Northern Ireland Assembly
Monday 6 November 2000 (continued)
Mr McGrady:
I thank the Minister for her comprehensive reply - [Interruption].
Madam Deputy Speaker:
Order.
Mr McGrady:
In view of what the Minister has said, and the reference to the many facilities available to make farming viable, does she consider that the adoption of a new attitude by the Department to treat farms as businesses and employ the services of other agencies, such as local enterprise development agencies with proper grant-aid and technology structures, would be useful to farmers in the transition between the farm gate and the market?
Will she also consider the great difficulties that the farming community has with regard to diversification, particularly when farm incomes and farmers' resources are at an all-time low? That transition is very difficult.
As a corollary, will the Minister make herself aware of the consequences of farmers leaving the land or diversifying? Who will then be custodian of our agricultural heritage and countryside?
Ms Rodgers:
I agree with many of the issues that Mr McGrady has raised. My answer addressed many of those issues with regard to helping farms progress as businesses. The Department of Agriculture and Rural Development enables farmers to treat their farms as businesses and to increase their competitiveness in the market.
The Member raised the issue of treating farms as small businesses for grant purposes, and many farmers have posed that question. For example, LEDU grants are available for start-up businesses, but the farming community sometimes feels that it is not entitled to them. The LEDU remit does not cover primary production. However, LEDU would consider issuing grants to farmers who wish to establish processing businesses and other businesses which fall under the diversification category. I encourage farmers to apply for this assistance, and I hope that LEDU will respond because farmers feel hard done by. It is possible to get access to those grants for certain businesses under diversification.
The Chairperson of the Agriculture and Rural Development Committee (Rev Dr Ian Paisley): The Minister is aware that the Assembly unanimously passed the resolution on the report mentioned in the question. How many of the recommendations in the report did the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development accept and bring to fruition through specially set-up machinery? How many recommendations have been acted upon? That is an important question. Today's 'Belfast Telegraph' features a report on the serious situation in the pig industry. More than half the herds have been lost in three years, and if any more are lost there will be no viable pig industry in Northern Ireland. The time has come for the Minister to announce the number of Agriculture Committee recommendations that her Department has accepted and will act on.
Ms Rodgers:
The report contains recommendations directed at all the links in the food marketing chain, as well as the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety and the Department of the Environment. In my reply to the Committee, I was pleased to confirm that in most cases the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development is already developing a range of initiatives aimed at addressing the underlying issues and concerns. Some of the proposals were for the industry and not the Department to develop. Some proposals would involve EU state-aid rules in which my Department would not be allowed to intervene. However, I am developing all the proposals that are within my powers, and I have already outlined some of them to the Committee.
Dr Paisley mentioned the pig industry. I am aware of the difficulties there. I also share the Member's frustration at the European Commission's slow response to our attempt to gain permission to restructure.
Several questions have been raised, and as soon as we responded to them other questions were sent to us. It has been a slow process. I raised the issue with Nick Brown, who wrote to Commissioner Fischler. I raised it again at the previous meeting of regional Ministers, and Nick Brown wrote to assure me that he personally had raised the matter with Commissioner Fischler. I await a response, but I have done everything in my power to ensure that we proceed as quickly as possible with the restructuring of the pig industry.
Mr Leslie:
The length of the Minister's replies perhaps answers the question about why the cost of administering the Department is starting to exceed the sector's revenue.
I am sure the Minister will agree that we cannot eat a book of regulations, no matter how attractive the wrapper. Yet we have book-loads of regulations that prescribe much of our own produce as not fit for sale unless it passes an expensive panoply of health and hygiene tests. On the very same supermarket shelves, consumers can buy imported foodstuffs that have not been subject to anything like the same degree of scrutiny. How does the Minister propose to level this most unfairly tilted playing field?
Ms Rodgers:
I am aware of the issue and of the frustrations experienced by our producers in having to adhere to the regulations, particularly those that relate to welfare. The issue was raised at a recent cross- departmental meeting of Ministers in London. It was agreed that it would be brought forward to the World Trade Organisation discussions with a view to making welfare regulations mandatory in all countries. I hope that that goes some way towards dealing with the issue.
Mr Kane:
Can the Minister assure the House that, in the event of evidence emerging about a price-fixing cartel, she will leave no stone unturned in any subsequent investigation?
Ms Rodgers:
I am aware of allegations of a beef cartel in Northern Ireland, and that the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) is considering those allegations. It is quite proper that any evidence of a breach of competition rules should be submitted to the OFT, and my Department will, of course, assist in whatever way possible. I assure the Member that should the OFT, discover any abuse of power I would press for immediate action to combat that.
Rural Development Plan (2000-06)
2.
Mr Armstrong
asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development if she will detail the progress made towards having the rural development plan for Northern Ireland for 2000-06 adopted by the European Commission; and if she will make a statement?
Ms Rodgers:
I am very pleased that the plan has now been approved. Negotiations were protracted and difficult, particularly in relation to the changeover from the old headage-based hill livestock compensation allowance (HLCA) scheme to the new area-based less-favoured area (LFA) support scheme. We have achieved a very positive outcome with increased resources and a safety net in the first three years of the new LFA scheme. I was able to secure substantial additional funding for the LFA scheme from the Treasury worth £32 million over its first four years of operation. That means that the financing of support for hill farmers is now more secure than it has been for several years.
