A considerable amount of work is being done on e-government, especially on digital inclusion. The Executive intend to make all key Government services electronically available by 2005. However, that is only half the story; that target will have to be matched by citizens in order to maximise access to those channels. A strategy document on the matter is being developed.

The Executive endorsed targets for electronic service delivery in July 2001, and those have now been included in the Programme for Government. It has been agreed that 25% of all key services will be capable of being delivered electronically by the end of 2002, with a target of 100% capability set for the end of 2005.

Like others before me, I welcome the statement on matters that are germane to all the islands. I draw the Ministers' attention back to one of my favourite subjects, which is Sellafield and British Nuclear Fuels Ltd. I welcome the fact that all Governments are now concentrating on that area, although I am somewhat sceptical about the report, which says that the UK Government, a principal stakeholder, is taking the lead in the environmental sector. I shall watch that space with care.

I draw the Ministers' attention to the fact that a statement will be issued later this week that will announce the establishment of a liabilities management authority and the possible dismemberment of British Nuclear Fuels Ltd. That will result in taxpayers, including those in Northern Ireland, picking up the tab for 50 years of nuclear waste accumulation. Will the Ministers ensure that all facets of the nuclear industry will be on the agenda next autumn on the Isle of Man? During my recent visit there, its Government outlined their grave concerns and their determination to pursue the commencement of the decommissioning process, which is creating the additional long-term waste. I want an assurance that, at the next meeting, we shall specifically pursue resolutions to the environmental sector's horrendous problems.

The Member is well known for his concerns on this and for the assiduity with which he pursues them. I remind him that the Republic of Ireland and the Isle of Man have taken the lead on the issue of Sellafield and radioactive waste. A paper prepared by Ireland and Mann was presented at the environment sectoral meeting in Edinburgh in February 2002. Since that paper was presented there have been several developments, such as the UK Government's decision on the Sellafield MOX plant, the environment agencies' consultation on the review of authorisations to dispose of radioactive waste from British Nuclear Fuels Ltd at Sellafield and the UK-wide public consultation on managing radioactive waste activity. Indeed, as the Member said, there may be further developments.

The Edinburgh meeting agreed that the paper should be redrafted to take account of those issues. The revised paper, which takes account of all subsequent developments, will form the basis of more detailed discussions at the next environmental ministerial meeting, which will take place in Belfast this autumn.

North/South Ministerial Council Plenary Meeting

TOP

I have received notice from the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister -

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. On 28 May last, I proposed a motion calling on the Assembly to enter into negotiations on the establishment of a North/South parliamentary forum. The Assembly rejected that motion, largely through the votes of Ulster Unionist Members. Media reports over the weekend suggested that the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC), on which the Assembly is about to receive a statement, had discussions on the establishment of such a forum, which I believe to be properly the responsibility of the House and not of the Executive. Maybe it illustrates a change of heart on the part of the First Minister; maybe it illustrates the continuing shambles of the Ulster Unionist Party. However, Mr Deputy Speaker, perhaps you will rule -

Order. That is not a point of order. I cannot accept it because it is not for me to rule on what may be discussed at the NSMC. However, the Member may ask a question on the matter that concerns him following the Deputy First Minister's statement.

On that point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. You did not allow me to complete my point of order -

Order. I have heard sufficient to know that it was not a point of order. I am not accepting it as a point of order. I call the Deputy First Minister, Mr Mark Durkan.

On a further point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker.

I am not taking the point of order, Mr Ford.

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. A Member has a right to raise a point of order if it is not along the same line as the point of order that you have ruled against. That is the right of every Member.

The Member has a right to attempt to make a point of order before a statement is made, as the Speaker made clear yesterday. That is why I allowed Mr Ford to continue for some time. I heard what he was saying, and it was not a point of order. I call the Deputy First Minister, Mr Mark Durkan.

The Deputy First Minister (Mr Durkan): With permission, Mr Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the Ministers who attended I will make a statement on the fourth plenary meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC) held on Friday, 28 June 2002 in Armagh. The eight Ministers whose names have been notified to the Assembly participated in the meeting.

