Northern Ireland Assembly

Rev Dr William McCrea:

Mr J Wilson said earlier that this Programme for Government was a great gain brought about through the Belfast Agreement. The old saying is that the proof of the pudding is in the eating. The community is going to have to digest some very serious pudding. I have no doubt that much of the document is designed for presentational purposes and that behind much of the rhetoric there is little of consequence. However, it will be a good benchmark by which we can judge the operational effectiveness of individual Departments. Alban Maginness said that one of the most substantial parts of the document was that relating to the Department for Regional Development. Naturally I concur that my Colleagues take their departmental responsibilities seriously and will prove to be excellent Ministers.

Paragraph 1.8 could be regarded as outlining the Programme for Government's mission statement on environmental issues. It says that a good quality built and natural environment is the key to our economy, helping to attract investors and visitors as well as being integral to the future of agriculture. It adds that sustainability must be the key theme running through the Executive's work.

Those are very fine words, but the words might be the weightiest part of it, because the Environment Committee does not consider that sustainability is a key theme of the Programme for Government. Does the Minister consider that it has been given a sufficiently high profile, and if he believes it has, can he explain how and where it appears in the Programme for Government? The Committee understands that it is unlikely that the environment will benefit to any significant extent from the Executive's funds.

Does this reflect the real priority attached to the protection of our environment? The Environment Committee is concerned that there is virtually no mention in the Programme for Government of the need to protect the built heritage. Can the Minister tell us why? This absence is borne out by the failure of the bid for additional funding for the historic building grant that will lead to a loss of funding from the Heritage Lottery Fund. Is this how we will protect our heritage? Those are fine words, but what of substance?

Section 5.2.3 sets out a number of actions to be taken to create a more efficient planning process. The Committee would like to know if the Department has secured the necessary resources to carry forward this work. If not, how realistic is the aim of the programme to clear the backlog in planning applications by December 2002?

Section 3.1.5 refers to "The Well-being of our Children". The Environment Committee welcomes the active increase in the number of road safety education officers. The safety of our children is of paramount importance to the Committee. At its first public inquiry, the Committee will be looking into the legislation which allows up to 101 children under 14 years old on a 53-seater bus. How can the Programme for Government claim that the emphasis on improving road safety through education will continue, when the Department itself considers that overcrowding of school buses is safe?

Section 3.3 states

"we will not only fulfil our EU obligations, but also seek to ensure that development takes place in a sustainable way."

Can the Minister assure me that the Department of the Environment is now in a position to implement EU Directives and will no longer be in danger of infraction proceedings? Can the Minister guarantee that we will fulfil all our EU obligations as stated in the Programme for Government? If not, this claim should not be made.

Section 7.4 of the Programme for Government refers to

"greater accountability for all services through a more efficient and effective structure of administration at local level."

Given that we are to have local government elections next year, the Environment Committee has been endeavouring to obtain information about accountability from the Minister and his Department. Is it not time that the Department came clean on this issue?

Mr Kennedy:

I am grateful for the opportunity to address the Assembly on this subject. The Programme for Government is ambitious, and it remains to be seen whether all that is promised will actually be achieved. Only time will tell. As Chairman of the Education Committee, I would like to bring a number of comments to the attention of the Assembly. This document puts strong emphasis on new TSN at an educational level. The Education Committee is unable to confirm that the action it has planned reflects the issues in the Programme for Government or vice versa. We await the outcome of that.

Equality issues are also prominent in the document, and the Department of Education is still awaiting a response from the Equality Commission on whether its equality scheme will be acceptable. Many issues remain unresolved, and the Education Committee will scrutinise that work.

Through its memorandum on the Budget, the Education Committee has sought to obtain an allocation of the Executive's Programme Funds for education. In the coming years it will press for as many resources as possible for education. Education is a priority. We also note the inclusion of public-service agreements in the Programme for Government and intend to scrutinise these targets to assess their educational value to the Department.

The Department of Education recently issued a consultation paper on the viability criteria for Irish- medium and integrated schools, and the Education Committee wants the same viability criteria to be applied to all schools, while ensuring that there is educational choice for every child and parent.

Given the rural nature of Northern Ireland, the Education Committee acknowledges the important role schools play, particularly in rural regeneration. We note the actions which relate specifically to education and will monitor closely the implementation of these targets and stated policies.

The Education Committee has asked the Department of Education to undertake research into early formal education, given that children in other European countries start their education at a later age. We will make comparisons and monitor the future progress of the transfer system.