Furthermore, the safety-net arrangements will minimise the losses to those farmers who will see a reduction in their level of payment. As well as the new LFA scheme, the plan also provides for a significant increase in the uptake of agrienvironment schemes and allows for a continuation of the forestry measures, which opens up new opportunities for farmers under those programmes. Overall, the plan is worth £266 million to Northern Ireland agriculture from 2000 to 2006.
Mr Armstrong:
Although I note that approval for the Northern Ireland rural development plan has come later than that for England and Wales, I welcome the fact that it has now been approved by the EU Committee on Structures and Rural Development (STAR). Perhaps the Minister would indicate when she expects full Commission approval. She will be aware of Commissioner Fischler's recent commitment to greater transparency in farm policy. Will she give a similar commitment to greater transparency, beginning with a commitment to keep the Agriculture and Rural Development Committee better informed of the process in such matters as the rural development plan?
Ms Rodgers:
The first part of the question related to when the Commission's approval would come through. It takes three to four weeks to get formal approval, so we would expect to receive that approval four weeks from 24 October.
I am not sure about the second part of the question, which seems to imply that I have not been open with the Committee. I have consulted with the Committee insofar as it has been possible to do so.
3.15 pm
When the plan was in preparation there was something of a hiatus in the proceedings of the Assembly, and that created a time lag. As I have explained to the Committee, I would have been in a better position to consult it had there been more time. I have given the Committee an assurance that I will attempt to do so in future on the basis, of course, that we do not have any more suspensions, hiatuses or breaks in our business in the meantime.
Mr Bradley:
How will the LFA scheme contribute to achieving environmental objectives?
Ms Rodgers:
The scheme includes a general requirement that all farmers observe a code of good farming practice. That will make a major environmental contribution and will be reinforced by a requirement for a minimum stocking of 0·2 livestock units per hectare, which will guard against the problem of under-grazing. To counter over-grazing, all farms with stocking densities above 1·8 livestock units per hectare will be inspected to ensure that they are being farmed responsibly. In addition to the provisions in the LFA scheme, the separate agrienvironment measures in the plan will provide assistance to farmers specifically to encourage good environmental practice.
Mr ONeill:
Can the Minister give us some details on the recent strategic study into organic farming, carried out under the rural development plan?
Ms Rodgers:
I recently announced the strategic study into the organic sector in Northern Ireland because of the increasing market opportunities for producers of organic goods. I wish to encourage the development of a vibrant organic sector in Northern Ireland. It is important that it should be developed strategically, and I thought that a study would be the best way to take things forward. In making my decision, I was guided by the valuable work and recommendations of the organic farming liaison group, which draws its membership from the organic sector and the farming unions, as well as officials from the Department. In the organic sector, market demand is ahead of supply and we should be homing in on the opportunities that it presents.
Mr Beggs:
What is the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development doing to support and promote the establishment of a rural community network in south Antrim and parts of east Antrim? Those are the only parts of Northern Ireland that are not covered by a rural community network. I am concerned that there should be equality of access to the provisions of the rural development plan and the funding from Europe.
Ms Rodgers:
I cannot answer that specific question, but I know, in general terms, that there have been areas in Northern Ireland that have not taken full advantage of the rural development opportunities available since 1991. The Department is anxious to help the communities that have not previously taken advantage of the plan and ensure that they do so this time around.
I can provide the Member with a more specific written reply, but I assure him that I am very aware of the issue and anxious to do something about it.
Organic Aid and Countryside
Management Schemes
3.
Mr McCarthy
asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development what uptake in the organic aid scheme and the countryside management scheme can be funded on the basis of the draft Budget allocation announced on 17 October.
Ms Rodgers:
The organic farming scheme and the countryside management scheme are funded by the additional moneys delivered by modulation. They are not dependent on the draft Budget allocation announced on 17 October. The modulation money will allow us to work towards the target of having 1,000 producers farming organically and 4,000 entrants to the countryside management scheme by 2006, which is the period covered by our rural development plan.
Mr McCarthy:
I welcome the Minister's response. Will she be able to provide enough advisory officers to assist farmers in developing their plans?
Ms Rodgers:
I hope and expect that we will be able to provide the necessary expertise and assistance to farmers wishing to go organic.
Mr McMenamin:
Can the Minister inform me when the uptake of agrienvironment schemes is expected? When will the organic farming and countryside management schemes open for application from farmers?
Ms Rodgers:
I will first deal with the agrienvironment schemes. The environmentally sensitive areas (ESA) scheme - in which 4,500 farmers participate, with 145,000 hectares under agreement - is considered to be close to its optimum uptake. It is anticipated in the rural development regulation plan that, by 2006, the organic farming scheme will grow from its present level of 20 farmers, with 1,000 hectares under agreement, to 1,000 farmers, with 30,000 hectares. The countryside management scheme, which will have its first entrants later this year, will have 4,000 participant farmers, with 150,000 hectares under agreement.
The second question related to the date for applications to the organic and countryside management schemes. As Mr Armstrong has already mentioned, the EU Commission approved the rural development plan on 24 October. The statutory rules necessary to bring those schemes into effect are currently the subject of consultation with the agriculture industry and will shortly come before the Committee for scrutiny. On completion of those necessary steps, the legislation will be brought forward as soon as possible, and I am anxious to be able to open the schemes.
