The Executive are aware of the compelling case that exists for expenditure in various areas. Mr Wilson has reflected the importance of Health Service issues to him and to his constituents. Other Members have also reflected that. Our approach aims to create more space for addressing those issues. That means, however, that we are unable to fully meet the attractive and worthy bids in other areas of expenditure.

I thank the Member for his kind remarks and compliments. The number of hats I am wearing will be reduced - I will be decommissioning at least one hat in the near future. I will do so on the basis of very profound advice that was given many years ago by a character in Derry called "Wabbits". He had a fondness for removing metal that did not belong to him - metal that was doing a perfectly good job where it was - and furnishing it to scrap merchants. One apocryphal story about "Wabbits" was that he was accused of breaking into a bank and sawing off the cashier security grills and metal plates. After having spent so much time in the bank doing that, he was asked why he did not take the money that was in the drawers. "Wabbits" in reply gave the very good advice: "One man; one job".

Today is a very poignant occasion for many in the House, because it will probably be the last time that Mark Durkan will make a statement on monitoring rounds as Minister of Finance and Personnel. I thank him for his efforts as Minister of Finance and Personnel.

Today's statement has been a very strong wake-up call for many people in relation to society's needs. The bids have again outstripped the resources. Clearly there is a need - as the Minister outlined in his statement and in a reply to a Member - to ensure that all Departments scrutinise their expenditure plans to make sure that that money is going to direct core funding. Departments should not be depending on monitoring rounds to deliver on the real needs that exist.

I agree with Ms Lewsley's point about the need to fundamentally re-examine departmental expenditure on an ongoing basis, rather than in a reactive way through emerging pressures in monitoring rounds. That is part of the thinking behind the needs and effectiveness evaluations that the Executive have commissioned and which will be considered early next year. The Member referred to an observation made by Monica McWilliams, and that is also valid.

Not only will the Departments have to re-examine their plans; this is an area in which the departmental Committees can make a significant contribution as well. In the past I have made the point that, when considering financial statements, a great deal of attention has been paid to bids and, in particular, to bids that have not been met. The more that Departments and Committees can focus on the quality, reality and priority of the plans for the expenditure as allocated, the better for us all.

I welcome the Minister's statement. I suppose that the allocation of extra money to any Department has to be welcomed. I am, however, disappointed that there is no allocation to the Department for Regional Development in this monitoring round. In his speech, the Minister made roads and the public transport system a priority; but he has told the House that the Department for Regional Development will have to wait until December for extra money. I encourage the Minister to put the Department for Regional Development at the top of his financial agenda when December comes.

I see that further money has been allocated for the completion of the census. Will the Minister tell us the cost of carrying out the census for Northern Ireland?

As I indicated in my statement, some of the bids by the Department for Regional Development for public transport will probably be more sensibly taken in December when a fuller picture will be available, rather than doing a bit now and a bit later. The House does not appreciate recurring bids of that nature.

In respect of roads, part of what we are doing in this monitoring round, in carrying money forward to next year, is helping to support the very significant priority allocation to roads in next year's Budget. We are talking about a year-on-year overall increase of around 15% for the Department for Regional Development. Just as for health, the carry-over strategy that we are working on is helping to fund that priority.

Further work was required to complete the census. There were problems given the outbreak of foot-and- mouth disease that meant that there had to be tracking back to ensure coverage. That is why additional money was required.

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I welcome the Minister's statement. However, I have a number of concerns. The Department for Social Development has surrendered more than £13 million in this round and has had less than £3 million returned to it. That is a grave matter, given that this Department is specifically responsible for dealing with the most marginalised and vulnerable members of society. I refer to those people who have to rely on benefits, who cannot avail of affordable social housing and who live in communities that have suffered 30 years of discrimination. Will the Minister explain to the House - [Interruption].

Order. I am having difficulty hearing the Member.