The Department of Education has stated that it intends to review the current educational arrangements of what are called "quangos" - quasi-autonomous, non-governmental organisations. My Committee welcomes this and would like to see proposals for taking this forward at an early stage.

A great deal is promised in this Programme for Government, but much of the detail is missing at this stage. Only as we scrutinise the work of the Department of Education over the coming months will our members be convinced that everything is possible and that appropriate action is being taken on all these points.

Mr Gibson:

I have heard many comments about this document today. Some people have called it transparent, and I would certainly call it transparent - to the point of opaqueness. It is a great wish list. It is a weaker document than many believe, for it is transparently unrealistic.

Let us turn to the last three paragraphs on page 10 that pay particular attention to the needs of victims. The sum of £4 million goes to prisoners who have perpetrated the deeds against the victims, while the victims receive £40,000. We are committed to helping those affected by economic difficulties and to give them equal opportunities. I have sat in this Chamber and heard about a partnership which distributes European and British money to the Catholic population that describes itself as a Catholic body with a few token Prods. Is this tackling inequality? Certainly not. Is this a just society?

Last Saturday evening a truck came in to blow up another Armistice Day commemoration. There have been 49 contract murders since the signing of the Good Friday Agreement.

Let us look at the top of page 11. Two sentences there show that some people are more equal than others. When we examine this document in detail, we see it as a willy-nilly wish list, a grouping of clichés that may be acceptable to some people in this Building who have no contact with reality.

I wish to pursue this and to examine the transparency needed to achieve equality in the distribution of funds to schools, because 80% of funding goes to the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools sector. Is that equality? Those of us who are used to the real world must view this document with a little scepticism.

By 2001 we will implement new viability criteria to help promote integrated education - 2% of education. By 2001 we will implement new viability criteria to help promote Irish-medium education - only 1% of the population can speak Irish. Where are our priorities? We then have some obscure statement about an Environment and Heritage Service education strategy. Alban Maginness is right, and those Ministers who have taken themselves seriously have put down a programme that can be costed and targeted with an implementation date. In many cases we have wish lists. Education is every citizens' bedrock, regardless of class or creed. The Minister may have been a field marshal elsewhere, but the abilities demonstrated in this document are those of a field mouse - maybe a Mickey Mouse.

6.15 pm

We can turn to other areas that have been neglected in the past few years. The Minister of Health will review the cardiac services to assess their efficiency and effectiveness and develop best practice. We have backlogs running into months. The Western Health and Social Services Board has been forced to send patients to London. It was cheaper to send the patient and his wife to London than to have the operation here in Northern Ireland. Why do we not treat hip replacements in the same way? Why have we not tackled the problem? Rather than a wish list, we have developed a review of cardiac services. It can be done, but it has not been done. The truth of the matter is that there is neither the will nor the ability within those Departments.

When we look at the packaging of care, on page 34, we see four wish lists. The truth is that the patient's charter has come off every hospital notice board. Already there has been a departure from what is written here.

Mr Hussey:

In section 1 of the draft Programme for Government I note a vision that we can all aspire to for a Utopia in Northern Ireland sometime in the future. In the meantime we have to address the first sentence of the mission statement on page 13:

"to make a difference to the lives of our people, enabling them to grow as a peaceful, fair and inclusive community."

I question the commitment of Sinn Féin Ministers and their Members to this statement and wonder when, if ever, the shadow of the gun will be removed from our society. My party, and every party on this side of the Chamber, questions that. The SDLP should also question that, but it seems to be adhering more to the Hume/Adams agreement than to the Belfast Agreement. Maybe there is another Programme for Government coming from that.

The broad-brush scope of sections 2 to 7 in the draft must be fine-tuned. I hope that the final programme the Executive produces will take on board the many concerns that have arisen today. We all know that everything cannot be done at once. In general I welcome the action plans, but I await greater detail on an overall prioritised list for implementation as asked for by Mr Close before I can give my final verdict.

Item 2.4 promises regeneration of the physical built environment and is most welcome, given that its remit extends across the whole community, rural and urban. It recognises that strong communities are central to economic, social and cultural development. I strongly support those Members who have already addressed the sincere concerns of the rural community, particularly in the west, with regard to equality of access to primary care services, hospital treatment and after-care facilities within the Health Service, under section 3. This must be done, as Mr Gibson has said, in a reasonable time.