Mr McCartney:
Is the Minister aware of Dublin Corporation's scheme to convert human waste into organic pellets for spreading on land? Apparently, 22,000 tonnes are due for production this year. It helps both organic farming and the disposal of human waste. Are there any similar projects in mind to help organic farming in Northern Ireland?
Ms Rodgers:
Was it Dublin Corporation?
Mr McCartney:
Yes.
Ms Rodgers:
I was not sure.
I am not aware of that scheme, and I would be very interested to learn more about it. Because I am not aware of it, I do not know if my Department has any plans about pellets. However, I will certainly enquire about it and let the Member have a written answer.
Potato Crop (Brown Rot)
4.
Mr Poots
asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development if she is aware of an outbreak of brown rot in the Scottish potato crop and, if so, what steps she has taken to ensure that it will not contaminate the potato crop in Northern Ireland.
Ms Rodgers:
I am aware that the bacterium responsible for causing brown rot in potatoes has been found in water samples from parts of the Lunan Burn, and the Isla and Tay Rivers in Perthshire. However, extensive sampling of potato tubers irrigated from the contaminated rivers has confirmed that the infection has been confined to the watercourses. The Scottish Executive have assured me that the Scottish potato crop is completely free of brown rot.
Brown rot has never been found in Northern Ireland, but the possibility of its spreading here cannot be ruled out. My Department is taking all preventative measures permissible under EU rules so that brown rot does not spread to Northern Ireland, and it will continue to take all possible steps to prevent the introduction of quarantine pests and diseases, including brown rot.
Mr Poots:
As the Minister indicated, Northern Ireland has never had brown rot. It is a disease that we do not want to infect our potato crops. I would like her to ensure that the Department ensures that no samples are allowed into Northern Ireland containing any disease, as washings of those potatoes could get into our water system, and thus contaminate the entire crop and do substantial damage to the Northern Ireland potato industry.
Ms Rodgers:
I think that I have already answered that question. The Plant Health Directive places the onus of plant health control on the country of origin, which in this case is Scotland. It allows the importing country to carry out sample checks. I have recently spoken to our scientists who are dealing with the situation and I have been assured that sample checks are being carried out regularly.
Furthermore, the brown rot Directive specifies detailed measures that all member states must implement in order to control and prevent the disease. It outlines a number of control measures to be taken to contain and eradicate infection should an outbreak occur. I have been assured by the Scottish Rural Affairs Department that the required measures are in hand.
Mr Wells:
There is enormous concern, particularly in my own constituency of South Down, about any remote possibility of this disease getting into Northern Ireland. Can the Minister confirm that it is within European regulations to test all imported potatoes coming through Larne or any other Northern Ireland port? Can she assure us that every batch of potatoes coming into the Province is being thoroughly tested for this disease?
Ms Rodgers:
As I have said, sample checks are being carried out. It might not be possible to check every single potato coming into the country, but sample checks are carried out regularly to ensure that brown rot does not come in. The Scottish Rural Affairs Department has assured me that it has been found in the water but not in the potatoes. It has taken all measures required of it under European regulations to ensure that contaminated water is not used for irrigation or for spraying of either potatoes or tomatoes.
Rev Dr William McCrea:
The Minister has said that there has never been brown rot in Northern Ireland. I have requested a meeting with her and her officials on this issue. There is genuine concern. We have never had this problem, and we certainly do not want the possibility of there being a problem added to BSE and the many other problems within the farming industry. Can the Minister assure me that not only is the onus on the country of origin but that she and her Department take the matter very seriously? Any brown rot coming into this country could wipe out another part of our vital farming industry at this perilous time.
Ms Rodgers:
I can assure the Member that I am treating the matter seriously. I took the trouble to discuss it with the scientists in the Department as recently as last week. I am aware of it as an issue. I am aware of the difficulties it would create. As far as anyone can humanly guarantee anything, we cannot rule out the possibility. For that reason, all the precautions I have outlined, both those assured by the Scottish Executive and those that we are doing ourselves, are being taken to ensure that brown rot does not enter the Northern Ireland crop.
Rev Dr Ian Paisley:
Does the Minister not think it advisable for her officials to go to the country of origin to see if those European regulations are being strictly adhered to? The concern among farmers is that they may not be, and, if there is only limited testing here, that opens a door. No one can tell what will happen if that door is opened. It could be the destruction of the potato industry in Northern Ireland for ever.
3.30 pm
Ms Rodgers:
It is not part of our responsibility, and it might be taken ill by the Scottish Executive if we were to send over our officials to see if they were doing their job properly. I will have to take the word of the Scottish Executive, and they have informed me that the issue is being dealt with. A watercourse is contaminated, but there is no potato rot. Every precaution has been taken to ensure that water from that watercourse is not used for irrigation or spraying until it is declared clear.
Madam Deputy Speaker:
Question 5 has been withdrawn.
Forestry Service
6.
Mr Byrne
asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development to detail how the Forestry Service has been reorganised.
