Northern Ireland Assembly
Tuesday 14 November 2000 (continued)
4.00 pm
A close examination of the allocation of resources to the Department of Higher and Further Education, Training and Employment reveals that the percentage increase does not allow the Minister to address these issues as I am sure he would wish to. A written answer from the Minister of Education this week made it clear that the Department will be unable to meet its targets for improving literacy and numeracy in secondary schools. The problem does not begin in secondary schools but starts almost from the moment a child is born. For more than 250,000 people between the ages of 16 and 64 the problem will continue for the rest of their lives unless more money is made available to address this injustice. This is happening in a society which, it is claimed, has the best education system in the world. We need to pause, stand back and remind ourselves that it is not just our city centres that need to be lit up as we emerge from the dark days of the past. The lives of our people must also be rekindled. The Programme for Government, which was discussed yesterday, promises to do that, but there must be adequate resources to address the needs of those who have been marginalised in the past, including those who have lost out on education and training.
Last week I saw a chink of light when I visited a cross-community project on the Ligoniel Road in north Belfast. Here the local community, including parents, teachers and children, work as a team to ensure that no child leaves school without being able to read and write. The project depends on public funding which will run out in a few weeks, unless resources can be found to keep it going. What will that mean for the children? Little Jimmy has moved house three times since September. He has serious learning difficulties, but his workbooks suggest that, slowly but surely, he is building a vocabulary of words that will form the foundation for his future. He is helped by a classroom assistant from the community, who has benefited from the same community education project. Sitting beside him, I remember little Rebecca, another child who now has an air of confidence about her as she receives personal help from another classroom assistant. I intended to spend no more than half an hour there, but after two hours I was still excited by what I was learning.
In the heart of this socially deprived area there is hope for the future. Each child is important and is aided by dedicated teachers and community activists. The neat classroom and tidy playground tell me that this community is holding its head up for the first time. I wish that as many Members as possible could visit that project and see the power of community education and community groups. For those who are interested, the school in question is St Vincent de Paul on the Ligoniel Road. I have no doubt that there are many other equally deserving projects. There are many fine community-based projects across Northern Ireland, but more must be done if social inclusion is to have its proper meaning. If the Assembly is to make a significant impact on people who have been disadvantaged during decades of neglect, we must continue to target social need and find the resources to continue the work of regeneration.
Yesterday I spoke of the regeneration of towns and villages, but today I refer specifically to the regeneration of people who have existed in the twilight world of neglect, presided over by an uncaring Government and the political instability of the last thirty years. As I said goodbye to the school principal and the organisers of that community project in north Belfast, I promised that I would use my influence to ensure that little Jimmy and Rebecca, and all the other children, would continue to have all the support that they need. We must do everything possible to ensure that no more children join the 251,000 who have gone through the education system with either undetected or ignored learning difficulties. The Assembly has a responsibility to ensure that continuing education and lifelong learning is a reality and that all those involved in delivering that service have the resources to continue their work to redress the educational defects of the past.
I am concerned that the budget for the Department of Further and Higher Education, Training and Employment will not be adequate to address the concerns I have spoken about. I petition our officials, the Executive and the Minister to revisit this issue, for it is of fundamental importance to the success of the Good Friday Agreement and of the Assembly.
Mr Wells:
The events of the last two days have shown the Assembly at its best and at its worst. Yesterday's debate earned us no brownie points whatsoever. The spectacle of a large number of Members standing up and rattling through prepared notes for five minutes in a desperate attempt to fit in as many subjects as possible can certainly not be construed as a debate. Today we have at least seen some healthy scrutiny of the Budget and some exchanges between Members as they tried to tease out very important points. Mr Close has starred in his normal role: exciting, enlightening, and blighting us all - and making some important points. I probably did not agree with a word he said, but I felt that his points were well put.
In future, if we are to combine a debate on the Programme for Government with the crucial issue of the Budget, we must avoid squeezing everything into two days. No matter what our views of the Executive and its plans, this is without doubt the most important matter we shall deal with as an Assembly. It is important that we call the Minister of Finance and Personnel to account, probing, questioning and making life difficult for him. He has a chauffeur-driven car and a very healthy salary, and he should earn them. Therefore the more probing and questioning we can direct at him, the better.
Turning to the Budget itself, I should like to welcome the 27% increase in the budget allocated to the Department of the Environment, though I suspect it will not be enough. There is absolutely no doubt that the work of the Environment and Heritage Service and the Planning Service, two major constituents of that Department, has suffered enormously as a result of the last 30 years' underinvestment. I tabled a question to the Minister, Mr Foster, on the subject of the designation of areas of special scientific interest (ASSIs) - the highest accolade which can be awarded to an area of natural habitat in the Province.
The legislation which brought in the ASSI designation was the Nature Conservation and Amenity Lands (Northern Ireland) Order 1985. I was in the old Assembly when we ploughed through that legislation line by line, and it took many months to go through. Fifteen years ago we expected that, once the Order was in force, all the ASSIs in Northern Ireland would be designated within five or 10 years. I was horrified to learn that only 175 areas have been designated, with at least another 80 or 90 in the pipeline. It could be another 20 years before all these areas are designated. That is simply unacceptable. Indeed, under direct rule the Department gave an assurance that the complete designation process would be complete by 2000. We have only about six weeks of that year left, and it is obvious that it is simply not going to happen.