One of the finest education systems in the world has been weakened by quick-fix, mainland-imposed policies. Any reviews under paragraph 4 of the programme must seek to restore confidence both inside and outside the school system, particularly in vocational areas of study. I welcome the development of this field, in both secondary and tertiary level education. In today's world, education is closely linked to the creation of a secure competitive economy, as is the implementation of provincewide infrastructural policies. Therefore, I welcome the aim of ensuring that there will be an infrastructure for competition.

I seek assurance that the Executive's final programme will ensure that priorities throughout Northern Ireland are treated equally. Actions under paragraph 6 to promote Northern Ireland's image abroad are also most welcome. However, in the strategy for securing high-profile international events there must be a recognition of the need for appropriate facilities and for Northern Ireland to be considered as a whole in any marketing strategy.

Finally, I ask Ministers to consider very carefully the proposals for arrangements to ensure that the rates provide an adequate level of funding for public expenditure. I remind the Executive that, for three consecutive years, the regional rate was increased by 8% by direct rule Ministers. This was a cumulative rise of 26%, which, we were told, would be channelled specifically into infrastructural development. I am concerned that the Assembly should seek to continue this situation prior to a proposed review of rating policy by March 2002.

Mr Deputy Speaker:

I have no further indication that Members wish to speak. The Ministers will now speak.

The Minister of Education (Mr M McGuinness):

Go raibh maith agat, A LeasCheann Comhairle. I am grateful to my Colleague, Seán Farren, who opened this debate, but I stress the importance of the Programme for Government in setting our agenda on education.

We have a successful education system, which has shown progress in recent years. Our economic success depends on the quality of our education and training system. The experience of the South is an illustration of what can be achieved with a well-educated and highly-motivated workforce. Therefore, there is no alternative to investment in education if we want to improve the quality of people's lives and offer them the prospect of fulfilling, well-paid and stable employment.

Our education system has improved in recent years, despite its legacy of problems and significant under- investment over a considerable period. However, much remains to be done. We have had one of the lowest levels of access to pre-school education in western Europe. We still face serious problems of low and under achievement. This was illustrated today when Ian Paisley Jr admitted that he had go to the Library to find out the meaning of the word "sustain".

We must also respond to the challenge of the digital revolution and to the phenomenal growth of ICT. We need a secondary education system which values our children and develops their potential to the maximum. I want to put the three "Ens" - encouragement, enlightenment and enjoyment - at the heart of our education system, and it is vital that we do so. This is the underlying rationale for the schools and youth sections of the Programme for Government, which is rooted in a clear analysis of our needs. We must invest in our education system to ensure that there is equality, excellence, choice and accessibility.

A central element of the Programme for Government is our pursuit of co-operation through the North/South Ministerial Council. Our education systems, North and South, spring from the same historical roots, and we face the same problems of under achievement and unfulfilled potential. We are both struggling to cater for the special educational needs of our most marginalized children. We need to co-operate, to share best practice and to develop joint provision for the most specialised forms of support. The North/South strand is a key element of my programme, which has the potential to deliver real and immediate benefits to all children. I am deeply concerned that the attitude and actions of the First Minister will impede this work and have a directly negative effect on the education of our children.

Many were sceptical of the Executive Committee's ability to reach agreement on the draft Programme for Government. I am delighted to say that their scepticism was confounded, because those of us who support the agreement determined that this was an opportunity to deliver change and, within the monetary limitations imposed upon us, to make a real difference for all our people. I had hoped that we could enter this debate in that same spirit of co-operation and partnership. However, the decisions taken by the Ulster Unionist Council at the Waterfront Hall represent a full-frontal assault on the institutions established under the terms of the Good Friday Agreement. It is bizarre that we are conducting a debate on an agreed Programme for Government, when the First Minister has informed his party that it is his objective to see the institutions suspended or collapsed.

The decisions taken by the Ulster Unionist Council must call into question the commitment of the Ulster Unionist Party. The party's decisions also call into question the commitment of its Assembly team and its Ministers to the Programme for Government. Most pointedly, the attempt to obstruct the functioning of the North/South Ministerial Council blatantly contradicts the commitment in the draft Programme for Government to the development of North/South co-operation and relations. The exclusion imposed on the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety and the First Minister's discrimination against her, directly contradict the commitment he declared in the draft Programme for Government to equality, inclusivity and partnership.

The First Minister's actions also fly in the face of his commitment to the Executive as a unifying force for the community. To have any prospect of achieving a cohesive, inclusive and just society requires, in the first instance, a cohesive, inclusive and just Executive Committee. We need to get real, folks. This debate is being conducted against a background of determined attempts by the Ulster Unionist Party to collapse this Assembly, and with it the other institutions in which we are involved. This is ridiculous.