Ms Rodgers:
Following the Forestry Service's establishment as an agency, the chief executive invited consultants to look at its organisation, staffing and systems and to recommend options for improving efficiency and effectiveness. The outcome was major changes to the structure of the Forestry Service. Most significant has been the reorganisation of the work into three directorates - operations, policy and standards, and corporate services. The most radical changes were in the operations directorate, where a redrawing of district boundaries created three larger districts. Working practices were restructured, and responsibility for forestry grants was transferred to the policy and standards directorate. Previously the Forestry Service operated in five geographical districts - Ballymena, Castlewellan, Enniskillen, Limavady and Omagh, each serviced by a district office. The three new districts - east, west and north - created by the redrawing of district boundaries have offices at Castlewellan, Enniskillen and Limavady. The Limavady office will shortly move to Garvagh.
Culture, Arts and Leisure
Community Arts Projects
1.
Mr Dallat
asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure how he intends to promote the wider development of community arts projects throughout Northern Ireland.
The Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure (Mr McGimpsey):
Members will be aware of the future search process undertaken by my Department. An independent review of community arts has been identified as a pressing need, and the terms of reference have now been drawn up. For the first time, the review will provide a clear and comprehensive description of the community arts sector, by activity and location, and will outline how it can be developed throughout Northern Ireland.
Mr Dallat:
I welcome the Minister's statement. Can he assure us that community arts will now be afforded equality with other art forms?
Mr McGimpsey:
If by "equality" Mr Dallat means equal amounts of resources or cash, for example, I cannot give that sort of guarantee. The Arts Council of Northern Ireland is responsible for funding. It is responsible for its own budget and administers the arts lottery money. I can assure the Member that there will be equity of treatment for community arts, because there is a growing awareness of their importance and the role they play at several levels.
Mrs E Bell:
Can the Minister assure me that there will be a better relationship between community arts and the Arts Council? I know that there have been difficulties in the past.
Mr McGimpsey:
I am aware that there has been tension, shall we say, between the Arts Council and the Community Arts Forum (CAF). We are addressing the issue by looking at a review of community arts - the sector, its size, how it is coping, how it is growing et cetera. Such a review will inform us of how best to treat the sector as part of the overall arts infrastructure. Although there may be debates and arguments between the Arts Council and community arts groups, a review will take that on board and resolve the issue.
Mr Shannon:
How will the Minister encourage applications for community arts projects from both sides of the community? Secondly, how will he ensure that equal funding is given to applications from both sides of the community?
Mr McGimpsey:
The issue of equal funding relates to Mr Dallat's question. We can be assured of equity of treatment, and the Arts Council, in common with all bodies and non-departmental bodies, has its own equality scheme as well as requirements under, for example, New TSN. Those are requirements that the Arts Council must meet. Each application will be treated on its merits, what it will deliver and what its outputs will be.
A review of community arts will perform an important task in informing the Arts Council where those criticisms lie. Criticisms may or may not have a basis. That is something that we will wish to be informed on, as it is a key area.
Mr Neeson:
Does the Minister agree that in dealing with community arts we are not talking about two communities? We are talking about a multicultural society in Northern Ireland, bearing in mind that there are sizeable ethnic minorities and other groups in the Province.
Mr McGimpsey:
I agree with those sentiments. The Everitt review recommended that the Arts Council should consider delegating responsibility for community arts to district councils, and that is reflected in the Arts Council's strategy of opening up the arts. There is equity of treatment and there is one community. Matters are dealt with on their merits, and that is the proper way to go forward with respect to the equality scheme that the Arts Council has adopted.
Leisure Facilities
2.
Mr Neeson
asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure if he will detail the steps he is taking in conjunction with the Minister of Health to promote and encourage the use of leisure facilities in Northern Ireland.
Mr McGimpsey:
I recognise the role of sport and leisure as a major contributor to health and well-being. My Department is co-operating with the Department of Health in promoting the health agenda through its representation on the interdepartmental ministerial group on public health and the Northern Ireland physical activity strategy. This level of co-operation is endorsed by the Programme for Government, which recognises that improvements in health are vital to the creation of a modern and successful Northern Ireland. I confirm that my Department, in all its areas of responsibility, will continue to contribute to the efforts to promote a healthier society.
Mr Neeson:
I thank the Minister for his answer and welcome co-operation between the two Departments. Does he accept that, although health education is a major issue, there is a need for the provision of affordable leisure facilities in Northern Ireland?
Mr McGimpsey:
Affordability is a key factor, and we are aware that the provision of leisure facilities is a matter that lies primarily with district councils. District councils play a key role in the provision of leisure facilities. The Sports Council is responsible for the development of sport. Within the strategy, there are several bodies for promoting a healthy lifestyle, and the understanding that prevention is better than cure and that greater participation in sport and physical activity will have benefits not only in the sporting realm of this Department but also in the realm of health provision for dealing with the consequences of physical inactivity.
Mr McMenamin:
Will the Minister assure me that he will consider encouraging people with disabilities to avail themselves of leisure facilities? Will he also consider introducing a package that will enable the unemployed to afford those facilities?
Mr McGimpsey:
I can confirm that the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure is very concerned about the needs of the disabled. We recently announced funding made available under the Programme for Government through the Access for Disabled People to Arts Premises Today (ADAPT) Fund Northern Ireland, for a programme to provide 40 audits of a range of sporting and cultural venues to assess how they can be made more accessible. It will also allow smaller adaptation grant schemes to be introduced. We are promoting equality of opportunity and participation by as many people as possible. That includes people who have physical disabilities. I take the point about the unemployed and the fact that leisure activities perhaps present a greater financial burden for them.
