I support the motion. The programme being developed is the result of court decisions in England and changes to the legislation there. The topic is before the Assembly because of parity legislation. It has been suggested that the Assembly should look at this issue differently, but it has no option other than to go down this route. Having said that, there are certain safeguards in doing so. Some safeguards mentioned earlier in the debate are either not realistic or may not be adopted by the Assembly, and I wish to deal with some of them.

Most Members have outlined the importance of the Towards Supporting People fund. There are approximately 800 schemes in which people who require extra help towards their living expenses are supported. These schemes help almost 13,500 people. Therefore many people are being affected by the changes that have separated the supporting element from the housing benefit element of the funding.

Many people who present themselves as homeless are in that position for reasons other than difficulty with accommodation: they often need additional support. During the Committee for Social Development's inquiry into homelessness it was significant that some groups said that up to 25% of the people they placed in accommodation would present themselves again as homeless within a year because the problem was not simply a housing one. Many people also require social support because of learning difficulties or other problems. Therefore the supporting element of housing costs is important, and the Assembly must address it seriously.

It is pointless to pretend that we can continue with the current demand-led system, because the courts have ruled against that. The system is changing in the rest of the UK, and it must change in Northern Ireland as well. Therefore the Assembly and the Department for Social Development must ensure that when the budgetary arrangements are changed, they have done sufficient work to determine the cost of the supporting element to allow for an adequate transfer of funding to the Northern Ireland Budget, and to ensure that the element currently paid in the housing benefit block is split sufficiently to ensure that there is money to maintain the supporting services.

I have no doubt that the Minister will assure the House that that work is being done and that money will be made available. If we get the baseline right, the problems that people envisage for the future should not arise. If too little money is transferred from the start to the block grant for support services, it will be a struggle throughout to ensure that there is enough money for them.

Some people have suggested that money for support services should be ring-fenced. Some ask why money cannot be ring-fenced here when it is ring-fenced in England. There may not be a parallel between the situation here and that in England. The difficulty is that if money is ring-fenced for one area, we will be pressed to ring-fence money for other, equally important, areas. People can make very good cases for protecting the services that they provide.

Social service workers appeared before the Committee to make the same point about funding for community care. Does the Member agree that they said that health resources were being drained into acute care? Because money for children's services and community care was not protected year after year, it was simply taken from the Cinderella services to pay for the ever-increasing cost of acute care. With hindsight, it might have made sense to ensure provision for community care. Surely the same argument applies to supporting people.

I accept the Member's point. However, we must remember that we can have an input through Committee meetings when Members can consult on budgets. We also have an input in the Budget through debates in the House, and we vote on the Budget every year. Members who feel, as Ms McWilliams does, that the Cinderella services are being squeezed, have ample opportunity to raise those concerns and put pressure on Ministers through the Committees or by amendments to the Budget.

There are problems with ring-fencing funds of any sort. First, if certain funds are ring-fenced, other groups will ask why they are not deemed important enough to have their funding protected. As Members, we face particular difficulties if we take that route. Secondly, demand may increase or decrease at any time, and flexibility is lost by ring-fencing money. I would prefer an annual debate on prioritising resources. Through Committee meetings and debates in the House we can respond to the needs of the various services. Raising such concerns and scrutinising money every year could lead to real debate about budgetary considerations and allocations.

I take on board Ms McWilliams's earlier point about dividing the housing costs from the support costs. That may not be as difficult to do as people imagine. We know the rental costs for certain types of accommodation across Northern Ireland. The cost of providing and maintaining the bricks and mortar will be covered by housing benefit - and it should not be difficult to cover that cost. The supporting element gives us the opportunity to examine and put a value on the services being provided.

I have visited some hostels and have seen the excellent work being carried out. People are often at the end of their tether when they come to hostels, having perhaps lost their home through unfortunate circumstances or due to violence in the home. I remember talking to people in a hostel on the Cliftonville Road who had gone through horrific experiences. Thanks to the support work being carried out, I was amazed at their optimism for the future. They told me how they were trying to get jobs, move into rented accommodation, and about how things would be different once they had a house of their own. Their self-esteem must have been built up as a result of the support work of those running the hostel. That work is invaluable. The Towards Supporting People fund will give us an opportunity to value such work.