The plenary meeting reviewed the programme of work which it had put on train at its first meeting in Armagh in December 1999 and received a progress report on the work of the NSMC at meetings in sectoral format since January 2002. The Council heard reports on the valuable work being done in those sectors. Both sides look forward to the delivery of further tangible benefits to both jurisdictions. The council noted that the useful first meeting took place in institutional format in December 2001 and looked forward to continuing its work in that format.

The Council considered proposals brought forward by the consultative forum working group following consultation with the Northern Ireland Civic Forum and the social partners in the South which are participating in the central review mechanism of the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness.

An outline structure for a North/South consultative forum was agreed by the Council. A twice-yearly conference will take place, alternating between North and South and comprising representatives of civil society in the North and South. The planning and organisation of the first conference will be undertaken by a steering committee drawn from the Northern Ireland Civic Forum and the social partners in the South participating in the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness in liaison with the two Administrations. The steering committee will also invite representatives from a range of relevant organisations from the North and South to participate in the conferences.

The Council noted the analysis put forward by the working group, which was set up to consider areas of co-operation, and agreed that there is potential for mutual benefit from co-operation in areas such as strategic investment in infrastructure, including strategic transport issues.

It was also agreed that the appropriate Ministers in the respective North/South Ministerial Council sectors should consider whether there are matters within existing areas of co-operation which might be included in their future programme of work.

With regard to North/South co-operation outside the North/South Ministerial Council, it was agreed that Ministers would examine the working group's proposals. The Council considered the provisions of the agreement that established the North/South bodies for the transfer of the functions carried out by the Irish Lights Commissioners to the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission. It recognised that complex issues surround such a transfer, and it asked the relevant Ministers and Departments, North and South, to examine urgently the alternative possibilities and make proposals to the Council.

The Council discussed European Union matters and considered a report from the EU working group. Recognising the importance of the EU to both jurisdictions, the Council decided that Ministers might consider the European dimension of North/South co-operation at the next sectoral meetings of the North/South Ministerial Council. It also decided that the working group should make an overall assessment of EU issues that are likely to arise. Further consideration will be given to how the Council's views can be reflected appropriately at EU meetings.

The Council considered proposals to overcome obstacles to cross-border mobility on the island of Ireland. Consultants carried out a study on the matter, which was published earlier this year, after which there was extensive public consultation. The Council was pleased to note that, since commissioning the study and the consultation process, some recommendations have been implemented. In response to recommendations on the difficulty of accessing information on issues relating to North/South mobility, the Council agreed to establish a web site providing comprehensive and easily accessible information.

The Council also decided that recommendations for education, work, health and pensions should be considered by relevant Government Departments so that they can make detailed proposals for implementation, including costs. It also decided that officials from the two Administrations would further examine other recommendations.

The Council noted the annual report on the activities of the North/South Ministerial Council from 1 January 2001 to 31 December 2001. That report will be published soon. The Council noted the development of two similar investment initiatives: the National Development Finance Agency in the South and the strategic investment body in the North. It welcomed the proposals for infrastructure development being prepared by both Administrations.

The Council, when considering the provision for a joint parliamentary forum in strand two of the agreement, recognised that the development of any such forum is a matter for the Northern Ireland Assembly and the two houses of the Oireachtas. It agreed that officials from the two Administrations should contact officials in the elected institutions and report to the next plenary meeting. The Council noted a recently completed economic appraisal of the options for accommodation for the joint secretariat of the North/South Ministerial Council in Armagh. It agreed that those options should be considered by the two Administrations in liaison with the joint project team and that they should be presented at a Council meeting.

The Council approved a schedule of North/South Ministerial Council meetings to take place over the coming months. Before the meeting commenced, the First Minister, the Taoiseach and I launched the North/ South Ministerial Council web site. The Council agreed that its next plenary meeting would take place in Northern Ireland in November 2002. A copy of the communiqué that was issued after the meeting has been placed in the Assembly Library.

Will the Minister confirm that the scheduled sectoral meetings will be business driven as opposed to diary driven?