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Will the Minister of Finance and Personnel explain to the House, given the continued absence of the Minister for Social Development from meetings of the Executive, how the Executive decide which bids to support? How do they reach their judgements on bids submitted for social development, given the huge disparity between revenue in and revenue out? Will the Minister of Finance and Personnel explain how the Executive can decide that it is more important to provide £800,000 to the Department to cover unexpected losses in rental income than to provide money for warm homes, for kitchen and bathroom replacements and for tackling the increase in homelessness and the lack of community infrastructure? Even with 17·5% of homes in Fermanagh still unfit, nothing extra has been given to meet these sorts of needs. Go raibh maith agat.

The Member has made a number of points. There were too many points for me to cover in one answer, particularly if I am going to be fair to other Members who wish to ask questions.

The Department for Social Development has important responsibilities for a range of services which, as Ms Gildernew said, relate to the needs and circumstances of people in need in this community and more widely. Most social need is dealt with by the benefits system, which, while it falls within the remit of that Department, is not covered in the Executive's discretionary spend through the departmental expenditure limit but instead through the social security budget, which is part of annually managed expenditure.

Additional money above the amount expected came through from house sales. It is not that money has come in through house sales, but that it is more money than was anticipated. It is right that such receipts, wherever they emerge, should come to the Executive for consideration and not fall to the Department where they arise. Not all Departments are in a position to generate or receive such receipts, not least the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety.

Members ask us to show due priority and not adopt an approach that allows Departments - as Seamus Close said - to receive money which is then locked up in that Department, rather than made available for wider priorities. That is exactly why the Executive are adopting this approach. The Executive take decisions on the bids and pressures set against the priorities that they have agreed for themselves and that have been endorsed by the Assembly through the Programme for Government. The Department of Finance and Personnel and the Economic Policy Unit, based on work with Departments, prepare recommendations on the bids that the Executive should do most to meet. The Executive then take decisions based on those recommendations and other reflections.

I welcome the additional money allocated to the Department of Education to assist the two inescapable bids concerning special needs and Classroom 2000. However, while I note the Minister's recognition that Northern Ireland's schools face major problems, the Department's initial bid for £9·3 million to help to redress those difficulties in school budgets has not been met in whole or in part. That bid reflected the need to match the Chancellor of the Exchequer's allocations for schools in England. Will the Minister assure the House that schools in Northern Ireland will not be treated less favourably than those in England and Wales and that this matter will be rectified in the next monitoring round?

I accept the Member's welcome for the allocation, and I also accept that the Education Committee feels that more could be done in relation to school budget pressures. Members must remember the overall context. I remind Mr Kennedy that the Executive are not in a position to meet all the bids that they would like to meet, and certainly not on the scale that they would like. The bid in question centres on helping schools to meet the pressures on their budgets that arise due to increases in non-teaching costs. I recognise the difficult budgeting situation of schools, but I equally recognise that there is a difficult budgeting situation for a number of other services, not least those that have been emphasised by other Members. However, at this point I cannot anticipate, or speculate on, what areas are likely to emerge in the December monitoring round, beyond those that the Executive have already agreed as areas for consideration.

I welcome the Minister's decision to adopt a more strategic approach and to prioritise spending in Departments. Does he agree that that approach is also a necessary prerequisite to ensuring that our representations to the Treasury on the Barnett formula are more credible and more likely to attract additional funds?

I accept Mr Dallat's point. Unless we can show that we manage our expenditure strategically and that more of our spending is planning-led, we will not be able to put together the sort of case that people want us to put to the Treasury. Our case for more money - or our case for more scope in the use of money - will not make much of an impression on the Treasury if we are not seen to adopt a hard-headed and wholehearted approach to ensuring that our Budget plans meet the needs of the community.

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his competent stewardship of his finance portfolio to date. I welcome his statement and commend him on his election as party leader at the weekend.

As an Irish Nationalist Member, I am concerned by paragraph 20 of the Minister's statement, which states that the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure is receiving extra money to meet the costs associated with the Golden Jubilee celebrations. That is happening when money would be better spent on the Health Service.

How much money is being set aside for local celebrations of the fiftieth anniversary of the British Queen's coronation? The Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure is becoming very partisan. Public money has been spent on marking the bicentenary of the Act of Union. I want to give the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure and the Minister of Finance and Personnel early notice that 2003 will mark the bicentenary of the execution of Robert Emmet.