Mr Hussey:
I welcome the recognition of the facilities that the Minister has rightly identified as being provided by local authorities and the part that they will play in the future health of the people. However, the Minister will be aware that local authorities are under considerable pressure in many areas to ensure that those facilities remain available to people. Are there any plans in the Minister's Department, or in the Department of Health, to give some assistance to ensure that those facilities remain viable?
Mr McGimpsey:
The provision of leisure centres is primarily a matter for district councils. The Member points out that district councils suffer the financial burden and asks whether I have any plans. I am not aware of anything specifically at the moment, but I will enquire, and I can write to the Member should there be any specific details. The underlying principle is to promote equality of opportunity and participation. If district councils are having difficulties, that is something that the Department will have to address.
Mr S Wilson:
If the Minister intends to promote equality of opportunity for folks who are disabled or unemployed by making leisure centres more accessible to them, some form of subsidy will be needed. Is he saying that the Department will be making funds available to local authorities so that whatever revenue they lose through promoting leisure centres in that way will not have to be borne by ratepayers?
Mr McGimpsey:
That is not what I am saying. In answer to Mr Hussey's question, I am saying that I do not have details to hand of any specific proposals for those who suffer physical disabilities. We are undertaking an audit of a range of sporting and cultural venues to assess what needs to be done to make those venues more accessible. It may be that provision can be made for a small adaptation grant scheme. Large sums of money are not necessarily required. Very small amounts of money can often make such venues accessible. I cannot be any more specific at this point, but I will write to Mr Hussey about it. If Mr Sammy Wilson wishes, I will copy the letter to him.
Foras na Gaeilge
(All-Ireland Language Body)
3.
Mr McElduff
asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure if he will detail the steps he is taking to ensure that Foras na Gaeilge/the all-Ireland language body will allocate and deliver funding at the start of January 2001.
Mr McGimpsey:
For the information of Mr McElduff and other Members, the title of the North/South Language Body in Irish is An Foras Teanga. Foras na Gaeilge is one of the agencies within the body. Both Foras na Gaeilge and Tha Boord o Ulster-Scotch are preparing corporate plans for carrying out their functions in 2001 and beyond.
3.45 pm
Those will be submitted in due course for approval by the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC). Foras Na Gaeilge is currently conducting a review of its activities and structure, and consequently its corporate plan may not be submitted to the NSMC until early next year. An indicative work programme for 2001 will, however, be submitted to the NSMC for approval. That will ensure that there is no disruption to clients and potential activities in the interim period. Neither myself nor my ministerial colleague in the Republic of Ireland has any reason to think that there will be a delay in the allocation and delivery of funding at the start of January 2001. In 2001, indicative funding of £11·42 million will be made available to the language body.
Mr McElduff:
Ba mhaith liom iarraidh ar an Aire an bhfuil sé sásta leanúint ar aghaidh le hobair phráinneach an Fhorais Teanga uile-Éireann gan stad agus gan aon bhac óna pháirtí féin? I am glad to hear the assurances that money will have an impact on the ground as soon as possible. However, will the Minister act decisively to ensure that the crucial work of the all-Ireland language body proceeds without interference and does not fall hostage to the mood swings of the Ulster Unionist Council?
Mr McGimpsey:
I can give Mr McElduff the assurance that I have already given. As I said earlier, neither I nor my ministerial colleague in the Republic of Ireland has any reason to believe that there will be a delay in the allocation and delivery of funding. We must remember that An Foras Teanga, or Tha Boord o Leid, is the body responsible for funding both the Foras na Gaeilge and Tha Boord o Ulster-Scotch. I do not anticipate any difficulties. It will be a smooth operation in terms of drawing down money and carrying out their responsibilities.
Mr S Wilson:
I am interested in the Minister's reply. Is he saying, despite the assurances given by his leader that the withdrawal of Sinn Féin Ministers from the North/South Ministerial Council is designed to punish those who are not giving in arms, that, to use his own words, "the actions should cause no delay or disruption to the work of the North/South Ministerial Council"? Is he admitting, therefore, that his party is engaged in a con trick?
Mr McGimpsey:
That is a political question rather than one for my Department. Mr S Wilson clearly misunderstands what has been said and what this is about. The Member should understand that what we have given assurances on will not affect the operation of the North/South Ministerial Council or the implementation bodies. It will simply affect the participation of certain Ministers. That was what was said, and that is what will happen. It in no way prejudices or undermines the workings of the NSMC agreement, the Assembly or the Executive - any more than the actions of the DUP do.
Lisburn Library
4.
Mr Poots
asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure if he will detail the progress made in providing a new library for Lisburn.
Mr McGimpsey:
The responsibility for providing a new library in Lisburn rests with the South Eastern Education and Library Board. The board has acquired a site, with funding from my Department, and is currently exploring the possibility of providing a new library under the private finance initiative. If the new library is provided in that way, my Department will make additional funding available to help with the running costs.
Mr Poots:
The Minister's response does not enthuse me very much, as we have been getting similar responses for some 25 years and still the second-largest council area in Northern Ireland is being deprived of library services. If the private finance initiative does not work out, what will the Minister do to ensure adequate library provision in Lisburn?