The future business of the North/South Ministerial Council, in its various formats, will be business driven in that work being carried out at present must be followed up by the relevant sectoral format. The Council agreed at its meeting on Friday that the sectoral formats would consider EU matters that may be of relevance to them and examine other opportunities for co-operation that have not yet been activated. There is work to be done and followed through in the meetings in each sectoral format, so future meetings will be entirely business led.

Can the Minister say what discussion occurred with the two newly launched investment initiatives - the strategic investment body in the North, and the National Development Finance Agency in the South? Can he ensure that they will be fully supportive when joint investment projects of mutual benefit arise? Where will the next NSMC plenary meeting take place, and will the Deputy First Minister consider bringing it to his native city to allow the participants to experience the hospitality of that part of Ireland? [Interruption.]

Order. A mobile phone rang in the Chamber; can it be switched off?

On the Member's latter point, we may be able to hold the next plenary meeting in Magee College in November. I hope that we will be able to fulfil the Member's ambitions and that the local hospitality matches the standard that she claims.

The discussion we had on the strategic investment body and the National Development Finance Agency took place at a time when our plans and proposals for those entities were at a formative stage. We shared with the Southern Ministers the background to the reinvestment and reform initiative and the role we envisaged for the strategic investment body, which is to deliver supporting finance solutions for the programmes and priorities that will be determined on the democratic, political side by Ministers, Departments and the Executive.

Southern Ministers filled us in on the background to the National Development Finance Agency. Although the scope for activity and support by the bodies is similar, there are some distinctions. Given that we will be talking about strategic investment, which on some occasions will have a North/South dimension, and about trying to lever in other sources of funding that may include funding from international markets, it makes sense to compare notes and exchange ideas. It is a situation in which great minds think alike. We have produced and developed an entity similar to that in the South, so we should maximise the advantages of further comparisons and co-ordinate and collaborate in the future.

The Ministers' report on the NSMC plenary meeting states that

Surely that is a major extension of the area in which the NSMC should work? It seems that political issues that are not within the framework are to be brought in. It has been advocated that the NSMC should make representations at European meetings on European matters. That would weaken the status of Northern Ireland as a separate entity from the Irish Republic and prevent Northern Ireland from making its own case in association with the rest of the United Kingdom and Europe. Keeping those points in mind, can the First Minister and his deputy tell the House the cost of the proposed increase of the North/South quango? Can they confirm that it is the Dublin Government that is driving the agenda for the benefit of those who demand a united Ireland? Can they further confirm that the Northern Ireland Assembly has no power to alter the budget of that all-Ireland vehicle in which they seem to participate so enthusiastically?

I remind the Member that what I said was with regard not to North/South co-operation that is not taking place but to North/South co-operation that is taking place outside the NSMC. It was agreed in respect of that kind of co-operation that Ministers would examine the working group's proposals. That was discussed earlier in the year when the First Minister and I reported on the meeting in the NSMC's institutional format that considered other areas of co-operation that were taking place outside the NSMC.

An extensive range of areas of co-operation is being pursued on a Department-to-Department and civil servant-to-civil servant basis. I would have thought that the Member, who is so assiduous in trying to ensure that anything that happens should happen under the spotlight and accountability of OFMDFM and that Ministers should be accountable for everything that their Departments do, would not be averse to ensuring that all areas of activity that are undertaken by Departments on a cross-border, North/South basis, would be considered for inclusion in the areas of co-operation that are conducted under the NSMC and would, therefore, be the subject of accountable statements in the Assembly.

Let us be clear about EU matters. Nobody talks about Northern Ireland as a region that does not have its own case on EU issues. Clearly, Northern Ireland has its own case. Northern Ireland's regional case on EU matters is often different from the priorities of and cases made by the UK Government. At times, it is also distinct from the priorities and interests of the Irish Government.

Northern Ireland must use all available channels to promote its needs. That involves MEPs and their role in the European Parliament. It involves the Assembly, using every means available through joint ministerial committees and other opportunities, such as its influence on the position of the UK Government. It includes Northern Ireland's Ministers being involved directly in the business of the EU Council, alongside UK Ministers. All that has been done.