I thank the Member for his compliments. I knew that there was a "but" coming; there had to be. That must be the longest time that Barry McElduff has gone without making a dig.

I want to put the matter into perspective. The Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure covers a range of activities, including events and programmes to mark various anniversaries. The Department supports numerous commemorative events, in different ways, and it is not the case that it has assisted only the Act of Union commemorations. The exact balance and spread of such programmes are for the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure to decide.

Northern Ireland will be expected to participate in events and programmes that are being planned elsewhere - not just here - and various agencies and entities will want to participate in those events. There is pressure on the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure to meet that demand, and the Executive have now done so.

The Minister's statement was full of gloomy tidings that the largesse - the largesse of the Durkan years - may be ending. What does he know that we do not?

The Minister stressed that we should expect the unexpected with regard to increases in costs and that we might have to reduce allocations, despite the fact that, hitherto, bids have tended to exceed the ability to spend the money allocated. That reflects overbidding or inaccurate budgeting - or a bit of both.

Mr Durkan makes trenchant remarks about the need for hard choices and tough and unavoidable decisions but then reminds us that someone else will have to make them. With that job description, I hope he will indeed be able to find a successor before too long.

Following Mr Durkan's elevation to the post of Deputy First Minister, does he expect that the Executive, in not shirking their responsibilities, will be able to reach consensual decisions on these tough and unavoidable hard choices that he assures us are coming up in the future?

The Executive can have a consensual approach in ensuring that our priorities are translated more firmly into Budget plans. It will not be easy if people approach budget-setting on the basis of assuming automatically that Departments will receive incremental increases on all existing budget lines. We will be entering a spending review next year and will have to examine not only our case to the Treasury but our own plans and patterns. The needs and effectiveness evaluation work is part of that review, which has been commissioned on behalf of the Executive. I hope that the Executive will be able to look at future plans in the light of the outcome of that evaluation work.

I hope that the Assembly and its departmental Committees will help the Executive and will also challenge and press not only Departments but the Executive.

I welcome the Minister's statement and recognise the merit of having better matching of Budget spending plans against Departments' actual spending, so that fewer funds are being recycled out of monitoring rounds. However, money available for redistribution is always welcome, even though difficult choices have to be made about which bids should be considered.

Given that spending bids are always in excess of the public funds available, will the Minister advise what actions, if any, each Department is taking to generate extra resources? Finally, given that an extra £200,000 was allocated to the 2001 census exercise, and in view of the importance of the results in forward planning of public services - health, education and social housing in particular - when will they be published?

The indications always were that it would be 2003 before we would have the full range of information from the census. Partial information will be available before that.

As far as strategic priorities are concerned, we need to work together to make sure that they translate cogently into our budgetary arrangements. In the debate last week, I was encouraged by the focus on priorities. I hope that we are moving away from the bid-chasing approach to these issues. There is a growing recognition that we face hard choices and that an automatic assumption that all expenditure goes up should not be made. We need to have a more mature approach than the "Does my budget look big in this?" mentality that all Departments must receive increases just because another Department receives increases.

The needs and effectiveness evaluation follows through on the Programme for Government. Committees should be locked into work on public service agreements and service delivery agreements in relation to departmental operations and plans. That will help us to achieve what Joe Byrne has suggested. Similarly, when dealing with Executive programme funds, the Executive must ensure that decisions are less incidental and that they are compatible with the wholesale priorities that have been proclaimed in the Programme for Government.

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I congratulate the Minister on his appointment as Deputy First Minister of the Assembly and leader of his party.

First, regarding the job evaluation of library staff, I believe that it is untenable that the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure should have to meet the costs of the evaluation exercise. The Department should not have to pick up the tab for something that occurred before devolution, which should have been paid for by the British Exchequer. Direct rule debt should not be a matter for the Assembly. It is a disgrace that the Assembly should have to pick up that tab when money is being siphoned off from an already declining pot. The Assembly is being held responsible for pre-devolution debt. What is its legal position in that respect? Members were informed that the Assembly would not address pre-devolution matters.