Mr McGimpsey:
I agree with Mr Poots when he refers to 25 years - Lisburn waited during the 25 barren years of direct rule, and the shortages and underfunding in much Government activity mean that the Library Service is no exception. Several towns have, like Lisburn, awaited provision for some time. During the spending review, SR2000, I secured an extra £0·5 million for capital library funding. Lisburn library itself will cost approximately £3·5 million. Clearly the extra funding, added to the £1·3 million we are already getting, does not begin to address the need. Work is underway in Portadown, and plans for Strabane have also been announced, but we do not have enough resources. I continue to ask for the sympathy of the Executive Committee, but until the money is allocated to my Department I cannot provide capital funding for libraries.
Mr Close:
Does the Minister not agree that it is a scandal of monumental proportions that Lisburn borough - the second-largest borough in Northern Ireland - should have been deprived of adequate library facilities for a quarter of a century? Rather than stating that he is exploring possibilities, the Minister should know that the people of Lisburn are demanding that, through devolved Government, the necessary finances be made available to provide a library, sooner rather than later. Although we recognise the other areas' difficulties, the fact of Lisburn borough's inadequate library facilities prevails.
Mr McGimpsey:
I refer Mr Close to my original answer: there is a private finance initiative going forward to provide a new library for Lisburn. Lisburn Borough Council and the South Eastern Education and Library Board share Mr Close's and Mr Poots's recognition of this need, and they are considering providing the library through that mechanism. If that does not work, we will have to look at other ways, but we hope that Lisburn will get a new library through the private funding initiative.
Mr Close must understand that after 25 years we will not be able to address all the funding shortfalls in year one or in session one. The project will take many years. I agree that Lisburn is a key borough, and although I may not agree with his words "a scandal of monumental proportions", I accept that there is a glaring need for provision.
Museums
5.
Mrs E Bell
asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure if he will detail his budget proposals for museums in Northern Ireland and state how they are reflective of the needs of the corporate plan published earlier this year by Museums and Galleries of Northern Ireland (MAGNI).
Mr McGimpsey:
As a result of the spending review, museums have received an extra £300,000 for current expenditure and £400,000 for capital development for next year. Given the current financial climate, that is a welcome addition to the money available for museums. It will help to get the Museums and Galleries of Northern Ireland (MAGNI) off to a good start in implementing their corporate plan.
Mrs E Bell:
I hope that the Minister's ambitions are realised. Have all the necessary funds been provided for the delivery of the corporate plan, and has a timescale been developed ?
Mr McGimpsey:
That is a matter for MAGNI, as it is the responsible managing body. It has a corporate plan, and it is fairly ambitious. It includes, for example, a national gallery for art in Northern Ireland and a museum of creative arts, which has a fairly large price tag of an estimated £57 million. There is also a proposal for a maritime, aviation and industry museum, at an estimated £30 million. We cannot provide those in year one or year two, but we may be able to do so over a number of years. Those will not be schemes that merit a once-and-for-all payment from the Executive Committee to the Department. We must look at more creative means of raising the finance, rather than following the previous route of expecting taxpayers to foot the bill.
(Mr Speaker in the Chair)
The Deputy Chairperson of the Culture, Arts and Leisure Committee (Mrs Nelis):
Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Chomhairle. Will the Minister say if he has plans to address the destruction of ancient archaeological sites as a result of modern development? That was mentioned in the corporate plan. Will his Department consider an audit of the archaeological sites?
Mr McGimpsey:
Archaeological sites are a matter for the Department of the Environment through its Heritage Service. It would be more appropriate to address the question of preservation to the Minister of the Environment. A review is being carried out at the moment of local museums and heritage sites, which is taking into account several heritage and archaeological sites. Preservation is specifically a matter for the Department of the Environment.
North/South Language Body
6.
Mr McCarthy
asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure if he will confirm the location of the North/ South Language Body (An Foras Teanga/Tha Boord o Leid); and if he will make a statement.
Mr McGimpsey:
The body has two agencies, with headquarters in Dublin and Belfast. The headquarters of Foras na Gaeilge are situated in 7 Merrion Square, Dublin 2, and the headquarters of Tha Boord o Ulster- Scotch are located on the fifth floor of Franklin House, 10-12 Brunswick Street, Belfast.
Mr McCarthy:
I am a bit disappointed because the fifth floor is probably not very accessible to many people. The fifth floor in which building in Belfast? Which street?
Mr Speaker:
The Minister might help by repeating the answer.
Mr McGimpsey:
The fifth floor of Franklin House, which is located at 10-12 Brunswick Street, Belfast.
Mr McCarthy:
That would not be accessible to many people. To make it accessible to more of our community, I thought it would have been outside Belfast. Agencies are centralised a lot in Belfast and an out-of-town site for that body might have been considered.
Mr McGimpsey:
Tha Boord o Ulster-Scotch will have permanent headquarters in Belfast in two to three years' time. The choice of location is primarily a matter for Boord o Ulster-Scotch. It also has plans for an office in Donegal, and there is also the possibility of an office in Edinburgh. That is part of its corporate plans and it is for it to determine where its offices should be located.
Mr Dodds:
I notice that the North/South Language Body is referred to by two different Irish names. Who is correct - Mr McCarthy or the Member who claims to be an expert in the Irish language?