I welcome any injection of funding which will increase the amount of work done by the designation team. It is a sad reality that, without designation, an area of important wildlife habitat can be destroyed. The owner or occupier can destroy it or denude it of its scientific value, and nothing can be done unless a planning application is required. If a farmer decided to chop down some ancient woodland in the Minister's Londonderry constituency in the absence of a tree preservation order or a requirement for planning application, he could do so.
We saw a very good example recently - not in my constituency but close to it in Killyleagh - when a property developer decided to fell five acres of very important woodland, since he felt that it would be awkward having it there when he put in his planning application to build houses on the land. One morning he moved in with a bulldozer at the crack of dawn and destroyed it. There was nothing anyone could do, for the area had not been designated. These areas cannot just be designated ASSIs in their own right; they can also be designated special areas of conservation (SAC) and special protection areas (SPA) under European legislation.
The way the Environment and Heritage Service has been carrying out this work, it has not been possible to designate SACs and SPAs until the area has been designated ASSI - holding up the whole implementation of the European directives in Northern Ireland.
In this Province, we are fortunate to have some incredibly important areas for wildlife - such as Strangford Lough, Lough Foyle, the Antrim plateau, and most of County Fermanagh. The equivalent areas of habitat in other parts of the United Kingdom have long since been destroyed. In Northern Ireland we are fortunate to still possess many important areas and it is vital that they are designated and protected. That is not happening because of the lack of funding.
I am also deeply concerned about the lack of progress that has been made in the designation of areas of outstanding natural beauty. Why has Strangford Lough not been redesignated under the terms of the Nature Conservation and Amenity Lands (Northern Ireland) Order 1985? Why have there been so many delays in protecting some of our very high quality areas of natural beauty? Again it has been lack of funding. Only £300,000 per annum has been set aside for the management of areas of high quality landscapes such as the Mournes, the Antrim plateau and the Sperrins. In any other part of the United Kingdom the budgeting for these areas would have been much higher. Of course, most of them would be national parks and have a very large amount of money set aside for their management. Northern Ireland is like Cinderella in that we have some of the best landscapes in the United Kingdom, with the smallest amount of money to protect them.
My favourite area is north Londonderry. The representatives for East Londonderry - the Limavady and Dungiven area - have an incredibly attractive area around Benevenagh. It is one of the great unsung treasures of this Province, and many people do not know that it exists. Areas like that require much more protection than they are receiving.
I am concerned that in the Budget and the Programme for Government the crucial words "global warming" do not feature. Anyone who has been watching the media over the last few weeks will see that there is now almost conclusive proof that, as a result of the emission of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, we in this Province and people throughout the world are facing radical changes to our climate. The Executive should have given some thought to the implications of that for Northern Ireland. I accept that most of our coastline is not so low-lying that we will suffer inundation or coastal erosion to the same extent as east Anglia, Yorkshire or Lincolnshire. Any responsible Executive must be looking at the implications of such a major change on our agriculture, lowland flooding and drainage systems, all of which should be considered. This issue has not been addressed and there is no excuse. All these points where arising whilst the Executive was forming its Programme for Government and devising the Budget.
I welcome the 23·5% increase in the budget for the Planning Service. Many Members will be aware of the enormous pressure that the Planning Service is under at the moment. They are being deluged by a huge increase in the number and complexity of planning applications and I fear that the Planning Service is going to break under the pressure. Gone are the days when they simply had to deal with an application for a couple of dozen houses. We now have applications for major developments in the countryside, running to 200 to 300 dwellings. If the Planning Service decides to turn those down, often with public and local authority support, they then have to fight public inquiries at great expense, both in terms of money and manpower. At the moment Northern Ireland has had a huge increase in inquiries. The budget for the Planning Service has been insufficient to meet those demands.
The Executive have missed an opportunity. The Planning Service requires a radical increase in funding and a radical upgrading of its status. We expect them to implement and oversee the regional development strategy and develop area plans for a large proportion of the country, yet we still have it within a Department, simply as a planning service. Is that sufficient to meet the demands being placed upon it and should we consider upgrading the status within the Department, perhaps making it a Department in its own right?
4.15 pm
If we do not increase the status of the Planning Service, it will simply buckle under the pressure from the big developers. Those Members representing coastal areas will know of a huge increase in the number of applications for apartments and the amounts of money that are being paid for sites. I do not believe that the Planning Service has the status or the resources to fight the battle that is going to stretch from Donaghadee to Kilkeel and Rostrevor, and all along the north coast. There is a major battle ahead for the Planning Service, and we must give it the power and the resources that it needs.
I want to make one point about area plans. A great swath of Northern Ireland is covered by area plans that are out of date. So far the Planning Service has not had the resources to start the ball rolling to update them. Given the present difficult circumstances, and considering the 23% increase in funding, I suggest that it should engage consultants to do most of the donkey work involved in preparing the plans. There simply is not sufficient qualified planning manpower in Northern Ireland to undertake this work.
Because of the pressures for development we must very quickly reach the stage where every part of the Province is covered by an up-to-date area plan.