Mr Deputy Speaker:

Minister, your time is up.

Mr M McGuinness:

The First Minister needs to rethink his approach, and I appeal to him to do that.

Mr Kennedy:

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. I want to establish the purpose of ministerial statements during this debate on the Programme for Government. My simple understanding was that Ministers would. at least be in a position to respond to points raised by Members - not to engage in speculation, or put forward their interpretation of the Ulster Unionist Council - [Interruption]

Mr Deputy Speaker:

I am sorry, Mr Kennedy, but that is not a point of order. I call Mr Foster, Minister of the Environment.

Mr Kennedy:

It is very clearly a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. What is the role - [Interruption]

Mr Deputy Speaker:

Order. Please sit down, Mr Kennedy. I call Mr Foster, Minister of the Environment.

The Minister of the Environment (Mr Foster): Despite the ominous and destructive Republican weapons of war, and the backdrop of terrorist activity in my home county of Fermanagh over the weekend - 13 years after Enniskillen - I welcome this opportunity to take part in the debate. The Programme for Government is an important document which illustrates what can be achieved when local Ministers work together. It clearly demonstrates that a locally elected Executive can make a real and positive difference. This could be destroyed by Republican intransigence.

I was pleased with the emphasis placed on environmental matters by many Members today. Several Members referred to the importance of sustainability. My ministerial Colleagues and I support that. The Programme for Government undertakes to prepare a sustainable development strategy. Sustainable development covers every aspect of Government, and it ensures that we consider fully the needs of future generations.

That is equally important for environmental issues. The Programme for Government recognises the crucial importance of the environment to a healthy community and a competitive economy. This is supported by the draft budget allocation, which will be discussed tomorrow and which provides a 14.4% funding increase for my Department - a clear signal that the Executive has recognised the need to deal with former underfunding of environmental issues, road safety and local government functions. We will work to ensure that the additional £10 million allocated in the draft budget for implementing EU Directives will help improve our air, land and water quality.

In reply to Rev Dr William McCrea, the budget for environmental programmes next year will increase by almost 40%. This is a true reflection of the importance that the Programme for Government places on environmental matters.

In this section of the debate, we are specifically considering the actions in the Programme for Government to secure a competitive economy.

6.30 pm

The protection of the environment is critical for economic growth, and we want to ensure that businesses develop in a sustainable manner. International businesses in particular will be very aware of their environmental responsibilities, but these responsibilities are not just for them. Members will be aware of the major conference on climate change which commenced today in The Hague. Some 5,000 delegates from 180 countries will be discussing how greenhouse gas emissions can be cut. We must all take steps to ensure that the environment is protected.

The Programme for Government deals with other areas of my Department's remit. Earlier in the year, I announced that I was increasing the number of road safety education officers and intensifying the road safety advertising campaign. The Programme for Government commits the Executive to a new road safety plan which will set out a strategy for further reductions in the totally unacceptable level of carnage on our roads.

Another aspect of my Department's activity reflected in the Programme for Government is planning. A growing economy requires development, and we all want to encourage that. We also need to protect the environment and social amenities and, therefore, we need a proper and efficient planning process which will make a major contribution to facilitating economic growth. I have already initiated a review of the processes in the Planning Service, and I am committed to addressing the backlogs with planning applications and to furthering area development plans, including the major Belfast metropolitan area plan.

I also welcome the commitment to a review of public administration in the Programme for Government. I want to ensure an efficient and effective local government for ratepayers and full consultation for district councils in review plans.

As shown by the debate in the Assembly today, there has been a keen interest in the Programme for Government, and a number of Members have raised specific issues relating to my Department. In the short time available to me, I cannot address each of those issues, but I have sought to comment on the main themes. I trust that Members will realise the significance of the programme and give it their support.

The Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development (Ms Rodgers):

I would like to place on record my thanks to ministerial Colleagues for their co-operation in ensuring that the importance of the rural economy and rural society is recognised in the draft Programme for Government. I also thank the great number of Members who have spoken in this debate about the importance of our rural economy and the agriculture industry. That proves - if proof were needed - the importance of the rural society to Northern Ireland.

In referring very briefly to the comments made by Jim Wells about early retirement, I remind him that that issue is not contained in the rural development regulation plan submitted to Brussels and, therefore, that it cannot now be introduced until the review stage. I have not ruled it out. I will remind Mr Wells, however, that the three and a half months of suspension of the Assembly - which he approved and supported - was at the time when the plan was being prepared, and we as an Executive and an Assembly were denied an input at that crucial stage.