In addition, being able to use the NSMC to explore issues of common concern and possible differences and, therefore, rivalries and tensions that we might want to minimise when matters are discussed at EU level, will add one more layer of advocacy and support to Northern Ireland's regional interest.

There are occasions when it is directly in Northern Ireland's regional interest that present at the EU Council of Ministers are not just the UK Ministers whom we have lobbied and badgered, but Ministers from another member state - our neighbouring Ministers in the South, who fully understand Northern Ireland's needs and are often promoting a similar case. An example of that is fisheries. This is about maximising the opportunities that are afforded to us to promote Northern Ireland's interests in the EU.

I am disappointed that the Deputy First Minister seems to believe that the best interests of the North do not lie in Ireland's being treated as a single unit by the EU.

Nonetheless, I welcome the fourth plenary meeting of the NSMC. Yesterday, the Member for South Down, Mr Mick Murphy, raised the issue of students from the Twenty-six Counties being unable to receive financial assistance to study for PhDs in the North. Can the Minister detail the number and nature of recommendations that have already been implemented with respect to the proposals on obstacles to cross-border mobility? Can he also detail the North/South Ministerial Council meetings scheduled to take place in the coming months?

First, I have not said that I do not want to see the EU treat Ireland as a single unit for all matters. I made a statement on the business of the North/South Ministerial Council. I am not here to preach my personal opinion on different matters and different future arrangements. I am here to record in good faith what was transacted at a meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council and deliver a statement that was approved and agreed by all the Ministers who attended that meeting.

It is not for me, as a Minister making a statement on behalf of other Ministers, to embroider all sorts of things in all sorts of directions. If I were to do that, I would remind the Member that at least the SDLP, as a party that wants to talk about Europe and Ireland as a single unit, wants the euro throughout Ireland, while Sinn Féin appears to be sterling in its opposition to the euro and wants partition in that respect. We should not get into that here, and I should resist the Member's temptation.

Some of the recommendations of the obstacles to mobility study have already been implemented; others are the subject of further exploration and consideration and will, as I said, come forward.

A web site specific to the NSMC has been launched, and the Member will be able to find all the appropriate details there. I do not have a calendar to hand, but I will be able to provide the Member with details of the schedule of future meetings.

The Deputy First Minister mentioned the potential for mutual benefit on strategic transport issues. It was a fairly limited statement on something that has such major potential importance for transport on this island as a whole. Can he enunciate further on that?

I reflected what was discussed. We did not fill in specific proposals or projects at the meeting, which was exploratory and illustrative. My statement was an honest reflection of the quality of the discussion that we had. I do not want to understate the significance of this or overstate the nature of the agreement and the understanding that we came to.

Let us be clear: as with the British-Irish Council, this process will not work on the basis of immediate fixed products at any time. Because we are talking about areas of mutual interest, mutual co-operation and common advantage, the work will, by necessity, take time and require due consideration and diligence.

We have recognised the importance of those areas. The separate discussion on the National Development Finance Agency in the South and the strategic investment body in the North was also relevant and, in many ways, corroborates the positive assessment that was made on the possibilities.

The strategic transport possibilities do not only apply to those who happen to live in border areas and can see some of the more immediate localised infrastructure issues; they apply on an entirely strategic basis across this region and the South. Obviously, there is much more to be done. I do not know whether the relevant Assembly Committees want to try suggesting other possibilities, but they are certainly free to take an interest in them.

Mr Deputy Speaker, the Member has not availed of the opportunity, which you said would be available, to ask me specifically about what consideration we gave to provisions for an interparliamentary forum.

The Assembly was due to rise at 1.00pm; however, further to discussions through the appropriate channels, I am informed that the intention is to continue without a break for lunch.

I note that the North/South Ministerial Council agreed an outline structure for a North/South consultative forum, and that a biannual conference will take place. What are the desired benefits of a joint civic forum conference?

A North/South consultative forum is provided for in the Good Friday Agreement, but the provision has not yet been activated or pursued. The North/South Ministerial Council adopted an approach that does not involve creating a new entity whose members are separate from the existing social partner representative organisations - the Civic Forum here and the Central Review Panel for the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness in the South. The joint conference will involve members of those two bodies, which represent the broad interests of civic society. The steering group will be provided for members of those organisations. It makes sense to follow through on the provision in the agreement.

