards in place, young people will be more than just subjects; they will become co-designers of their communities and their services. Never has the phrase "Nothing about us without us" been more pertinent than when we discuss services for young people. The time for action is now, and I agree with the call on the Finance Minister to introduce the necessary regulations under the CSCA.

Mr Frew: I never fail to be amazed by the zombie-like collective memory loss about the part that the parties here played in the escalation of our mental health crisis through the deployment of fear and the lockdown philosophy. It amazes me that that has not been raised in any of today's debates. To prove my point, I will place on record the school attendance statistics. In 2017-18, 16·9% of children missed 10% or more of school. In 2018-19, that figure was 15·8%. However, in 2021-22, 35% of children missed over 10% of school. In 2017-18, 4% of children missed 20% or more of school. In 2018-19, that figure was still 4%. However, in 2021-22, it was 10·7%, and, in 2022-23, it was 8·7%. If you drill down into those figures, you see that it is even worse. In 2021-22, 4,145 pupils did not attend school for over 50% of the time. Of those, 1,280 missed over 80% of school. However, in 2017-18, 1,731 children missed 50% of school, and only 523 missed 80% of school. The deployment of fear and the lockdown philosophy doubled every one of those statistics.

These are children. I would like to know how we are going to fix the mistakes of the Department of Health and the zombie Assembly. Unless we know the root cause of the problems, we are not going to solve anything. That will start with each Member looking in the mirror and at the part that they played in the deployment of fear, which scared our children. I am not saying that those stats are all down to mental health, but you can see the clear correlation.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Will the Member draw his remarks to a close?

Mr Frew: Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Thank you, Paul.

Members, I am very conscious that many Members had more to say. I encourage Members to go to their parties and the Business Committee and look at the timings for the debate. However, these are the timings that we were given by the Business Committee. I understand that many Members wished to say more, but my hands are constrained.

Minister, over to you. You have 10 minutes in which to speak.

Dr Archibald (The Minister of Finance): Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this important topic. The mental health and well-being of children and young people should be a priority for us all. As has been reflected, it is an issue that we all deal with in our constituency offices on too regular a basis.

Statistics show that the rates of anxiety and depression in the child and youth population are higher here than in England, Scotland or Wales — a trend similar to that seen in the adult population. That highlights the scale of the challenge. The establishment of a mental health champion in Professor Siobhán O'Neill demonstrates the clear commitment across the Executive to joint working to improve the mental health and well-being of all our citizens. The aim of the office of the mental health champion is to advise and assist in the promotion of mental health and well-being through all policies and services here.

The Children's Services Co-operation Act aims to improve cooperation among Departments and agencies. It places a duty on children's authorities to cooperate where appropriate and pool resources should they choose, as they deliver services aimed at improving the well-being of children and young people.

The Act enables my Department to make regulations about procedures to be followed when sharing resources or pooling funds. Cooperation between Departments already takes place, and existing mechanisms allow for the pooling of funding and sharing of resources. There is guidance available from a number of sources about how the pooling and sharing of resources can be actioned. For example, Departments can submit joint bids for funding from the Budget or during in-year monitoring rounds. The recent call for bids to the transformation fund also encouraged joint bids across Departments.

One good and recent example of how cooperation has been taken forward and implemented in that area is the work done at pace to develop proposals on interim support measures for early learning and childcare. The Executive agreed to earmark £25 million for that in 2024-25, and that funding was held centrally until measures were brought forward. Those measures were developed with the support of a cross-departmental task and finish group. That ensured that proposals captured work across relevant Departments and avoided duplication of existing support measures. Although the Department of Education is the lead Department on the work stream, it is coordinating implementation of the measures and transferring funding, as appropriate, to other delivery organisations. Technical transfers are also possible between Departments to facilitate the pooling of resources. There is therefore guidance available, and there is the means to cooperate across Departments.

The process for setting the 2025-26 Budget is under way, and I will encourage Departments to look for opportunities to work together and to propose joint working. Ministers can, of course, work together to deliver effectively on a cross-departmental basis, and that must be encouraged. I am keen to do everything possible to encourage collaboration across the public sector and beyond. I appreciate that the pooling and sharing of resources across Departments, where appropriate, can support more efficient and effective service delivery, and we all aspire to that.

Earlier this month, I hosted a round-table event with representatives of the children's sector and organisations with a more general interest in the Executive's actions for children and young people. A number of those present highlighted the 2015 Act and called for more collaboration between Departments. I will continue to engage with representatives from the sector in order to understand the issues and requirements. It is my view that the pooling and sharing of resources is best addressed on a case-by-case basis, as that approach ensures maximum flexibility to deliver services in the most efficient and effective way rather than constraining the options available to Departments or to the Executive as a whole.

There will be some concerns that putting regulations in place could have adverse impacts by limiting the cooperation that can take place rather than by allowing initiatives to develop organically. I genuinely believe that there is a desire amongst Ministers to work together to deliver for people, not just because of our limited resources but, more importantly, because it will deliver better outcomes. I, however, am always happy to look at the need for further guidance if it can be shown to be making a meaningful difference. My Department is represented on the children and young people's strategy monitoring and reporting board, and that is a useful forum for discussing the issues.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): Thank you, Minister. I call the leader of the Opposition to make a winding-up speech. Matthew, you have five minutes.