Mr Speaker:
It seems that the reference is in two languages, as I understand it from the question here.
Mr McGimpsey:
The language body is known in Irish as An Foras Teanga, and it is referred to in Ulster- Scots as Tha Boord o Leid. That is the governing body. There are two agencies, Tha Boord o Ulster-Scotch and Foras na Gaeilge, the Ulster-Scots and the Irish agencies.
4.00 pm
Museums
7.
Mr McGrady
asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure if he will detail when the review of the regional museums will be completed.
Mr McGimpsey:
The local museum and heritage review has reached its final stages. A specialist heritage consultant employed by the review steering group has completed his work, and I expect to receive the steering group's report shortly. The report will form the basis of consultation, first with the Assembly Committee, and thereafter with the wider museums and heritage sector. I expect a report to be made available to the Assembly early next session.
Mr McGrady:
I am sure that the Minister will agree with me that the inquiry into the future of regional and other museums in Northern Ireland has gone on for many years in the absence of proper policy and finance. Can he assure the House that the review, when it has its ministerial publication, will give effective direction on how museums are going to be dealt with in Northern Ireland - particularly in the regional strategy?
Will the Minister ensure - I will be parochial - that Down County Museum, which fulfils all the registration requirements for a regional museum as laid down by the Museums and Galleries Commission, is, like others, granted that status and proper funding to enable it to protect the heritage? We should not let our heritage, as embodied in museums and galleries, be the poor relation in the cultural sector.
Mr McGimpsey:
The review currently underway began in November 1999. Initial proposals were received by the Department in June. The review steering group has considered those and agreed a report. It will shortly deliver its own report to the Department, which I expect in December. That will allow us to prepare a draft strategy at the beginning of 2001, which will go out for consultation. I expect the consultation process to be complete and to have a final strategy ready by next spring. That is the process, and I understand that the review seems to have taken a long time. However, I consider it appropriate that such an important and wide-ranging exercise be comprehensive. I expect the Department to be able to put in place a final strategy -
Mr Speaker:
I ask the Minister to bring his remarks to a close because of the time.
Mr McGimpsey:
The Member has raised the matter of Down County Museum with me on other occasions. There are three classes of museum, and I confirm that Down County Museum is classified by the Department as a class-two or regional museum.
Mr Speaker:
Order. We must leave matters there. That set of questions started at 3.32 pm, and it is now after 4.02 pm.
Electricty Costs
Mr Byrne:
I beg to move
That this Assembly notes the high cost of electricity in Northern Ireland and calls on the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment to examine and review the electricity supply market in this region.
Three weeks ago the Executive presented a draft Programme for Government to Members of the Assembly. It stated that its overriding purpose was to make a difference to the lives of the people of Northern Ireland. That is to be achieved by the Executive and the Assembly's working together and listening to the interests of business and all the social partners to implement an imaginative legislative framework that could create opportunities for everyone in society. If the Executive and Assembly are serious about the task in hand, we must make a start and deal with policies inherited from direct rule, and whose effect is to hold us back from creating the sort of inclusive society and competitive economy that is at the heart of the draft Programme for Government.
The privatisation of Northern Ireland's electricity network is one such hangover from direct rule. Over the last seven years it has put industrial, commercial and domestic users at an unfair disadvantage. I will draw the House's attention to some statistics that graphically show the extent of Northern Ireland's disadvantage when compared with the price of electricity in Britain, the Irish Republic and the rest of Europe.
For example, at the start of 1999 the typical domestic user in Northern Ireland paid 9·43p per unit, while in Germany the average domestic consumer paid 11·8% less, at 8·31p per unit, and in the Netherlands 32·5% less, at 6·36p per unit.
The comparisons with the rest of the UK and Ireland are equally telling. Northern Ireland's domestic price per unit is 21% above that of Scotland, 27% above those of England and Wales, and 53% above that of the Irish Republic. This year domestic customers in Northern Ireland will pay around £305, whereas the average bill in Britain is £257.
The recent welcome liberalisation of the market in line with EU Directives will by 2003 allow around 420 of the largest commercial users to buy electricity from other companies such as the Electricity Supply Board (ESB). Despite that, the smaller small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are, and will remain, similarly disadvantaged. Taking an average industrial user with a maximum demand of 500 kilowatts at a 40% load factor, the price per unit is 14% above that of Scotland, 38% above those of England and Wales, and 75% above that of the Irish Republic.
With the introduction of the climate change levy in 2001, the cost of electricity to industrial users is scheduled to increase by another 5%. It is important, therefore, that we address the problem of high electricity prices in Northern Ireland now. The statistics reveal the extraordinary disparity in electricity prices in the North of Ireland, Britain, the Republic and the rest of Europe. The public has entrusted the Assembly with the good governance of the region. It is only right that we should ask why consumers in Northern Ireland pay more than consumers anywhere else in western Europe for this essential resource. The reasons are complex, and concern the structure of the industry and the way in which it was privatised; the refusal of Northern Ireland Electricity (NIE) to abide by the price controls of the regulator, the Office for the Regulator of Electricity and Gas (OFREG); the lack of interest from the British Government; and, until devolution and the draft Programme for Government, a total absence of any coherent policy direction.