Likewise, we can examine the service provided by organisations - and I can think of some examples in Belfast - that are not offering the support they should. The changeover presents us with many opportunities.

The Assembly must ensure that the transfer of funding to the block grant is at the right level so that we are not struggling to find the finance each year. Undoubtedly, the Department and the organisations providing much of the care will put in their bids and do their costings to ensure that the budget is appropriate. The Assembly must ensure that vital support services are provided for people whose problem is often social and not just lack of accommodation.

Supporting people is a most far-reaching and comprehensive change to the funding of support services. Come April 2003, housing benefit will no longer cover the cost of support and will only finance the basic costs of bricks and mortar. It is vital that the Government ensure that voluntary agencies, such as the Simon Community, are confident in terms of the appropriate levels of funding and do not have to face an uncertain future by having to bid for funding on a project by project basis.

At present, rent from residents requiring supported housing is mainly covered by housing benefit, and, once again, taking the Simon Community as an example, this makes up for just under 50% of their total income. With the proposed changes to the housing benefit scheme, the Government must therefore ensure that the Towards Supporting People Scheme, due to replace the current system, has sufficient level of finance in place in order to sustain valuable support services such as that offered by those agencies I have already referred to.

Supporting people goes much further than housing by looking at, and dealing with, the specific needs of the individual. The supporting people proposals have signalled the Government's response to developing a more coherent funding framework for supported housing. Supported housing is delivered to tens of thousands of vulnerable people in Northern Ireland. In fact, there are 13,500 people living under 800 supported housing schemes in Northern Ireland. These include elderly people living in sheltered accommodation, people with learning and physical disabilities, those with mental health problems and homeless people. These people all have very diverse circumstances, and, through supporting people, voluntary agencies will be able to meet the very different support packages which are required.

Unfortunately the tens of thousands of people who require such support services will lose out if adequate finance is not directed into support schemes. Already many support agencies are unwilling to initiate new long-term projects due to the climate of uncertainty that exists.

The consultation paper on the supporting people fund sets out new proposals to develop a new funding framework. The results will produce greater transparency in funding, and the provision of housing support will no longer be tied to types of accommodation, but, instead, to the needs of the clients, and will also facilitate access to financial assistance for housing support services. These proposals will go a long way in raising the priority of support services.

I think we are all aware that the Department for Social Development is under severe pressure in terms of its own budget. In 2000-01 the Department had a budget cut, and its bids for additional funds were not met. The Department has to deal with the most marginalised and vulnerable in our society, which is why funding is paramount to the success of projects launched by the Department.

We must not underestimate the role of the voluntary sector in providing support for the most vulnerable in our society. Those agencies, such as the Simon Community and Shelter, are working together for a common goal. They are providing support for people in different and very often difficult circumstances. I must also congratulate the Northern Ireland Housing Executive, which has initiated its own homelessness strategy and review of its services. The Housing Executive has stated that working alongside other agencies, both statutory and voluntary, is

As has already been mentioned, in the United Kingdom adequate funding has been provided in order to finance support schemes; £138 million has been allocated over three years for England, £15 million over three years for Scotland and £1·125 million in Wales for this financial year alone. The Government in Northern Ireland need to follow these examples if our voluntary sector is to continue to deliver support services effectively. There is no point whatsoever in introducing legislation if sufficient finance is not provided to make it a reality. Unfortunately, the reality at the moment is that without a supporting people fund thousands of vulnerable people will be unable to access the necessary support, therefore becoming further disadvantaged.

People's future should not be dependent on funding and balance sheets, but, unfortunately, finance is crucial to the success of the voluntary sector, although I would like at this stage to point out and to emphasise that the Minister has shown a commitment to the various agencies operating within the voluntary sector. In fact, only recently he launched a £250,000 initiative to help smaller community and voluntary groups.

I therefore call on the Executive to ensure that this Towards Supporting People legislation is supported with finance, at levels not less than currently available through housing benefit. The Government in Northern Ireland must ensure continuity of support for the voluntary sector, and they can do this through a long-term commitment on funding. I am the first to admit that there is no magic wand; there is only commitment, consultation, careful planning, and, as a result, continuing progress. I hope that through this debate today positive action can be taken with regard to funding in order to underpin the implementation process and, in the longer term, the actual programme delivery.