Mr O'Toole: Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker.

First, I thank those who spoke in the debate and those who have spoken on all the motions today. Two of our motions have passed thus far, albeit both were amended. We agreed with one of the amendments but were not so keen on the other one. I thank Members from all parties for the constructive way in which they approached the debate. We have said consistently that, in opposition, we intend to be constructive but that we will also be robust. Sometimes, that means that we are very robust, much to the displeasure of some of the Executive parties, but it also means that we use the time available to have constructive debates in the House. I think that we have largely had constructive debates today.

I will touch on a few of the remarks made. I will not exhaustively go through everything that was said, because I have only five minutes. There is only a limited amount that any Government or set of elected politicians can do to effect change in something as subtle and variable as the mental health of our citizens, but, in a situation in which it is widely accepted that we have a serious and deepening mental health crisis that is particularly acute among our young people, it is incumbent on all of us to use every power that we have to do something about it.

Diane Dodds strikingly and powerfully referred to the Northern Ireland life and times survey, which mentions the fact that 18% of 16-year-olds suffer from chronic physical or mental health challenges. Whether parents or not, we are all aware of the immense burden that our young people face, of the serious mental health challenges that we have and, as multiple Members have mentioned, of the severe challenges that the child and adolescent mental health service faces, including a lack of resources and a lack of ability to deliver.

Multiple organisations, whether they are involved in providing children's services or in the mental health sector — that is, the organisations that were represented in an event in the Long Gallery today — have made it clear that the Children's Services Co-Operation Act 2015, which is referred to in the motion, has not been used to its full potential. Multiple Members who spoke, including Ms Forsythe and, I think, someone from Sinn Féin, said that it would perhaps have been more apt to make a specific call of the Health Minister. Of course, we have brought the Health Minister to the Chamber twice today to account for what his Department is doing. It is clear that section 8 of the legislation in question places a specific —.

Mrs Dillon: Will the Member give way?

Mr O'Toole: I will in one second.

It places a specific burden on the Department of Finance, and I am glad that the Minister has come to the Chamber to engage on this.

I am happy to give way.

Mrs Dillon: For clarity, I was not saying that we should be bringing this issue to the Minister of Health; I simply meant to say that we need somebody to take the lead. I agree that all Departments should work together.

Mr O'Toole: I appreciate that clarification.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Dr Aiken): You have an extra minute, Matthew.

Mr O'Toole: Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. Thank you very much for the extra minute, Mrs Dillon.

It is important that we work together. Even those of us who are in opposition have an important job to do when it comes to delivering something like this. Our job is accountability, but also pushing policy and pushing the discussion in the right direction. That is what this afternoon is all about.

It is not very often that Mrs Dodds and I are in agreement, but, on a couple of occasions during her speech, I found myself in thundering agreement with her. She said that, in many cases, the public genuinely do not care who delivers what service for them. That could not be more true. Most people do not know how many Departments there are in Northern Ireland. If we are honest, most people do not know what powers are devolved, what powers are not devolved, where there is cross-border responsibility or where a council does something; they only care about the services that they and their family receive. That is why we should all be about better working, and that is why this motion is robust and specific in calling the Minister of Finance to use her powers. That does not absolve any other Minister, specifically the Minister of Health or even the Minister of Education, with whom, under this legislation, lies the statutory responsibility to deliver the children and young people's strategy. It is important that there is "jointery".

Without wishing to score points, I would say that we have heard two things during the debate. The first is broad-based commitment and seriousness on the issue, and I welcome that. Secondly, there is a slight tendency to say — as my colleague Patsy McGlone said in the previous debate — "This is terrible. Something must be done. Is someone going to do something about it?", and to slightly shift responsibility from one Minister to another. I did not hear that attitude from the Minister of Finance, and I commend her on that. I often challenge the Finance Minister, but, on this occasion, she was clear about where her responsibilities lie.

It is important that we use whatever powers we have. It is nearly a decade since this specific piece of legislation was passed, which also created an obligation for the Executive to formulate their Programme for Government on the basis of the provisions and reporting mechanisms of the Act. I have not yet seen any clear evidence — we will be asking questions — as to whether the just-published draft Programme for Government has specifically drawn on what is in that Act, but that resource is there.

The Assembly passed that Act a decade ago. Some of us were here then. I was not, but some of us were. The clear intention was that we would start to break down the pernicious traditional culture of silo working. I am afraid that, since the Assembly has returned, we have still seen too much silo working on occasion, and a tendency to say, "That's your Minister, and that's our Minister". Part of our job in opposition — I know that we occasionally, regularly or constantly irritate people, and we will keep doing that — is to say, "This is about outcomes for our citizens. It is not about whose Minister does this, whose Minister wants more budget or whose Minister hasn't seen what paper. It is about the outcome that we deliver for our citizens". That is fundamentally what the motion is about.

In a world of technological advances, social media pressures, climate change and a range of other things, it is extremely challenging for people in a devolved legislature to transform the challenges that face our young people, but we can use every single lever — legislative, regulatory or financial — that we have to do it. I encourage Members to support the motion. Thank you very much to everybody who participated constructively in today's Opposition day.