I also wish to inform Mr Wells that the feedback I get on a daily basis from farmers in all sections of the community indicates that they want to retain their local Administration and that they appreciate the accessibility and responsiveness of a local Minister. If further proof were needed of that, we have it in this programme, which shows that the Assembly is responsive and that it is making a difference. This a clear spur to all of us to reach agreement and to ensure that the structures we have remain in place.

One area that has been very neglected under direct rule is agriculture. It is my intention to build on the impetus that has already been established. I am especially pleased to have secured a commitment that all major Government policies will in future be rural proofed. By this I mean that all major policy proposals will be carefully and objectively examined to determine their impact on rural dwellers. We all want to see public services being fairly made available to all people in Northern Ireland, regardless of where they live, and we want people to be able to realise their potential and their aspirations without being hampered by whether they live in a city or a town.

The draft Programme for Government also sets a new direction for assistance to farmers and gives a new impetus to rural development. I am acutely conscious of the genuine hardship being experienced by farmers and rural dwellers, but as I listen to them, I have also been struck by their sense of frustration. They believe that their views are not being listened to and that policy makers too often bring to bear an exclusively urban perspective on problems.

Rightly or wrongly, they fear that solutions may be adopted that do not fit rural circumstances. The Executive Committee is agreed that we need to take action now to ensure that we do not foster an urban/rural divide in a society that has already suffered too much from divisions. That is why the commitment to rural proofing is so important.

The draft Programme for Government contains an explicit commitment to build on the recommendations of the vision for the future of the agri-food industry exercise. It outlines initiatives to enhance the competitiveness of farming by improving quality, particularly beef quality, and by developing education and training programmes aimed at enhancing competitiveness.

There is also an emphasis on the environment that includes assisting the fishing industry to develop in a sustainable way and enhancing forestry programmes. Furthermore, there is an explicit commitment to the regeneration of rural areas, particularly the most disadvantaged. The proposed new approach covers not only agriculture, forestry and fisheries, but also the economy in rural areas and support for rural societies.

We have a well-established rural development programme, and we are integrating its contributions with the rest of Government to produce a co-ordinated approach. A good example of that is the initiative to establish a natural resource rural tourism programme which draws together my Department, the Northern Ireland Tourist Board and the Environment and Heritage Service of the Department of the Environment.

I also welcome the commitment to work more closely with the South on a formal and strategic basis. In the cases of agriculture, fisheries and certain animal health issues, there are practical benefits. There is also support for the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission. We will also be developing a strategy to promote rural development on a cross-border basis by working through various community initiatives with European Union support to develop network links and enhance different parts of the rural economy and society on a cross-border basis.

I also welcome the commitment to put rural community transport partnerships into operation, and the Department for Regional Development's commitment to preparing a regional planning policy statement on the countryside, as well as their commitment to put in place 15 new rural transport partnerships.

Mr Deputy Speaker:

Minister, the time is up.

The Minister for Regional Development (Mr Campbell):

I hope that I do not have to avail of the extra 13 seconds that the previous contributor used.

Some Members who spoke earlier were diverted into a series of political issues, but I do not wish to be so diverted. There are a number of matters within the Department for Regional Development's responsibility that I intend to pursue vigorously in the forthcoming year. I will do that in keeping with my election commitment until we get a satisfactory governmental system that has the consent and support of the Unionist community as well as the existing one that has the consent of the Nationalist community.

Some Members referred to free fares for the elderly. That is a top priority for my Department. I have identified it as a priority, as did my predecessor, and we are determined that it should be introduced at the earliest opportunity.

Some references were made to the burden that was being placed on local councils as a result of the consultation exercise. Members will be aware that we had a series of consultation exercises and that this will be a voluntary scheme for councils that wish to participate. If Members do not wish to burden local councils, they will have, in the Budget debate, the opportunity to vote the several million pounds that would be required to have the scheme implemented and controlled directly by the Department for Regional Development. I would welcome that, as I bid for the money in the first instance.

The regional development strategy will provide the strategic planning to plan our infrastructure more effectively. I want to put in place innovative arrangements at sub- regional level to ensure the effective implementation of that strategy. The regional transportation strategy, which my officials are working on, is an offshoot of that. Many in the House, and those outside, commented favourably on the work of the officials who were on the railways taskforce. The same group is working on the regional transportation strategy. I hope to be able to bring out the first draft of that document before the summer recess. It will be of fundamental importance to the whole of Northern Ireland.