I thank the Committee for Social Development for highlighting this important issue, and I welcome the opportunity to speak.

As almost everyone has said, supported housing is an effective and valuable service for many people in Northern Ireland. Of that there is no doubt. It helps people to live independently in the community, and it often complements community care provision. Many people depend on it: elderly people and those with learning difficulties are two obvious examples. Others have also been mentioned: victims of domestic violence, vulnerable young people, including those who are homeless, and people who suffer from alcohol or drug addiction.

Support comes in many different forms. It might be something practical such as helping a person to set up and maintain a home, helping someone to develop personal and practical skills or simply giving them advice on issues such as financial management. It might be more personal support, such as helping to develop social skills, giving emotional support and advice or simply befriending someone who is lonely or isolated. It might aim to ensure that vulnerable people feel safe in their homes by giving them help to establish personal safety and security or providing things like community alarms.

It is clear that many different groups depend on housing support services, and equally there is a wide range of support services. Not everybody has the same needs, and, therefore, support must be tailored to take account of individuals' needs and their circumstances.

In many cases, supported housing provision has been driven by an imaginative response from voluntary sector agencies to that wide range of needs. Many excellent schemes throughout the Province are run by hard-working, dedicated staff, often in difficult situations. I want to take this opportunity to pay tribute to all the people in the voluntary and community sectors who are involved in that important and vital work.

Needless to say, it costs a lot of money to provide these support services. One difficulty mentioned by the Member for South Belfast, Ms McWilliams, is that the current revenue funding arrangements are complex and fragmented. Many supported housing schemes are dependent on several different funding streams for a variety of different budgets, and in some cases the type of service provided has been driven more by the availability of a funding source than by the actual need of the resident.

Of course, the funding situation has been further complicated by the forthcoming changes to the housing benefit scheme. As has been mentioned in every speech, housing support services will no longer be an eligible charge under housing benefit. That is the main issue, because housing benefit is an important - though not the only - source of income for providers of supported housing schemes, and without it many schemes would be forced either to close completely or to significantly reduce the level of service to their vulnerable residents.

The Department and I were not prepared to see that happen; hence the move towards the creation of a Towards Supporting People fund. The increase in supported housing provision in recent years has given rise to an effective resource that provides valuable assistance to vulnerable people. Many of the schemes have been provided through funding from my Department in the form of housing association grants. Therefore, I have a vested interest, and I certainly do not want to see a situation develop whereby that investment might be jeopardised in any way through a lack of appropriate revenue funding. More importantly, I do not want to see a reduction in the level of service that is currently provided to the vulnerable and needy in society. For those reasons, I decided that Northern Ireland should establish a Towards Supporting People fund.

The creation of such a fund will provide many advantages. I agree with Ms McWilliams that this should be viewed as an opportunity rather than a threat. It will provide a replacement for the amount of housing benefit that is presently funding housing support services. That amount is now being identified and quantified by the Department as part of the transitional housing benefit process, and will be transferred from the social security budget to the Towards Supporting People fund in April 2003 as part of the Northern Ireland block.

Another advantage of the creation of such a fund is that it will eliminate fragmentation, removing the problems that stem from the current complex funding arrangements by combining all other existing funding streams into a new, single budget to be administered by the Housing Executive.

While changes to the funding arrangements are the main feature of the new proposal, they are by no means the only feature. The new arrangements will allow us to place a greater emphasis on the quality of the service provided. If we place all funding sources into a single budget, we will be able to progress from a situation where the service provided is tailored to meet the requirements of the funding source to one where the needs of the individual are the determining factor.

It will also mean that the Housing Executive can more closely monitor the service provided, and will therefore ensure that vulnerable residents receive the level of service that best meets their needs. In the next few weeks I propose to issue a consultation document that will set out the details of the proposed arrangements for monitoring.

An interdepartmental working group comprising representatives from the Department for Social Development, the Department of Health, Social Services and Public safety, and health and social services boards, chaired by the Housing Executive, has developed our proposals. They have been endorsed by an external reference group including representatives of the various interested bodies. They have also been subject to wide consultation. While concerns have been raised about details, the broad concept of the proposals has been welcomed.