My other interest is regional development. I congratulate the Minister Mr Gregory Campbell, on securing such a healthy increase in his budget. It shows that there is no need to be sitting round the Cabinet table with Mrs Brown and Mr McGuinness to put in a strong bid for increased funds and to achieve what is needed for one's Department. I congratulate both Mr Morrow and Mr Campbell on being so successful. I am particularly pleased that Mr Campbell has achieved a £100 million package for the railways. For once, the tide has turned in favour of public transport in this Province.
We now have a three-year programme attempting, once again, to make up for the gross under-expenditure on the Province's infrastructure. We can now turn the tide in favour of the railways. I asked the Minister at a recent meeting what would happen after the end of the three years. There is no guarantee that the work will continue when that funding is over. Obviously, I am hoping that, having spent £102 million on the upgrading of the tracks and rolling stock, we will find ourselves in a position where we cannot turn back.
But what has happened to the Prescott money? The Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott, announced a very large package of about £2 billion, which I understood was to lead to an upgrading of, and a massive investment in, public transport throughout the United Kingdom. I distinctly remember the words "the United Kingdom" being used. However, at a recent meeting with the Minister for Regional Development and his officials it was far from clear whether any of it was going to come to Northern Ireland. Under the Barnett formula at least one fortieth, or 2·5%, of the amount would normally be allocated to Northern Ireland. That would allow massive investment in public transport in the Province. However, no one can tell me what has happened to that money. Is it coming to us? Is it coming to us as additional money? Perhaps it is not coming at all.
The Minister of Finance and Personnel, Mr Durkan, must find out exactly what is happening. If it has not yet been earmarked for Northern Ireland he should ensure that it comes our way. If it comes as additional money it will do a tremendous amount to upgrade the tracks, the bus service and public transport in general.
Another crucial issue facing the Assembly - and one which will dog us for many years to come, if we survive that long - is the infrastructural deficit in respect of both the Water Service and the Roads Service.
I have to thank the Chairperson of the Regional Development Committee for the following figures. He always has these figures at the tips of his fingers. That Water Service requires £3 billion in the next 30 years, and the Roads Service requires £2 billion over the next 10 years. We do not have tax-varying powers - a euphemism for tax-raising powers. Without the ability to raise revenue except through the regional rate - and our rate base is too small to raise this large amount of money - there is absolutely no way that the Assembly, under the present budget restrictions, can ever raise that type of money. We have to accept that it cannot happen.
Therefore I have to agree with Mr Byrne that we must explore every other possibility of raising this money. Such a massive amount is needed that we must bring in the private sector, not to take over our infrastructure but to assist us in its financing.
There are currently many difficulties. What private operator will want to come in and run our railways? They would have no return for their capital, and if there were a return it would be so small that they would be far safer investing their money in the stock exchange, gilts or a deposit account.
The Executive and the Programme for Government must find ways of getting this money to upgrade services - roads, water, and railways - without inflicting the cost on the taxpayers. If we can crack that one, we are worth every penny. It is going to be difficult, but that is something that we are going to have to concentrate on over the next few months.
I have not been parochial yet, but I have to be just once. I am beginning to think that this is not the Northern Ireland Assembly but the west Tyrone Assembly. I am getting tired of the gallant six from West Tyrone standing up time after time and saying "What about poor downtrodden Strabane and Omagh? We never seem to get anything." You would think that once you crossed the boundary into west Tyrone you would find people walking around barefoot and hungry-looking, with thatched cottages, and pulling their groceries home in a donkey cart.
Mr Leslie:
Does the Member agree that as West Tyrone was made the eighteenth constituency in the last boundary redraw, there must be a lot of people living there and it cannot be such a bad place after all?
Mr Wells:
Any time I visit West Tyrone it seems a perfectly average part of Northern Ireland which has underspending in some areas but perhaps no more so than Londonderry, North Antrim, South Down or anywhere else. But week after week we hear them, and I noticed in last night's television coverage of the Assembly that yet again there was the trio from West Tyrone saying the same things. What is the definition of an Assembly Member for West Tyrone? He is someone who when he sees light at the end of the tunnel goes out and orders more tunnel. That is exactly the impression I am getting. Their cup is always half empty - that is a totally irrelevant aside.
But if they are allowed to be parochial, as they always are, maybe I can mention one issue that must be tackled. It is relevant to my constituency and elsewhere. Many small towns in this Province are being strangled because of traffic congestion, and all that is required is a relatively modest amount of expenditure to take traffic away from them in order to let the towns return to their former glory. A classic example in my constituency - and, I maintain, one of the worst examples in Northern Ireland, much worse than anything West Tyrone can produce - is Ballynahinch.
Anyone who wants to see real congestion in this Province should go to Ballynahinch at four o'clock on a Friday afternoon in the summer and see the gridlock caused by thousands of cars en route to Newcastle, Kilkeel or other parts of south Down.
Mr Shannon:
Does the Member agree that if you were to go through Comber at four o'clock on any day from Monday to Sunday you would see that there is a problem there too?
Mr S Wilson:
Does the Member agree that if you go down the Newtownards Road at any time on any day of the week you would see the same?