Secondly, given the surrender of significant sums from the Department for Employment and Learning - and the consequent reduction in student loan subsidies - to ease pressure on the Health Service, does the Minister agree that additional money should be directed towards alleviating student debt?

Finally, as one of the unknowing on the "Good Ship Lollipop", may I ask the Minister to give details of the significance of the peace dividend since devolution?

I thank Mary Nelis for her compliments, though she moved more quickly into the "buts" than did Mr McElduff.

First, I want to address her question about the peace dividend. In monitoring rounds, the Executive deal with those services that fall to the devolved Departments. The Executive have a fixed block, so in monitoring rounds the exigencies of security costs and similar pressures do not eat into the money that allows us room to manoeuvre.

Under direct rule, incidental security costs arising from difficult circumstances had to be met from the monitoring rounds. Security matters are now in a separate block, and the Executive are able to make choices without feeling the draught of extra security costs. That is what is meant by the relative peace dividend.

Secondly, regarding the question asked about the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure and the £10 million, those decisions and issues were dealt with by the Departments that are now devolved, albeit larger. It is not a decision that was imposed by the British Treasury or the Exchequer. Those were issues regarding services in Northern Ireland that had implications for future spending. It is as unrealistic to say that that is a liability stemming from a decision that was made before devolution as it is to say that we are not obliged to meet public spending commitments that were made before devolution.

That is a serious issue for the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure. If the obligation is not met, some people may take the view that when the Department was set up, it was "set up". The bid must be met or it will have an adverse effect on the Department's work. The Executive are determined to ensure that the priorities that have been reflected and stated in the House are carried through.

I welcome the Minister's statement and congratulate him on another job well done. I am particularly pleased that £11·9 million has been earmarked to ease pressures within the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure. Despite what we might hear from some Committee members, we welcome that. Does the Minister agree that the reduction of that money from the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure's budget would have such an impact that it would impinge directly on areas such as leisure and sport? My understanding of medicine and health, little as it is, is that prevention is better than cure and that every pound spent on activities such as sport benefits the health budget.

Although I appreciate that work must be done with that money, will the Minister assure us that he will provide as much assistance as possible to enable the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure to resolve those issues quickly?

The Member has welcomed the pending allocation of money for the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure that I announced this morning. That allocation is beneficial because it not only offers that Department the basis from which to meet an outstanding liability but it protects the scope of the rest of the Department's budget. I hope that the Committee will be able to work with the Department to ensure that its plans, and the work that it undertakes in a variety of fields, will fulfil the ambitions of the Committee's Chairperson.

Although I appreciate that there are diverse demands on the Budget, will the Minister assure us that resources for health are a priority? The Health Service is in crisis. I acknowledge that the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety must make her case to the Executive, but does the Minister of Finance and Personnel agree that the case might be strengthened by an audit of health services? An audit would indicate more clearly what the needs are and where there is duplication and poor management. I am acutely aware of the many health needs, but without an audit it is difficult to get a clear picture of the whole service. After an audit, the Minister would have a very clear case, which would have to be addressed.

The current work on evaluating health needs is aimed at ensuring that we see all the issues to do with need, management, efficiency and effectiveness being dealt with together - as they must be. The Executive, the House and the Health, Social Services and Public Safety Committee need to know more fully what should be done on a range of difficult and complicated issues that affect the Health Service in many ways. That is the approach we are taking. The Executive are undertaking these evaluations precisely because we attach such importance to health services and because the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety is as determined as anyone on this issue. We hope to proceed early next year with the benefit of those evaluations.

I appreciate that the Minister is aware of the state of the Health Service in Northern Ireland, and other Members have spoken about it. Certain aspects of the Health Service are slowly disintegrating. However, I welcome the Minister's announcement of an extra £14·3 million for the service and in particular the £3·8 million to replace cardiac surgery equipment at the Royal Group of Hospitals and the two linear accelerators at Belvoir Park Hospital. We all understand the major problems there.