This motion concerns the implications of introducing a new system for funding housing support costs and the need to secure commitments from the Executive so that financial allocations for the Towards Supporting People fund are guaranteed and will be maintained at levels not lower than those currently provided through housing benefit. The motion emanates from the concerns of Committee members. They have already expressed concerns to me about the move from a demand-led fund to one that will have to be bid for year-on-year.

Concerns about funding were a recurrent theme during the consultation period and in the responses. I acknowledge those concerns. As has been acknowledged by some Members - but not by Mr ONeill, who suggested that we do something different in Northern Ireland - we have no option in the matter. The decision to remove support costs as an eligible charge for housing benefit was not made by this Department; nor would this Department have made it. The decision has not been made by the Assembly or by any MLA.

The decision has been made as a result of a court challenge, and it applies throughout the United Kingdom. Either we react to that fact and establish a Towards Supporting People fund, or we turn a blind eye to reality and risk jeopardising the viability of many important and worthwhile schemes. I am not prepared to do that. We do not have the luxury of wishing it could be different or of reverting to the previous situation. Things have moved forward, for reasons that I have explained.

The changes to the housing benefit system are being introduced because the courts decided that support costs are not an eligible charge for housing benefit. Whether we like it or not, housing benefit will not pay for housing support services from April 2003.

The housing benefit portion of the new Towards Supporting People fund, which is the amount that will transfer from demand-led to annual bidding, accounts for only half of the funding. The remainder will come from within the housing budget in the form of a special needs management allowance, which my Department pays to housing associations that operate supported housing schemes, and several other smaller funds operated by the Housing Executive. In terms of the motion as it is worded, there is no difficulty in agreeing that the financial allocations "will be maintained at levels not less than currently provided through housing benefit" because a substantial portion of the money allocated comes above and beyond housing benefit. Housing benefit is only a proportion of it.

I know that there are some concerns about matters of detail, not least about the method for calculating the amount of housing benefit funding that is considered to cover support services and that should, therefore, move from the social security budget to the Towards Supporting People fund. I give a guarantee to Mr Sammy Wilson, who raised the point, that there will be no underestimation of the amount to be transferred. Mr Billy Hutchinson said that the baseline figure in the first year will be critical. I am determined to ensure that the maximum amount of money is transferred to meet the costs of the Towards Supporting People programme.

Members have also expressed concerns about appropriate funding being made available to enable the Housing Executive to carry out its responsibilities, and that is where the £138 million comes in. Mr Shannon, who unfortunately is not in the Chamber, and other Members, raised that point. That figure is the money given to some 400 local authorities in Great Britain to implement the scheme. Northern Ireland has only one organisation, the Housing Executive, and until now the Housing Executive has managed to meets its responsibility within existing budgets. However, I realise, and I share the concerns of Members, that this is a situation that cannot continue. That is why I have bid, and will continue to bid very strongly, to the Department of Finance and Personnel to secure the necessary funding that the Housing Executive will require to allow it to meet all its additional commitments.

Therefore, I welcome the plea that was issued for all Members to ensure, when it comes to backing up the strong arguments made today on the need to ensure that appropriate funding is put in place, that those arguments are also put to the Department of Finance and Personnel. It is to the credit of the Housing Executive that it has been able to carry out the preparatory work to date within existing resources. Much important work has already been done in calculating the size of the fund and developing an implementation plan that sets out the timetable for tackling issues such as needs and supply mapping.

Funding for the Housing Executive is, of course, not the only issue. Members have raised the issue of the impact that the Towards Supporting People fund will have on the voluntary agencies that provide housing support services. It is important that they receive the necessary assistance to allow them to prepare for the new arrangements. The House will acknowledge the fact that some £120,000 has been provided in that regard, and the money has been used to create three posts specifically aimed at assisting voluntary organisations to prepare for the new arrangements.

The issue of Sydenham House was raised. The Housing Executive's Towards Supporting People project team has several secondees whose aim is to provide specific aid to small organisations such as that.

I also accept that communication is important. I assure Members that every effort will be made to keep all interests fully informed of developments.

The introduction of a Towards Supporting People policy and funding framework in Northern Ireland will allow us to place the future of the supported housing sector on a more secure and co-ordinated basis. It will eliminate fragmentation of funding and improve the quality and effectiveness of housing-related services.