Mr ONeill:
I have to come in and support my Colleague from South Down. Does he not agree that not only is Ballynahinch a congested town in the evening but it is causing the strangulation of the tourist trade which has been designated as the only possible economic growth area in our constituency? The consequences are very serious. On the one hand the Government are pumping money into centres such as Newcastle to promote the tourist industry, and on the other hand they are cutting it off by not supplying the access.
Mr Wells:
This will ensure that there are two statements in next week's 'Down Recorder' to the effect that the problem in Ballynahinch had been raised in the Northern Ireland Assembly.
I agree entirely with Mr ONeill. We are totally united on this issue. Not only is Ballynahinch being strangled but Ballynahinch is different from other parts of Northern Ireland in that you have no option but to go through the town if you want to travel from the Greater Belfast area to the tourist area of south Down.
Unless one has a detailed map showing the rural routes, an alternative road is almost impossible. Not only is Ballynahinch badly congested, but the tourist industry of the Province is adversely affected. Tourists, quite rightly, are put off by having to sit in a queue of traffic - possibly for half an hour going through Ballynahinch and half an hour coming back.
That problem could be relieved by an expenditure of between £5 million and £7 million spread over several financial years. Dr Birnie tried to defend the expenditure on the cross-border bodies, the "North/Southery" as it is called. A fraction of what is being spent on the North/South institutions could solve Ballynhinch's by-pass problem immediately, build a new harbour in Kilkeel and retain Downe Hospital. Money is being wasted on the shenanigans of running up and down to Dublin.
As Mr Paisley Jnr stated, the £16,000 spent on one set of Ministers travelling to a North/South body would employ a classroom assistant or a trainee nurse in south Down. That is a lot of money.
It is important that the Finance and Personnel Minister allocates sufficient money to the Department for Regional Development. Some of that should be ring-fenced to clear those bottlenecks. That is an environmental issue. It is not healthy for the residents of places such as Comber and Ballynahinch to be sitting in towns that have a lot of car exhaust fumes caused by large numbers of cars waiting to pass through the town. The quality of life for people in those areas is extremely poor because of congestion in the towns.
I ventured into the area of parochialism even though I was concerned that I might be criticised. It is one of the most pressing regional development issues in my constituency.
Finally - [Interruption].
Mr Deputy Speaker:
Is this really final? The Member has spoken for 21 minutes.
Mr Wells:
Yes, I have, but I need my second article for the 'Mourne Observer'.
There are enormous funding difficulties in the Water Service, and I am concerned that the new filtration plant for the Silent Valley will not be finished until 2004. That means that the sheep grazing ban in the inner Mournes will last for at least another three seasons, which will cause enormous difficulties to the farming community in south Down. The Minister should ensure that the funding for that project be speeded up to enable its quick conclusion.
Mr Deputy Speaker:
I am sure that Mr ONeill is resisting the temptation to get into sheep. [Laughter]
I call Mr Gerry McHugh to bring order to this Place.
Mr McHugh:
Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I will be speaking on agriculture, but I will keep as far away from sheep as possible.
As Mr Wells said, why do people try to focus on everything in the Budget? It is almost a natural progression from the ideas that are to be found in council - if you leave anything out you are seen as not supporting it. People then feel that they have to justify their support for almost every issue. I am also glad that Mr Wells thinks that there might be future Budgets for the Assembly to discuss.
Overall, it is a good Budget. When Members sit on different Committees they have different interests, and they try to focus on what most deserves extra funding. In particular, the Assembly is unsure where the funding that went to the Executive will be designated. With regard to the block grant, our gross domestic product is much lower than that of the South or parts of Europe. Therefore there is the difficulty of having a block grant which is too low.
4.30 pm
Given that we are a population growing out of conflict, the least we could have expected was the British Government to bear their own responsibility by enhancing the Budget for some years to make up for the underfunding over the past 80 years. All Departments cross-cut with agriculture and they all have a part to play in developing rural areas. There has been a question mark over the Executive obtaining funding, and over Departments boxing off moneys for their own projects.
The Department of Agriculture and Rural Development made bids of about £10 million for visioning and £9 million for administration that was not paid for in other years. Do they still expect to receive that money, or will it come from other budgets that we are keen to support or push for in other years, such as supporting farming developments that would give money directly to farmers? That is one of my difficulties with this Budget. There is nothing in it for farming development and the possibility of receiving money in future years will be just as difficult to achieve.
The allocation to agriculture is low because the British Government policy is anti-farmer. The Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food has stated that, in the past, European moneys to farmers have damaged the rural landscape - but I think they are referring to the London area. We need a higher budget in Northern Ireland to keep our environment intact and to allow people to remain in the countryside for the best reasons. We should work at this on an all-Ireland basis and not just as the afterthought that the North has always been in terms of British Government policy - and will continue to be as long as we are in that situation. Their failure to draw down European funding because they would have to provide match funding is directly related to that policy. Millions of pounds could have been used in our budget to deal with the things we have been asking for.
The Department of Agriculture and Rural Development's administration budget has to be questioned. A sizeable amount of money is spent each year on disease compensation, but can one farmer receive as much as £1 million from that budget? We will have to investigate why large sums of money can go to individuals and we have to ensure that the best use is made of the budget. Rather than being in a position where a budget of £6 million to £8 million is having to be used each year to keep something there which should be changed or eradicated, the money should be used more efficiently for something else.