Many people in Northern Ireland have relatives waiting for the development of, or an announcement about, the proposed new cancer centre at Belfast City Hospital. Are there any plans to include initial funding for the regional cancer centre in future monitoring rounds?

Getting cancer services up to standard is a top priority for the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety. It is also a top priority for the Health Committee. That has been reflected in some of its recent deliberations. Work is urgently continuing to ensure that plans for the regional cancer centre are taken forward as quickly and competently as possible. The costs are not yet totally clear, but it will receive attention as soon as possible.

The issues involved are both immense and immensely important. In committing resources for future developments, the Executive must examine issues other than the monitoring rounds. Given everything that I have said about monitoring rounds and the health warning that I gave about them, I would not imply, for the sake of giving a positive response to Dr Hendron, that the question of cancer services will be answered through future monitoring rounds alone. The issue must be given a more strategic consideration. The Committee has put forward some ideas.

TOP

North/South Ministerial Council:
Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission

The sixth meeting of the North/ South Ministerial Council (NSMC) for the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights sector took place on Friday 26 October 2001 at the Great Northern Hotel in Bundoran. Following nomination by Sir Reg Empey and Mr Mallon, Mr Dermot Nesbitt and I represented Northern Ireland. Mr Frank Fahey, Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources, represented the Irish Government.

The meeting opened with updates from the vice- chairman of the board of the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission (FCILC), Lord Cooke of Islandreagh, and the chief executive of the Loughs Agency, Mr Derick Anderson.

Lord Cooke discussed the progress on the development of the Loughs Agency's marine tourism strategy. The board decided that the agency's role should be to facilitate and stimulate marine tourism through the development of recreation and leisure aspects of the fisheries of the catchments, rather than to provide direct funding. Research has shown that there is already adequate funding available for the development of marine tourism, from various sources, and it is not therefore necessary for the agency to provide additional funding. Work is progressing towards the delivery of that strategy.

Lord Cooke also updated the NSMC on progress made on filling posts on the agency's proposed advisory forum. The agency has appointed consultants, who are currently recruiting members to the forum with a view to ensuring that it is fully representative. That work is progressing well.

Mr Anderson informed the NSMC that the agency hopes to have its equality scheme approved by the Equality Commission shortly. In anticipation of approval being granted, the agency has commenced a period of public consultation on the screening of its existing policies. That process will end on 21 December and includes three days of open consultation in Belfast, Newry and the agency's Prehen headquarters. Mr Anderson further advised the NSMC that the agency's new targeting social need draft action plan is also currently undergoing a public consultation.

Mr Anderson also informed the NSMC of the agency's plans to review its entire staffing structure in the near future. That will be carried out by independent human resource consultants.

The chief executive also provided the Council with details of the agency's day-to-day operations, including the positive contribution made by the introduction of the salmon carcass tagging scheme in the Foyle and Carlingford areas. There has been a huge reduction in illegal fishing, matched by a drop in the seizure of illegal equipment and in prosecutions. The Council received a presentation on the agency's work in monitoring shellfish in Lough Foyle and Carlingford Lough and the potential for future development of the resource. With good management, the loughs have the potential to support a vibrant shellfish industry, particularly in native and Pacific oysters and in mussels.

Following those updates the Council considered several papers. First, the Council approved the making of the Foyle Area and Carlingford Area (Licensing of Fishing Engines) Regulations 2001, which will come into operation on 1 January 2002. The Regulations provide for the introduction of a coarse angling licence in the Foyle and Carlingford areas. Prior to devolution, coarse angling licences were available only in the Carlingford area.

The Regulations also provide for the harmonisation of licence fees throughout the Foyle and Carlingford areas. That is required as a result of the introduction of the euro in the Moville and Louth areas. Previously, the cost of a licence has been that of the face value of the licence in the currency of the jurisdiction in which the purchase was made. Licences therefore cost less in the South in real terms because of the exchange rate between the currencies of the two jurisdictions. The regulations provide for the cost of a licence to be similar in both jurisdictions from 1 January 2002.