The issue of ring-fencing has been mentioned in relation to the situation in the rest of Great Britain, where money has been allocated to local authorities and ring-fenced to ensure that they do not spend it on other requirements. Under the new arrangements the money in the Towards Supporting People fund will be part of the housing budget. The Minister for Social Development will be responsible for it and will be in a position to ensure that that money is not raided to meet other priorities. The Assembly will be in a position - through the votes at Budget stage - to ensure that the necessary resources are available to meet the priority that we have spoken about so strongly today. Let no one be in any doubt as far as that matter is concerned.

I value the debate. It has been an important debate on an important issue. I commend the Committee for Social Development, and I assure the House on behalf of my Department that we are fully committed to the introduction of the Towards Supporting People fund, which will meet the needs of the most vulnerable and needy people in our society.

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I shall make a few additional remarks, given the importance of the debate and the concerns surrounding it.

Several common themes arose from the consultation process and the consultation paper 'Supporting People: A New Policy and Funding Framework for Support Services'. Several seminars took place about the Towards Supporting People fund. The key message from those seminars was that the housing support element was too low, resulting in an underestimation of the budget.

The budget for the Towards Supporting People fund should be ring-fenced so that it is not diverted to other priorities. That is essential, as funding may be split between the Housing Executive and health trusts. We must ensure that resources can only be used for this specific purpose or we will have difficulties in years to come in providing funding for this essential service.

Providers have difficulty in determining the split between rent - meaning bricks and mortar - and care and support costs. That will no doubt result in the underfunding of certain projects. Small providers and some voluntary groups will need training, support and the necessary resources to implement the scheme. There is a danger that some of the smaller housing providers for the homeless will not be able to survive within the parameters of Towards Supporting People policy, and may have to close. That will inevitably lead to gaps in provision.

The consultation also highlighted the fact that further details were needed in order to evaluate the extent of partnership required, and that links with local strategic partnerships and communities were essential. Consultation with the voluntary and community sector should continue on this issue.

One can tell from comments made in today's debate that there is a great deal of concern about the inadequacy of funding for maintaining existing services and meeting new responsibilities. If finances are to be based on existing levels of support, then an increase in needs may not be met.

Another theme arising from the consultation was that domestic violence should be explicitly included, particularly in matters of confidentiality. The issue of asylum seekers must also be addressed.

People also wonder how the Children (Leaving Care) Bill will fit in with the Towards Supporting People proposal.

Mr ONeill rightly identified the issues of timescales and the finance needed to deal with the increasing problem of homelessness, particularly for young people leaving care. My party Colleague the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety recently introduced the Children (Leaving Care) Bill, the Second Stage of which was passed today. She understands the needs of young people leaving care and the many and varied challenges that they face. We must play our part in implementing provisions that will make it easier for young people at that difficult time. We must ensure that the provisions in that Bill, when taken alongside the housing support Bill, provide the proper legislative basis to give young people the security and help that they need. Mr ONeill is right that bids should not have to be made. It is a demand-led service, and the money must be guaranteed.

Dr Birnie and Mr ONeill promoted an integrated and holistic approach to the issue. They are right that the issue is not the responsibility of the Department for Social Development alone. The Bill includes an educational component, and its connection with health is obvious. Dr Birnie made an interesting association between the needs of the long-term unemployed and their vulnerability to homelessness. I agree that we need preventative strategies, but we need money for support services as well.

I congratulate Mr Shannon on drawing attention to the plight of women. Vulnerable women affected by domestic violence need to know that there are safe places that will meet their needs in times of trauma. Mick Murphy asked whether the Minister has bid for funding to pave the way for the scheme. I am unsure whether the Minister responded properly by stating that the needs were met through the existing Housing Executive resource funding. Perhaps he could give us further detail on that.

Billy Hutchinson made a measured and valuable contribution. We are lagging behind, and we need more integration. He used the special purchase of evacuated dwellings (SPED) scheme as an example of funding difficulties. In addition, he mentioned charging and means testing, which must be taken on board. Mr Hutchinson also said that it is incumbent on all Members to make pleas to the Executive to provide that money. The Minister is the key person in that respect.