Members of the two representative bodies and other interested parties have useful insight that would help to identify concerns and obstacles to mobility that affect individuals, sectors and localities daily. The forum will be able to reflect on some of the North/South Ministerial Council's work and on other issues that the Council does not address. Moreover, it will be able to indicate and, I hope, promote some of the very good cross-border partnership work outside Government, for example, in cross-border councils and the community and voluntary sectors. It will also consider the many private sector initiatives through the Confederation of British Industries and the Irish Business and Employers' Confederation.

The conference will provide a channel for reflection by those disparate groups. Just as the Civic Forum is designed to provide a common platform for different interests in the North, the joint consultative forum would provide a common channel for the cross-border interests and activities of different policy communities.

Does the Deputy First Minister agree that strategic transport is an important element of economic and social development on this island? Given that tomorrow the Assembly will debate the regional transport strategy, and in the light of the report on co-operation on strategic transport, does the North/South Ministerial Council intend to create a sectoral group to deal with the issue? A sectoral group on strategic transport was envisaged in the Good Friday Agreement and would facilitate broader discussion and Executive action, if appropriate, on North/South transportation and infrastructure.

I agree that strategic transport and, more broadly, strategic infrastructure are important. We are considering the matter in the context of the reinvestment and reform initiative. The Executive are trying to prioritise the issue and are pursuing it through the North/South Ministerial Council and the British-Irish Council. Therefore, that is a demonstration of our commitment to the issue, and our determination to use all available platforms and means to achieve progress.

The North/South Ministerial Council can recast the scope of its sectoral footprints and designate further areas of co-operation. I cannot pre-empt what consideration the Council might give to sectoral designation.

Does the Deputy First Minister agree that, in areas of co-operation, the provision of benefits to all sides and all people must remain the fundamental principle of the North/South Ministerial Council?

The Deputy First Minister: The North/South Ministerial Council's annual report, when Members receive copies of it, will advertise strongly that all the work undertaken provides benefit to everyone involved. It also provides benefits for the many people who insist on not being involved but are happy to reap those benefits and positive by-products of the Council's work.

The annual report promises to be the basis on which to continue the Council's work. Mr Armstrong referred to areas of co-operation. People co-operate because it is in their interest to formulate better ideas together, to achieve economies of scale, to promote best practice and to take advantage of the variety of policy synergies. Therefore, the North/South Ministerial Council's work addresses mutual benefit and common purpose.

I pay tribute to all concerned for the positive work done by the North/South Ministerial Council since its first meeting at the end of the previous century. What areas are being considered as suitable alternatives to the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission for inclusion as a North/South body?

As I stated earlier, the Council asked the Ministers and Departments most immediately involved to consider the possible replacements for the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission. Although there has been consultation to determine other activity in the remit of the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, and in the remit of the newly created Minister of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, further consultation is necessary. Officials from the relevant Departments, and from the Centre group, will consider the alternative as a matter of urgency and will bring specific proposals to a future Council meeting. Some of the obvious candidates for consideration include marine research and sea fisheries. However, there must be further discussion and consideration.

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. Before you took the Chair, your predecessor made a reference in response to a point of order of mine. He said that I could ask questions of the Deputy First Minister on a matter that did not appear to me to relate to the responsibilities of Ministers in this place. Will you advise me which Standing Order entitles Members to ask questions of Ministers that are not their responsibility?

I shall read Hansard and get back to you on that issue.

North/South Ministerial Council: 
Language

TOP

I have received notice from the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure that he wishes to make a statement on the North/South Ministerial Council sectoral meeting on language, which was held on 14 June 2002 in Dublin.

I wish to report on the fourth meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council in language sectoral format, held on Friday 14 June 2002 in Farmleigh, Dublin. Following nomination by the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, I attended the meeting as an Executive representative, with the accompanying Minister, Ms Bairbre de Brún. The Irish Government were represented by Mr Eamon Ó Cuív, Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, who also chaired the meeting. Ms de Brún has approved the report, and it is made on her behalf also.