The Council also considered the agency's proposals for fitting out its interpretive centre. Expenditure of £370,000 was approved, which will be met from the agency's existing approved funding for 2001 and 2002. That expenditure will enable the agency to complete its interpretive centre using interactive audio-visual displays, and it will provide it with an important facility for educating people on the value of the fisheries resources of the Foyle and Carlingford areas.

A presentation was made to the Council on the agency's proposals to engage in a two-year genetic study of salmon populations of the Foyle system in association with the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, the Queen's University of Belfast and the Marine Institute, Dublin. The study will provide the agency with the management information necessary to ensure the future sustainability of salmon stocks in the Foyle system.

The Council was also updated on the position regarding the making of legislation to enhance the functions of the Loughs Agency of FCILC in line with the North/South Co-operation (Implementation Bodies) (Northern Ireland) Order 1999. Officials from my Department and the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources continue to work together to progress that legislation, and I hope to be in a position to introduce a Bill to the Assembly early next year, subject to parallel progress being made in the South.

Ministers were also updated on progress in transferring the functions of the Commissioners of Irish Lights to the FCILC. The Council learnt that a series of meetings had been held involving the Department of the Taoiseach, the Department of Foreign Affairs, the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources, the UK Department of Transport, Local Government and the Regions and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to address the considerable legislative, corporate and financial complexities inherent in transferring the functions of the Commissioners of Irish Lights to the FCILC. The challenge for the parties concerned is to reconcile the legal responsibilities and traditional lines of accountability to the UK Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions and the role envisaged for the North/South Ministerial Council under the North/South Co-operation (Implementation Bodies) Order 1999. Discussions at official level, with a view to resolving those issues, are ongoing among the parties concerned.

The Council discussed the difficulties arising from an aquaculture site in Carlingford Lough licensed by the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources. Mr Fahey agreed to pursue the matter with the Office of the Attorney General as a matter of priority.

The Council also agreed that better co-operation among all operators in Carlingford Lough should be encouraged through a CLAMS-style initiative. CLAMS is an acronym for co-ordinated local aquaculture management system. This is a system designed to develop an aquaculture management plan for a bay or a lough with the involvement of all interested parties. CLAMS is separate from licensing issues.

Finally, the Council agreed to meet again in February 2002, and it approved the issue of a joint communiqué, a copy of which has been placed in the Assembly Library.

I am making this statement on behalf of Mr Nesbitt and myself.

I thank the Minister for her statement and congratulate her on her election as deputy leader of the SDLP.

As the Minister will know, the Foyle Fisheries Commission was somewhat naughty and has not produced annual reports for three years. When will we get those overdue reports? Can the Minister assure us that the new Loughs Agency will not follow the same bad practice and that we will receive its annual reports annually? I understand that the 2000 annual report is still outstanding; we are almost at the end of 2001.

My second question relates to fishing licences. As the Minister pointed out, there are two different currencies on the island - sterling and the punt. The punt is pegged to the euro, and the euro will replace the punt on 1 January. Why is it necessary to have new Regulations for the price of licences when the punt is already pegged to the euro? Can the Minister confirm that the price of licences in Northern Ireland will be in sterling, while in the Republic of Ireland it will be in euros? Does she acknowledge that the euro and the sterling price of licences will continue to float and change throughout the year, as did the prices in sterling and punts?

I thank the Member for his congratulatory remarks and his questions. At its meeting in June the Council approved the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission's first annual report, which covered the period from its foundation in December 1999 to the end of December 2000. The Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission is in the process of finalising its accounts for that period, and, following the completion of the audit of those accounts, the annual report and accounts will be published jointly. I look forward to the completion of the accounts as soon as the audit is carried out. I hope that, as the Member stated, the reports will be published annually. I have no reason to believe that that will not happen.

The decision to charge licence fees in punts and in euros was made to ensure harmonisation, so that licences would cost the same on both sides of the border.

How is that the case?

The value of the punt is indexed to the euro. If, for example, a licence cost £1 sterling, and that was the equivalent of 60 euros, the price in euros would have to be increased to create an equal cost.