To understand why the consumer is getting such an unfair deal, we must look back to 1992-93 when the industry was privatised. Whether we agree or disagree for ideological reasons with the policy of privatisation, it has been stated that the previous Conservative Government, in the words of Adam Ingram, botched up the privatisation of Northern Ireland's electricity. It was rushed through. The two main power stations, Kilroot and Ballylumford, bought overpriced and uneconomic long-term contracts. They were paid £320 million - almost twice as much as they were worth - for such low-efficiency levels of production.
The two main components of those contracts were the guaranteed fuel payments, in which the customer paid for the cost of fuel burnt through NIE, and the availability payments, through which the generators received payment for the time they were available, whether or not they produced output. That is like paying a taxi company for having taxis available and paying for the taxi again when it does a run. The availability of the generators increased from 70% before privatisation to over 90% in some instances after privatisation - a higher fixed cost to the consumer. The availability of payments accounts for almost 50% of the total generation costs, a figure considered by OFREG and the Northern Ireland Consumer Committee for Electricity as excessively high. At around 80%, generation costs account for the largest proportion of the bill for industrial users, and the proportion is 60% for domestic users.
After some resistance from NIE, the Coolkeeragh and Ballylumford contracts have been reconstructed, which has reduced the cost to customers to a certain extent. Work on the new combined cycle gas turbine plant at Ballylumford will lead to increased efficiency levels and a further reduction in costs. However, it is disturbing that NIE insisted that the capital expenditure should be written off over a period of 10 years instead of the normal 20, which would have brought greater savings to customers. In my opinion, plant like that could be written off over 30 years.
Furthermore, the Kilroot contract is in need of renegotiation, but to date nothing has been done. The restructuring of the Kilroot contract, according to the Northern Ireland Consumer Committee, would bring the greatest savings to customers.
However, it would be mistaken for this House to focus all its attention on the generators. In a consultation paper published by OFREG in April, the charges relating to the transmission and distribution of electricity represented the largest single component of the cost of electricity after generation, and accounted for 30% of the final electricity bill. Transmission and distribution costs are the most profitable part of the business for NIE and its holding company, Viridian. This has important consequences for domestic users in particular, as the transmission and distribution component is, as OFREG has stated, inversely related to consumption. Therefore the transmission and distribution costs for domestic consumers represent 40% of the bill, whereas for large industrial consumers they are less than 15% of the bill.
At this juncture it is interesting to compare the costs of transmission and distribution with those in Britain. According to OFREG, at the time of privatisation, transmission and distribution costs were around the GB average for the average customer. Although overall transmission and distribution costs are expected to be higher in Northern Ireland than in Britain because of the lower level of electricity production, over the last 10 years they have shown an increasing divergence. We have not benefited as much from privatisation as consumers in Britain.
This year, transmission and distribution costs will be around 57% higher than those in Britain. OFREG predicts that that divergence will continue, despite the growth in demand in Northern Ireland that should have reduced costs. Transmission and distribution costs in Northern Ireland are set to rise, and by 2001 this divergence will be close to 60%.
One cannot get away from the fact that transmission and distribution costs are a major factor in the high price of electricity in Northern Ireland. In its April 2000 consultation paper, OFREG says that it is worth taking into consideration that since privatisation, had transmission and distribution costs reflected those in Britain, consumers could have saved an estimated £200 million, and around £40 million in the year 2000 alone.
If it is to fulfil the mandate given to it by the electorate and make a real effort to deliver social justice for all sections of our community, then the Assembly must address this serious issue. There is no justifiable reason why NIE's transmission and distribution costs should be so much higher than those of comparable regional electricity companies in Britain. As OFREG says, NIE is unique in that it is the only electricity company not to have a price control set by the regulator. The regulator, unfortunately, has no teeth in Northern Ireland. The first price control was set by the Government in 1992-93, and ran until 1996-97. It allowed NIE to raise revenue by 3·5% above the rate of inflation, and its transmission and distribution prices by 1% annually above the rate of inflation. According to OFREG, that gave NIE £301 million to invest in improving the network. One third of that money was not used for network investment, but for the benefit of shareholders. Consumers experienced the consequences of this during the storms of Christmas 1998, when many had to go without electricity for days.
In 1996, NIE rejected the second price control set by the regulator. The case was referred to the Monopolies and Mergers Commission (MMC). In the end, a compromise was agreed. However, it did not adequately deal with the problem of high transmission and distribution costs. Unfortunately, customers have also paid for the capital underspend, as NIE was allowed to claw back an additional £25 million from customers in what the MMC referred to as "underpaid depreciation charges". The customer paid twice. That is staggering when one considers NIE's "super profits" since privatisation and the dividends paid to shareholders, which have surely and steadily increased.
It has been estimated that Northern Ireland's total electricity bill between 1992-93 and the current year was £3·8 billion before tax. Fifteen per cent of this figure (£573 million) represented NIE's share of the profit, and 7 per cent (£267 million) of this sum was the generators' profit. NIE also made healthy returns for its shareholders. In 1993 the dividend was 10p per share, rising to 25.3p per share in 1999. NIE's transmission and distribution asset base also increased considerably, from £402 million in 1993 to approximately £520 million in 1999. Of course, it must be acknowledged that since 1997, particularly after the 1998 Christmas storms, NIE has made amends by making significant improvements to the network, thus fulfilling their capital expenditure requirements. It has also invested in new customer communication systems.