I will move to rail travel. I mentioned that the taskforce carried out very comprehensive and worthwhile work. A party Colleague said that under the draft budget £102 million was put in place, but the figure is actually £105 million. We are in a position to put the framework in place, but that will not be the ultimate solution. It will not deliver a two-tier rail service, but it will provide the infrastructure and the bedrock upon which we will build a comprehensive rail strategy for the whole of Northern Ireland, not just for the most frequently used lines.

In conclusion, I want to refer to two fundamentally important issues - the infrastructural fund and the reference to it in the Programme for Government regarding roads and water. The underinvestment is such that I will support any effort to get a one-off payment for an infrastructural fund. Several Members have mentioned this, but we need something substantial. Without encroaching on the next Member's time, I want to thank the Regional Development Committee for its assistance throughout, and I look forward to its assistance in the coming year.

(Mr Speaker in the Chair)

The Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment (Sir Reg Empey):

It is not possible, in the time available, to carry out a normal winding-up of the debate or to respond to the many points made.

However, I want to mention a matter raised by Mr Close on the procedures available to Members who wish to comment further. This is a draft Programme for Government, and it has been submitted to the Assembly for consideration and ultimate approval. We are currently seeking the views of Assembly Committees, particularly on actions relevant to the first year of the programme, but the views of others also have to be taken into account. The Civic Forum has been asked to consider the proposals set out in the draft programme and will give its views on those. The document has also been made available more generally to key stakeholders such as district councils, trade unions and representative bodies across many sectors and to other interested groups and individuals. People have been encouraged to respond with their views on its contents, and we welcome that. The feedback will be used to improve the document so that we can present a more detailed programme to the Assembly in the new year, one which will incorporate public-service agreements for each Department, which is fundamental to how the programme is joined up and the actions determined.

The third and concluding part of the debate focused on education, training, the economy and infrastructure. Like other priorities in the Programme for Government, these are important issues for our community's future prosperity and quality of life. While I, and the Education, Regional Development, and Higher and Further Education, Training and Employment Ministers clearly have lead roles in these priorities, all Ministers and Departments have a contribution to make in achieving these goals. The fact that in the last few minutes we have had contributions from the four parties making up the Executive is not without its own significance.

I thank the Members for their worthwhile contributions throughout the day, although at times one or two of them appeared to be on autopilot, probably blissfully unaware of what they were saying and participating in. Nevertheless, the general contribution has been important. Members have made some very good suggestions that should be followed up.

6.45 pm

These suggestions should be taken up in the Committees' Consideration Stage, and I welcome the fact that people were able, albeit briefly, to make an initial response to the programme. Copies of Hansard will be available to the Departments. I have asked my officials to take note of certain points on which I picked up, in the context of my portfolio, and other Ministers will do the same. Ultimately, we have a unique opportunity to make a real difference to this community, in spite of our political problems. The Minister of Education and his colleagues made known their views. However, it is an unavoidable fact that they have a major contribution to make and a responsibility for these matters. The problems we face today are not for someone else but for everyone to deal with - perhaps Mr McGuinness will devote some of his attention to this fact.

The programme does have its weaknesses, and there are areas in need of improvement, but it has nevertheless been a comprehensive attempt to merge, for the first time, the various strands of Government, the different themes and the cross-cutting elements. It has been an attempt to get away from the silo mentality and to try to offer a vision of what this Province could be like if we get the opportunity to implement the programme.

We must bear in mind the 30 years of misery which have gone before us, with all the wasted opportunities, and the fact that we have very little time left to catch up with our major competitors. European funding will come to an end in five or six years' time; competition is at an all-time high; and developing countries throughout the world are snapping at our heels. Nobody owes Northern Ireland a living, and my Colleagues will be doing their best to provide the best possible service and infrastructure, using the resources available, to provide the people of Northern Ireland with a real future for themselves and their children. I commend this programme to the House.

Mr Ford:

This morning, some of us noticed that the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister did not even have the manners to remain in the Chamber to hear the first round of speeches. However, is it in order for the Question to be put, without either of the proposers of the motion being present?

Mr Speaker:

It is in order. Any Minister can represent the Executive.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved:

That this Assembly notes the Executive Committee's proposed Programme for Government; notes that it will guide the public spending plans for 2001-02 in the Budget; notes that the Programme for Government will be presented for the approval of the Assembly in the New Year, embracing public service agreements for all Departments.

Adjourned at 6.48 pm.

<< Prev