The meeting began with oral progress reports on the body's activities by Seosamh Mac Donncha, chief executive of Foras na Gaeilge, and George Holmes, the deputy chief executive of Tha Boord o Ulster-Scotch. The report covered areas such as corporate and business planning, the activity report for 2002, the equality scheme, the code of conduct for board members, and administrative issues on staffing and accommodation.

The Council welcomed the progress of the North/ South Language Body and its two agencies, as well as the volume of work that those agencies carried out to date. The Council received updates on the business plans of Foras na Gaeilge and Tha Boord o Ulster-Scotch.

The business plan for Foras na Gaelige describes the activities that it intends to undertake in 2002 to address the key challenges and objectives in its strategic plan, as well as the resources that it will employ. That includes the work to be undertaken on: state culture and heritage; communications and marketing, community and business; education services such as the English/Irish dictionary; and corporate planning, which includes the establishment of a Belfast office.

The business plan for 2002 for Tha Boord o Ulster-Scotch is aligned with its corporate plan 2001-03 on four strategic themes: linguistic diversity; culture; education; and public understanding of Ulster-Scots language and culture. That plan identifies resources, objectives, key deliverables, targets and impacts associated with activities that are related to the four themes. Those activities will include projects such as: a tape-recorded survey of native speakers; production of a textbook for written Ulster-Scots; compilation of a dictionary; a programme of cultural activities and development of formal academic courses.

The Council considered and noted the progress reports on the corporate planning issues that relate to Foras na Gaeilge and Tha Boord o Ulster-Scotch, and it looked forward to the presentation of the finalised corporate plans for both agencies at the next language sector North/South Ministerial Council meeting.

The Council considered and approved the content of the draft activity reports for both agencies for the period 2 December 1999 to 31 December 2000. Tha Boord o Ulster-Scotch's activities during the year included the creation of the first ever three-year strategy for the agency and a partnership agreement between the agency and the University of Ulster to establish the Institute of Ulster-Scots Studies at Magee College.

The Council also noted the draft unaudited accounts for both agencies, and noted that further work is required before the statement of accounts for the language body can be submitted to the Comptrollers and Auditors General in both jurisdictions for formal audit.

The Council considered and approved the draft equality scheme for the language body, and that has been subjected to public consultation. The Council agreed to submit the draft equality scheme to the Equality Commission, and approved an amalgamated code of conduct for the language body's board members.

The Council agreed to meet again in this sectoral format in Northern Ireland in October or November 2002.

I thank the Minister for his report and all those who were involved in its production. There has clearly been an attempt to progress matters apace. I am particularly pleased to see the emphasis on Ulster Scots and the work that has been done for the board. I was disappointed to note that there was no mention of filling the post of chief executive of the Ulster-Scots Agency. Given that the North/South Ministerial Council approved the filling of that vacancy on 7 December 2001 and the Department has not yet advertised it, will the Minister tell the House what is causing the delay, when the post will be advertised, and when the position might be filled?

On 7 December 2001 the process for appointing a chief executive was approved, and it will be completed shortly. The agency has an obligation to fill this key post. A steering group has been set up that includes representatives from the two sponsor Departments and the board. PricewaterhouseCoopers was appointed by the board to handle the recruitment process. The group met recently, and I look forward to the recruitment process coming to fruition.

I congratulate the North/South Ministerial Council for holding its meeting in such a beautiful cultural treasure as the former Guinness home at Farmleigh.

Coud A speir at the Meinister whit he thinks is the neist stap forrit for Tha Boord o Ulster-Scotch?

Could I ask the Minister what he thinks is the next step forward for the Ulster-Scots Agency?

The agency is responsible and answerable for its own actions by agreement with the Department and the North/South Ministerial Council, and through them to the House. The agency has a three-year corporate plan, which has recently been reviewed and extended to 2005. It sets out four strategic themes on linguistic diversity, culture, education and public understanding. The agency is taking the following steps: a tape-recorded survey of native speakers; a textbook; a dictionary; a programme of cultural activity; and the development of formal academic courses. Unlike Foras na Gaeilge and its predecessor Bord na Gaeilge, the Ulster-Scots Agency has been in existence for only two and a half years, and it has made enormous strides.