Planning has been mentioned quite widely. Mr Wells mentioned ASSIs, ESAs and AONBs and the fact that they have not been always designated, especially in Fermanagh which would gain from such designation. People were against designation because planning regulations have been used to stop them building in the countryside. It has not had a detrimental effect, but it has turned people against designating these areas for the wider benefit of everyone. No money has been directed towards carrying out surveys to help people gain an understanding of the issues.
I welcome some of the elements of the Budget that will create a more efficient food industry. We are a food producing country, and we should be going in that direction. If we compare the Government's commitment to the needs of agriculture in the Budget compared with what has being given in the South this week, we will see that there is very little or no commitment towards farming and agriculture. We have to question the future commitment to this industry, which is still very important to many parts of the Six Counties.
I also welcome that aspect of the Budget which seems to be willing to spend money on placing IT facilities on farms. That is very welcome, in that it would encourage people to develop new skills and perhaps set up a new business or innovate an existing one that may, in turn, alleviate the pressure of low incomes among the farming population.
Although reputed to have a high cost, the North/South implementation bodies have a lot to offer, but the difficulty is that there is underresourcing in this area. There are tremendous benefits to be had, however, and anyone who does not look at the island of Ireland in an all-island context is looking in the wrong direction. In any sort of industry where, for example, there was a factory, you would control it as one unit; you would not have separate parts working to the detriment of each other. That is definitely the direction in which we need to be going.
The DUP has a narrow-mindedness in relation to that as well as a narrow and inward focus, which has always been costly. How much has this cost us, not just during the last 30 years but in the last 80 years, in tourism and agritourism? We have estimated that approximately 20,000 jobs could be created in tourism over the next few years, although that figure is just benchmarked against the number of tourism jobs that have been created in the Twenty-Six Counties and is not a real figure at all. Considering the cost of the situation at Drumcree each year, I do not see that there is any kind of future in tourism. The present budget for tourism is, indeed, probably being wasted.
I agree with most of what was said about rates. There is a difficulty in that money is needed from the regional rate, but people in various businesses are being taxed three times over. They have to pay the regional rate; they are taxed on their business, and they are taxed on their home. That is unfair, for not everybody is able to afford it.
The Housing Executive budget is one that affects my county in particular. We have a very high percentage of housing deprivation, although it is being dealt with. The drop in the budget will have a massive effect on housing deprivation, and one has to question how much longer the Housing Executive will be able to deal with these issues. It will have a long-term effect on the rural areas. People there do not have access to housing under the old regulations and will have to buy new houses, which they are, perhaps, unable to afford.
Some people have mentioned to me the fact that NIE charges for the likes of meter readings and ground rent; they should not be doing this. That is not an efficient way of running a Government business or one that is part-public. No other business would be allowed to charge money to provide a service and then charge again. NIE should look at that, for they may be taking money under false pretences. The Water Service operates in a similar way.
Fermanagh has a longer network of roads than any other county in Ireland, and it has one of the greatest expanses of small undermaintained roads. We have a small maintenance budget of £150,000 to £200,000, yet very little funding is to be allocated to larger projects for the foreseeable future. The amount of tax we pay is illustrated by individuals such as Sean Quinn, who has paid more money in tax on his lorries over the years than is channelled into even a quarter of our Budget in any year. The Department for Regional Development must examine this issue.
There has been a push for the provision of rail transport, and it is good that this has been budgeted for. However, this will not alleviate transport difficulties in rural areas, such as Fermanagh, where there are no railways. The aim of public transport is to carry large numbers to their centres of work, but not many people live in rural areas, and, in any case, a very small percentage of the population actually works in Belfast city centre. Rural areas are affected by the high cost of fuel which results in an increase in the cost of anything which is transported in or out of the area. Those who live in rural areas have no choice but to use a car. This issue must be taken into account, even if we have to stand up constantly and highlight it.
On the issue of expenditure on cross-border bodies, there is no reason for the Minister for Regional Development not telling his counterpart in the Twenty-Six Counties that people there use roads in parts of the North as much as, or more than, we use their roads. There is no reason for not co-financing some of the main corridors into areas in the North, and particularly Fermanagh. Their Government seem to have a lot of money to spend and, in looking to the future of all-Ireland unification, they should consider using their budget to fund the island's infrastructure on an all-Ireland basis.
Collaboration on local road provision is taking place between councils like Fermanagh and Monaghan. I see no reason for not developing this on a larger scale or for not at least requesting the co-financing of budgets for major road developments. There is an excellent road in the Twenty-Six Counties, which runs the length of Aghalane, yet the route which runs on to Enniskillen has been described by local councillors as a goat track. We do not have budgetary provision to remedy this, or, at any rate, the budget has not been given to us by the Department. We have applied for funding to upgrade that road within the next 15 years. That is the situation with roads in Fermanagh.
Underinvestment and economic underperformance in the past have been due largely to total dependence on the British Government's subvention for the security industry here. This supported the notion that it was not necessary to have an effective economy, operating on its own merits. That has contributed to the difficulties which we now face. Recent eye-openers, which have affected local ports, particularly Harland and Wolff, will perhaps illustrate how businesses must stand on their own feet.