Ms McWilliams made the critical point that legislation is all very well, but resources are needed to give effect to it. She drew attention to the difficulty of breaking down the costs. That common theme emerged from the consultation, and all the service providers made a similar point. Resources are needed urgently to help the service providers to deal with the changes. Ms McWilliams said that that was an opportunity to value the voluntary sector providers.

I was glad that the Minister paid tribute to the voluntary and community sectors. Often they are not recognised for their work to meet certain needs in society. I too pay tribute to them, but the greatest tribute that the Assembly could pay would be to ensure that the work of those sectors is funded.

Sammy Wilson outlined the scale of the problem and the variety of reasons for it. He said that we need to get the baselines right, and I agree. It is important to help service providers to get their calculations right so that underfunding does not occur. Mr Wilson also acknowledged the importance of support work, and other Members highlighted the need for prevention. Perhaps more outreach work is needed to ensure that the situation does not become critical. I trust that the Minister will not overlook the need to include that requirement in his calculation of figures based on necessary provision.

Mark Robinson rightly highlighted the need for certainty among providers. There is a great deal of uncertainty and concern among the service providers as to how they will be affected by the Towards Supporting People initiative. In addition, he raised concerns about the Department's budget levels and drew attention to the fact that England, Scotland and Wales have set aside funding for the introduction of the new scheme and are well advanced in their plans for it. Like Ms McWilliams, Mr Robinson said that legislation on its own is never enough and that funding is critical.

My first observation is that the debate has served at least one purpose. It has drawn attention to the fact that there are important social issues beyond health and education - housing must be third on our list of priorities.

It is unfortunate that more Members were not in the Chamber. However, the Members who attended have made a valuable contribution, and the standard of debate was excellent. I hope that the other Members' absence is not a reflection of how they feel about this issue, because it is something that affects all of us in every constituency in the North. I hope that those absent will read about the proceedings in Hansard. The Members who participated in the debate spoke about people - people who come from different political, social and religious backgrounds. However, as I have said, they come from every constituency. I do not deny that health and education deserve to be at the forefront of the Assembly's policies. However, they must not overshadow all other matters, and they must not be addressed at the expense of the most marginalised in our community.

It is worth noting that when the idea for the Towards Supporting People fund was put out for public consultation, almost all of the 20 or so organisations that responded were either providers of housing support services or agencies from the health sector. In accepting the need for changes to the existing system, many respondents welcomed the principle of a more flexible scheme. However, they registered deep concern about issues such as means-testing, quality improvements and the practicalities of introducing and delivering the new system. We must pay attention to those concerns. Those organisations have vast amounts of experience - they know what they are talking about, and if they are concerned, so should we be. As I have said, tributes have been paid to the work carried out by those agencies, and, although I cannot mention individuals, they have my appreciation and respect for the work that they do.

I hope that the Executive get the message loud and clear. Health and education are important, but so is housing. We are talking about legislation to provide for the poor, the elderly, those with addictions, those who have had to endure family breakdown or domestic violence, and young people. Some of those young people will be leaving care and will rely on our support as they seek to rejoin and re-establish themselves in our community. We need to support them properly, and we must ensure that adequate funding is available. I hope that this debate is not a one-day wonder, in which we all pledge to work for the marginalised and then retreat from that pledge.

I shall comment on some of the Minister for Social Development's pledges. He talked about how the Towards Supporting People fund will allow us to place the future of the supported housing sector on a more secure and co-ordinated footing. He mentioned eliminating fragmentation of funding, and approving the quality and effectiveness of housing-related support services. It is imperative that we do that, and I hope that he is right. The Minister said that the increase in supported housing provision in recent years has given rise to effective and valuable resources. That is true, and many of the schemes have come from housing association grants. I would like the Minister to keep this issue at the forefront and to ensure that proper resources are put in place. Although he says that money should not be ring-fenced, many Members said that the money should be ring-fenced. It is a worthwhile cause, so we should ensure that the money is available to enable the most vulnerable and marginalised in our society to have a better quality of life. Go raibh míle maith agat.

That this Assembly expresses serious concern about the implications of introducing a new system for funding housing support costs andcalls on the Minister for Social Development to secure commitments from the Executive to ensure that financial allocations for the "Towards Supporting People Fund", due to be introduced in April 2003, are guaranteed and will be maintained at levels not less than currently provided through housing benefit.