The agency is an implementation body; it implements the policy determined by the Department in consultation with the House and through the North/South Ministerial Council. One of the next steps forward will be to focus and refine that policy, and the agency is ready for that. The Department should focus its policy drive on efforts to support and reinforce the work of the agency. That will be done in the same way as the Department has focused on policy for football, libraries and other areas. The "future search" process will begin in September and will be completed by Christmas. The Department will define work with the agency and ensure that each element feels some ownership of the process. In September the agency plans a forward surge in the implementation plan. The agency's policy framework will be worked out in tandem with the implementation plan.

Some time ago, Dr Adamson asked the Minister how many times the linguistic diversity branch of the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure had met with the Ulster-Scots language groups. The Minister said that there had been five meetings. However, the Ulster-Scots Language Society wrote subsequently to the permanent secretary in the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure to seek clarification. The answer revealed that there had been no meetings with Ulster-Scots language groups. None of the five meetings that the permanent secretary identified, concerned language policy, which is the remit of the branch, and two of the meetings on the list were with the Apprentice Boys of Derry. Will the Minister acknowledge that he misled the Assembly and that there have been no meetings in the past year on the Ulster-Scots policy? Will he set the record straight?

Mr Morrow, the question is not directly related to the Minister's statement. I am unclear as to whether you are in order. However, if the Minister wishes to respond, I leave it in his hands.

I am sure that the Minister would want to respond.

I will attempt to reply. Having Mr Morrow present for a language or Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure event is rare indeed.

Several meetings have taken place between the Department and the Ulster-Scots Agency. There has also been correspondence between the Department and that body. Mr Morrow makes a distinction between the language and the agency which is not clear. I will check the record for the quotations that concern him. The Member needs to be absolutely sure what he is asking about. For example, do his comments relate to the question that I was asked originally?

I had a meeting in the Department around the end of June with the Ulster-Scots Agency and the Ulster-Scots Heritage Council. Several bodies are involved, and there is cross-membership. For example, Mr Nelson McCausland, of the Ulster-Scots Heritage Council, members of the Ulster-Scots Agency, including John Laird and others were present at that meeting. The meetings, and a large body of correspondence, are on the record. Those meetings are formal meetings that take place in locations such as Belfast city hall on a fairly regular basis. My special adviser and I attend.

It might be helpful for Mr Morrow to note that the overarching policy is defined by the agreement and the Council of Europe Charter for Regional and Minority Languages. With regard to the Irish language in particular, the British Government signed up in the agreement to

Now that the British Government have signed the Council of Europe Charter for Regional and Minority Languages, I take part II of that Charter to refer to Ulster Scots as well as the Irish language. Therefore, based on part II of the Charter and the agreement, the overarching policy for Ulster Scots also requires the Government to

The Department will seek to refine that policy during the autumn through a process with the constituency in full. The Ulster-Scots language is a part of the constituency; it is by no means most or all of it, but it is an important part. I will work with Ulster-Scots activists as we refine the policy, seeking to use the plan for the implementation body, which is essentially what the Ulster-Scots Agency is.

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker, the permanent secretary wrote to a body to say that what the Minister said was not true. Surely the permanent secretary and the Minister cannot both be right. There must be some way to find out the truth.

The Minister has indicated that he will check the records and report to the House on the matter.

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Cuirim fáilte roimh ráiteas an Aire agus ba mhaith liom mo bhuíochas a ghabháil leis as. Tá mé iontach sásta go bhfuil obair na comhairle ag gabháil ar aghaidh ar an leibhéal seo.

I welcome the fourth meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council in language sectoral format. I ask the Minister to consider providing future ministerial statements on these meetings bilingually - in English and Irish - for the benefit of Members who may wish to avail of them in that format.

When will the finalised corporate plan of Foras na Gaeilge be made public, and can the Minister provide a progress report on the establishment of the Belfast office? Sin an méid.