Mr Weir:
The Member has referred to the importance to the economy of the security industry. Is he calling for an improvement in the economy by remilitarisation now?
Mr McHugh:
Absolutely. We definitely need demilitarisation.
Mr Weir:
I think the Member misheard me. I said remilitarisation to help the economy.
Mr McHugh:
In the past, people were able to survive on the security subvention budget and there was no need for businesses to operate efficiently. There are those who hark back to the old situation where remilitarisation was necessary as a way of keeping people in jobs, although that is a poor outlook to have.
4.45 pm
I also want to mention hospitals, particularly in the context of the regions. The Regional Development and Health Departments have to take into account all that has been said about the underspending of this budget. It is probably the most important part of government, and you can not put it on the long finger. If you need money for this winter - if you need to provide services to people who are ill - you cannot put it off until next year or for five years; something has to be done about it now. There is not enough money available again this year, although that probably comes down to the fact that all moneys are coming from the block grant. I know that hospital provision is under review, so we must demand immediate access to services this winter.
Services in local hospitals have been cut back again, and we demand access to equal services; access is the key priority. When Belfast City Hospital stopped providing maternity services, people in Belfast complained about having to travel two miles to get to the nearest centre which provided those services, but there are women in Fermanagh who travel 60 miles to access the nearest maternity services. If a person who lives in the most remote part of my area were to suffer a heart attack he would have to travel 60 miles to get to a hospital - well outside the golden hour - and this would increase the threat to his life. It is a question of underfunding and the loss of skilled staff. We lost many staff last winter due to budget cuts, and we will have to try to replace them this year at great cost.
Fermanagh is suffering while this review is going on, and we will have to deal with the situation immediately. In view of the tight budget within which we have had to operate this year, where will the money come from to provide some of the services we have asked for in our local areas. Under policy appraisal and fair treatment (PAFT) or targeting social need (TSN) we expect no less parity in the budget as any other area in this Assembly. Go raibh maith agat.
Mr Neeson:
Mr Deputy Speaker, I can assure you that I will not take as long to make my points as the last two Members. We must bear in mind that this is a take-note debate. However, I am concerned that the process of scrutinising the Budget and the Programme for Government leaves a great deal to be desired.
I do not think that we have done the people of Northern Ireland any great service this year, because of the process in which we have been engaged. I believe, however, that we must recognise the problems that the Executive and the Assembly have faced this year. It is clear that we have inherited major problems created and developed by our predecessors over the last 20 or 30 years. There has been a gross underfunding of the Health Service and education, and in recent weeks we have seen the difficulties experienced by the Water Service and the flooding that my constituents and those in other parts of Northern Ireland have experienced on a regular basis.
Then there is the whole question of the gross underfunding of the railways. My party and myself have been dealing with this issue for two or three years. We recognised the serious problems being created with regard to the rail network in Northern Ireland: trains were breaking down; there had been a number of serious near misses; and great lengths of railway track were being neglected. In my area the sea wall has fallen in between Carrickfergus and Whitehead. These things were allowed to happen and have now created problems for the Assembly and the Executive. We must approach this issue in as positive a manner as possible.
Reference has been made to the moneys set aside by the Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott, to deal with the problems of railways in GB. I understand that at present there is no substantial amount of money coming to Northern Ireland from that particular kitty. I hope that I will be proved wrong in this case. However, if this is accurate the Assembly has a responsibility to approach the Government to ensure that the necessary funding is made available to provide a modern rail network in Northern Ireland. This is what is happening in the other parts of the United Kingdom.
Mr Wells:
If that is the case - and the Member may well be right - it is incumbent on the Minister of Finance and Personnel to tell us what he has done, or is doing, to redress that matter. Under the Barnett formula, are we not entitled to at least 2·5% of that funding package? His Department should be asking why we do not get our slice of that cake.
Mr Neeson:
I was coming to the question of the Barnett Formula. Like many Members, I am seriously concerned as to whether Northern Ireland gets its fair share. It is not only incumbent upon the Minister to ensure that Northern Ireland gets its fair share; it is incumbent upon the Assembly as a whole.
There is another issue which lacks clarity in the Budget. I and others have been campaigning to ensure that the natural gas pipeline is extended to the north-west - the Minister's own constituency. With regard to energy, there are major opportunities for us to develop an island energy infrastructure. This question of natural gas is important, as is the issue of the North/South gas pipeline. There is a need for some clarification.
I am strongly in favour of targeting social need. However, I am unhappy that new TSN still adheres to the Robson index, although perhaps not as rigidly as the previous TSN did. My own area of Carrickfergus - which has the fifth-highest level of unemployment in Northern Ireland - is regarded, under the Robson index, as having zero deprivation. In developing policy, it is important to recognise the inadequacies of using such a formula.
One of the major principles that the Alliance Party adheres to is the principle of sharing over separation.
I would like to think that trying to bring about integration will be at the very core of all the policies of the Assembly - not talking about two Committees, or a number of Committees, but bringing about an integrated single community in Northern Ireland. That must form the basis of any policy expounded by the Government.
Mr Byrne:
How do we overcome ghettoisation? Does the Member agree that that is our greatest difficulty with integration, particularly in urban areas where communities are polarised?