I thank the Minister for her statement and congratulate her on being elevated to the post of deputy leader. What action has the Loughs Agency taken to counteract poaching in its area?

With regard to the previous question, I would have thought that Lord Kilclooney would have been interested in harmony and harmonisation.

I thank Mrs Courtney for her remarks about my recent appointment and for her question. The Loughs Agency's predecessor, the Foyle Fisheries Commission, had an effective track record in dealing with poaching in the Foyle area, and the agency's commitment to tackling all illegal fishing activity in its areas continues.

So far this season, the agency has seized over 224 illegal nets, 24 boats and a number of salmon in the Foyle area. However, the agency's enforcement activities were curtailed for a time, due to the foot-and-mouth disease outbreak, when there was a need to minimise the crossing of agricultural land by the agency's officers. The introduction of carcass tagging for salmon has had a major - and beneficial - impact on illegal fishing.

In her statement, the Minister referred to a significant drop in illegal fishing. How many people have been caught; how many court cases are pending; and when will the cases come to court? Will there be a restriction on the number of salmon that people are allowed to catch in the Foyle and Carlingford areas? How will the system work - will people be allowed to catch one salmon per day or one salmon per licence, for example?

I do not have the details that the Member requested, but I can provide the figures in writing. In a sense, carcass tagging sets limits for the number of salmon that are caught, because everything must now be documented and accounted for.

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I congratulate the Minister on her rise to deputy leader of the SDLP at the weekend. I welcome the progress of the North/South Ministerial Council. The Minister said that her officials are continuing to process legislation. At present, people from all over Europe can come here and plunder native oyster and wild mussel along sections of Carlingford Lough. When will the enabling legislation be brought before the Assembly? Why is there such an inexcusable delay in the process? It will be nearly a year before legislation will be brought before the Assembly, and those areas will be at risk during that time.

I thank Mr McHugh for his remarks about my appointment.

I understand his frustration at the delay with the legislation. Progress is being made with drafting, and I intend to introduce the Bill to the Assembly as soon as possible. I am disappointed by the delay, but it is due to two factors that are outside the control of my Department. My officials are fully committed to processing the Bill as soon as possible. However, progress here is subject to parallel progress being made in the South. Also, the people who draft the legislation were unavailable for some time, and this slowed the process.

I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate Bríd Rodgers on her appointment to the deputy leadership of the SDLP. I am very pleased to see this for a number of reasons, and it is good to see a strong woman in the leadership of a party in Northern Ireland.

Will the Minister elaborate on the difficulty that had to be referred to the Attorney General, in relation to Carlingford Lough and the agriculture site? The Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety recently passed a Statutory Rule on food poisoning and shellfish. We were greatly concerned by the enormous outbreak of gastro-enteritis and other severe illnesses caused by shellfish in Northern Ireland. Can the Minister reassure us that the situation is not related to Carlingford Lough? In other words, were the shellfish in Carlingford Lough and other places unaffected? The shellfish came from the waters of Northern Ireland, so it would be good to be given some reassurance.

I thank Ms McWilliams for her initial remarks.

The main problems with aquaculture licensing in Carlingford Lough relate to the resolution of a number of policy issues to the satisfaction of legal advisers in both jurisdictions and to the drawing up of a comprehensive plan for a regulatory regime by the Loughs Agency.

The problems that Ms McWilliams referred to relate to a dispute over fishing rights in a mid-section of Carlingford Lough. At the moment, Northern Ireland fishermen are denied the right to fish in that section. The Minister of the Marine and Natural Resources, Mr Fahey, has assured me that officials will examine the issue seriously and are having discussions to resolve the matter.

There was a restriction on shellfishing for a time because of the presence of a poisonous substance. I am pleased to say that that restriction has now been lifted. The Food Standards Agency made that decision and has given us the all-clear. I assure the Member that shellfish are continually monitored. However, health matters are dealt with by the Food Standards Agency and the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety.

The Minister will be aware that there are considerable opportunities to develop marine tourism on an all-Ireland basis. Can she tell me what progress the Loughs Agency has made on developing marine tourism in its areas?

TOP

<< Prev / Next >>