I understand that Foras na Gaeilge has acquired an office in Queen Street, Belfast, and that it intends to station the deputy chief executive and the director of education there. The draft corporate plan will be available soon for presentation to the North/South Ministerial Council, I hope that it will be ready for the next meeting.

As for bilingual presentation, I present the plans as they are. As Gaelic is the working language of Foras na Gaeilge, I am sure that it can present its corporate plan in Gaelic, but I cannot be certain. My report comes as you see it.

The Minister was right when he said that last year the United Kingdom Government signed and ratified the Council of Europe Charter for Regional and Minority Languages. Under that charter the Government committed itself to consult, and take into account the views of, the Ulster-Scots language movement. Will he admit that his own civil servants in the linguistic diversity branch, who are responsible for language policy in Northern Ireland, did not meet or liaise with the Ulster-Scots Language Society or the Ulster-Scots Heritage Council even once during the past year? Will he acknowledge that that is clearly a breach of the charter?

That is not directly related to the ministerial statement. I will allow the Minister to make his own judgement.

Perhaps Mr Hutchinson was not here for the previous answer. What do we mean by "the language movement"? Do we define it as the Ulster-Scots Language Society? Is it the Ulster-Scots Language Society with the heritage movement? Or do we define it as the whole Ulster-Scots language constituency, which is broadly represented through the Ulster-Scots Agency, our implementation body?

Mr Hutchinson should be aware that there is a sizeable constituency of native speakers who regard themselves as being somewhat marginalized by what they see as a middle-class, academic, Belfast-based, English-speaking wing of the constituency. It is important that the entire constituency be represented, and their views taken into account.

As far as honing and refining policy is concerned, policy is defined by those sections of the Belfast Agreement concerning rights, safeguards and equality of opportunity, and is carried through by the European charter. That is the overarching policy. Of course, it is proper and appropriate that we should look to refine that policy, and now is the time to do that.

The agency has made enormous strides over the last two and a half years, and now is the time for another step forward. The way to do that is through a process that we have used in other sections and sectors of the Department: a "future search" process. I will look to further refine the policy in the autumn to allow the agency to implement it. Within that, the entire constituency will be represented.

We have had ongoing discussions with Members. However, if someone says that today he is the language, and not the heritage, society but tomorrow he will be the heritage, and not the language, society, it is difficult to distinguish. It is in Belfast; it is a small constituency. We are not always clear exactly which group we are talking to. However, we deal with the implementation body - the Ulster-Scots Agency.

Can the Minister give a commitment that he intends to move towards equal funding for Ulster-Scots and Irish language and culture? Will he also indicate the timescale in which he intends that position of equality to be reached?

As far as funding under devolution and under the agreement is concerned, Ulster-Scots contributions pre-devolution were £118,000, and, post-devolution, we are projected to go to £1·6 million. We have increased the funding approximately tenfold. That is important.

This is not about money, however. We are often inclined to condense arguments and movements down to money. Ulster Scots is at a different stage of development vis-à-vis Irish. Foras na Gaeilge took over the old Bord ne Gaeilge; it took over the terminology committee, a publishing house and an education support movement. That was an advanced, sophisticated group that had been going for approximately 150 years, 50 years in its current form. Ulster Scots is in a different situation; it is largely up to date and, with some exceptions, is primarily an oral tradition. We have been seeing Ulster Scots grow during the last two and a half years.

It would be wrong simply to say that because Irish gets so many million pounds, Ulster Scots should get the same. Under parity of esteem, which is equal respect, we will ensure that everybody gets equality of opportunity and equality of treatment and that funding will be according to need. Need is the key determinant factor. To date, the Ulster-Scots Agency and the Ulster-Scots movement have been funded according to need, and then some.

We now take the next step forward and consider policy development. I welcome input from Mr Clyde, Mr Morrow and Mr Roger Hutchinson and their support for Ulster Scots as a language and a movement. I will ensure that they are invited to engage in the process, and they can put forward their ideas for developing the Ulster-Scots language and culture then. It is important that we refine the policy. That will have resource implications, and we will look at those in due course. Need is always the guiding principle. There must be equality of opportunity and equity of treatment in dealing with that need, and we must be guided by equal respect.

TOP

<< Prev / Next >>