Mr Neeson:
There is one way of getting away from it. To all intents and purposes, Mr Byrne's party sides with one section of the community, and people on the other side of the House side largely with the other. We want to create an integrated society, and the sooner we get away from tribal politics in Northern Ireland, the sooner we can create that.
European funding is another important part of the overall Budget for Northern Ireland, and there is a need to finalise the programmes for peace and reconciliation and the structural funds, so that we can benefit fully from European funding in the transitional period from having Objective 1 status.
Earlier in the debate you warned against repetition, Mr Deputy Speaker, so I will simply say this: regional rate, regional rate, regional rate. Or perhaps even Executive rate, because the Executive has taken the decision to increase the regional rate by 8%. It is cheap - and it is rich - of Sinn Féin Members to complain about the major increase in the regional rate. The Sinn Féin Members are part of the Executive. Where is the collective responsibility? Surely that must be taken on board. The Assembly needs to look at that seriously. On the point about introducing this rate through the back door, why do Members not sit down with us and talk about tax-varying powers for the Northern Ireland Assembly, on the same lines as the tax-raising powers for the Scottish Parliament. People have to realise that if we are going to have a Government in Northern Ireland, we must be up front. Rather than bringing moneys in through the back door, let us be up front with those people.
Mr Leslie:
Is the Member aware that the Scottish Parliament has made no use of its tax-raising powers? As far as I know, it has no plans to do so. It has discovered that there might not be quite the same enthusiasm for it in action as there was before the referendum. When does the Member expect the Scottish Parliament to make use of these powers?
Mr Neeson:
I recognise that the Scottish Parliament has not so far used those powers, but the option is there. We do not have that option. I hasten to add that perhaps Scotland benefits more from the Barnett formula than does Northern Ireland. There is a cushion there which we do not have.
At the beginning I said that I was very concerned about the process this year. It is to be hoped that next year we will be able to exercise the real powers of scrutiny that the Assembly has. I have been out of the country for the last few days, but I hear that Mr John Taylor is suggesting that we collect our P45s at the end of January. We all know just how committed Mr Taylor is to the Assembly. I fervently suggest that next year when we are dealing with the Budget and with the Programme for Government we have a process that will be effective and efficient and will provide real scrutiny of those proposals.
5.00 pm
Mr Beggs:
In the Budget I welcome the increased expenditure on the railways and on the Water Service infrastructure. However, I would like to register my opposition to the Northern Ireland Housing Executive increases, which are above the rate of inflation. At least 20% of tenants will be caught in a poverty trap because of those increases. I would also express my support for a free transport service for all pensioners.
In the debate many Members have expressed similar views, but few have offered practical suggestions on how we can implement those proposals. One party has expressed opposition to the regional rate and indicated a wish to introduce tax-raising powers with some form of income tax in Northern Ireland. Get real. We have to determine the Budget by December. We do not have the authority to introduce tax-raising powers.
Mr Neeson:
I am saying that we should have that authority.
Mr Beggs:
If we did have the authority it could not be done by December. If Members are going to be realistic and oppose the 8% regional rate increase, what are they offering to cut from the Budget? What are their proposals for achieving that saving? This is the only way to balance the books.
Members either go with the increase or offer proposals to cut the Budget. Please listen and learn. [Interruption]
Mr Deputy Speaker:
I must ask the Member to make his comments through the Chair.
Mr Beggs:
I do not favour high taxes but acknowledge the fact that there is a need for improvement in our water and sewerage system to ensure the purity of our water supply and to protect the environment and avoid the pollution that is affecting our rivers and coastlines.
Perhaps the Minister will enlighten me on how our rates compare with local authority and water charges in the rest of the UK. That is the real comparison to make.
The Alliance Party has the privilege of being able to act in the Assembly without any responsibility. What cuts will they propose if they are going to oppose -
Mr Close:
I thank the Member for giving way on this very important point. I am interested to note that the Member is prepared to privatise everything right, left and centre in order to escape his responsibilities. If the Member had been here this morning he would have heard me say quite clearly that if the Assembly and the statutory Committees had been given a proper scrutiny role, millions of pounds could have been saved and spent on delivering services rather than being wasted.
Like me, the Member serves on the Public Accounts Committee where in the past few months there has been a clear demonstration of the inaccuracies, the wastage and the inefficiency that we have in Northern Ireland. We want to correct that, and we can do that through proper scrutiny.
Mr Beggs:
I fear that the Member has not been listening to my comments. Nowhere in my contribution did I indicate any desire to privatise the Water Service. I do not know why he is jumping to that conclusion; perhaps it is something he is thinking about.
I too am a member of the Public Accounts Committee. I acknowledge that several members of that Committee, many of them in the Chamber, do valuable work, and I hope that I do likewise.
However, are we really going to make a budget, based upon a hypothetical saving which might occur, given the fact that we do not even know what areas we are going to investigate over the next year? Have no doubt about it: there will be savings. However, should we commit expenditure now, when those savings have not occurred? I favour prudence in public expenditure. I favour pressing for those savings and - when they arrive - putting them to the best use. At that point, we should redistribute the savings to the most needy areas of our various Departments. It is imprudent to spend money you do not have.
I said that I would raise an area where I thought there was potential for saving in this Budget. I wonder how many Members, in their Committees, have carefully scrutinised the central administration costs of each Government Department proposed by the current Executive? The Department of Agriculture is spending £98·1 million on departmental running costs (a 6·4% increase); the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure is spending £12·8 million (a 10·4% increase); the Department of Education is spending £18·7 million (an 11·9% increase); the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment is spending £38·1 million (a 4·8% increase); the Department of the Environment is spending £35·8 million (a 13% increase); the Department of Finance and Personnel is spending £97·3 million (an increase of 5·1%); the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety is spending £32·7 million (an increase of 5·2%).
It makes me wonder what central administration does in the Department of Health, given the number of boards, trusts and taskforces we have. What are they all doing? What are they doing at the centre?
The Department of Higher and Further Education, Training and Employment is spending £31·4 million on departmental running costs (a 16% increase). That is a very excessive increase in departmental running costs. The Department for Regional Development has departmental expenditure limits increasing by 10·2%. It will be spending £137 million on departmental running costs, an increase of 3·5 %. The Department for Social Development is having an increase of 15·3% in central administration and miscellaneous services costs. It will be spending £156 million - an increase of 9·1% in departmental running costs. I would like each of those Ministers to come to this Assembly.
Mr S Wilson:
Does the Member agree that the most profligate Department is that run by his leader? Is he going to criticise him, or does he feel that he has already criticised the leader enough and does not want to be scolded once more?
Mr Beggs:
If the Member had listened he would know that I have covered all the Government Departments. I was unable to find an accurate percentage increase in the Department that he is referring to, because I saw nothing in the Budget referring to this year's account.
Mr S Wilson:
If the Member turns to page 26 - I would like to assist him in this - he will see that the percentage change is given as 20·6%. The figure is on exactly the same line, by the way, as that of all of the other Departments, the budgets of which he has quite rightly read out to this House.
Mr Beggs:
I thank the Member for that information. I include that Department in my criticism.
Money spent in central departmental expenditure will not be spent in improving the services we deliver to the citizens of Northern Ireland. There is a need for Back-Bench pressure. We can all sit back merrily and do nothing about it. How many Members have raised these issues in their Committees? Everyone is on a Committee. I see that several have. I have too. We should all raise them in the Committees. How many have got their Committee to pass concerns on to the Finance and Personnel Committee? I have done that. I have also spoken to a number of members of the Finance and Personnel Committee and I hope that there will be careful scrutiny of all these central running costs. We can all sit here and do nothing about it, or as Back-Benchers, we can apply pressure to our various groups and parties and collectively do something to change this.
Mr Weir:
Will the Member agree that some people are probably not in the best position to apply pressure to their groups? [Laughter]
Mr Beggs:
The Member seems keen to flaunt that fact. We can sit back, do nothing and accept it, or, within our groups or collectively within the Assembly, we can apply pressure to the Executive and the Minister of Finance and Personnel to achieve savings, so that we have money to spend on free transport for the elderly. Let us achieve some savings so that we can spend money where we want to spend it. Interestingly, while sitting through this debate I received a written answer to an oral point I made on 24 October. The reply is from the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister. It is rather interesting, and I will read a little from it:
"We share your concerns about the need to avoid excessive administration. We were elected to this Assembly to produce more accountable and more efficient Government, not to create unnecessary bureaucracy."
The Budget figures we have been discussing do not tally with the comments in this letter. We need to ensure that savings are made in central Departments. We must not create fiefdoms for our Ministers with lots of civil servants to answer all their wishes. It is important that Ministers go back to their Departments and scrutinise them carefully to achieve savings. We have new technology; e-commerce is being flaunted and we have e-government.
When a private sector company introduces new technology, it is to save money and improve its business performance. By introducing new technology, we have made savings in this Budget. How will that benefit our electorate? We are all answerable for this, and the Executive and every Minister are accountable.
I will now comment on something raised by another Member - criticism of some of the changes in the peace funds. Anyone interested in the expenditure of Peace I cannot fail to be confused and bewildered by the number of funding bodies and agencies that are distributing money. Administration is duplicated, and as we come to Peace II it is important that this is examined so that we eliminate wasteful administration in intermediate funding bodies and get clarity on which organisations to approach for money.
Ms McWilliams:
Does the Member agree with me that many of these bodies are made up of volunteers who do not receive any remuneration? Surely they have been one of the success stories in Northern Ireland, constituting a partnership that did not hitherto exist.
Mr Beggs:
Perhaps what I said was not clear. I am not criticising the voluntary funding bodies. I am criticising the number of intermediate bodies with full-time staff who determine where the funding goes. Why are there so many such funding bodies, with expensive administration costs? These costs mean that less funding goes to the voluntary sector and the community groups to which the Member refers.
Regarding the earlier contest for the biggest traffic jam, I will not be inviting the Minister to examine the bottlenecks in east Antrim. He is, however, welcome to come and visit the A2, but not in the middle of the day. Let him visit the main Carrickfergus to Belfast road during peak morning congestion, or perhaps come to the Mallusk junction of the M2, which ends up like a car park. I invite the Minister to come and view that morning congestion.