Northern Ireland Assembly

6.

asked the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety to outline the discussions she has had with health and social services trusts concerning the allocation of resources to mental health services in Northern Ireland.

(AQO 533/00)

Ní hé an cleachtas é plé a dhéanamh le hiontaobhais sláinte agus seirbhísí sóisialta aonair faoi leithroinnt acmhainní do na seirbhísí meabhairshláinte. Bhí tuairimí na gcoimisinéirí san áireamh sa tairiscint ar acmhainní breise a cuireadh faoi bhráid na Roinne Airgeadais agus Pearsanra sa bhabhta caiteachais anuraidh.

The Department does not engage with individual health and social services trusts about the allocation of resources to mental health services. The views of commissioners informed of the bid for additional resources were submitted to the Department of Finance and Personnel in last year's spending round. Additional resources were secured in the Budget, which should help to meet the cost of drugs and at least 10 additional in-patient beds for child and adolescent psychiatry. Subject to overall resource commitments, additional resources should also provide for some further long-term placements in the community.

I thank the Minister for her reply. Is she aware of the projections from the World Health Organisation that indicate quite clearly that mental ill health will continue to increase substantively? Given that the National Health Service in Northern Ireland, as far as we can see, is inadequate in that area, will the Minister not reconsider her answer and consult with the various people on the ground who are administering the mental ill-health provisions in Northern Ireland? That would ensure adequate and meaningful funding, which would lead to adequate and meaningful health provisions. Groups such as Action Mental Health in Northern Ireland could then execute proper therapeutic and care programmes tailored for the different requirements in various areas of Northern Ireland rather than the general approach through the commissioners to whom she has referred.

I believe - as do the health and social services boards - in local provision and in the need to improve mental health services in their areas. They are also aware of the need to develop the services and to act in partnership with trusts and voluntary organisations to make the most of the resources available to them. The Member will be aware that the question of resources and the availability of resources applies not only to me but also to my Colleague who will take questions next and to other Members of the Executive. There are competing priorities that the Executive have to decide upon. However, the effects of previous underfunding cannot be addressed overnight. I will continue to argue the case for additional resources so that boards and trusts can continue to improve the services they deliver.

TOP

Finance and Personnel

1.

asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel to detail what progress is being made on the design and management of the European progress funds.

(AQO 555/00)

5.

asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel to outline the progress made on the finalisation of the EU structural funds.

(AQO 558/00)

I will take questions 1 and 5 together.

The Northern Ireland Community Support Framework (CSF) was formally approved by the European Commission in December 2000. The CSF will be implemented through the transitional Objective 1 and Peace II programmes which are at advanced negotiation stage. The draft programmes have also entered the Commission's own inter-service consultation process. Community initiative proposals have also been submitted separately for negotitaion with the Commission over the next five months. The three monitoring committees for the CSF, the Peace II and transitional Objective 1 programmes have been appointed, and preliminary meetings of all three were held before Christmas.

I thank the Minister for his answer. Will he let the House know his thinking on the INTERREG programme? How does he invisage that the local authority cross-border networks could be used to facilitate delivery in conjunction with social partners?

As I said, proposals for the INTERREG III programme have been submitted to the Commission. Those proposals were agreed by the North/South Ministerial Council when it last met in special EU programme sectoral format, and have been approved by the Executive. We are working to ensure the admissiblility of those proposals, and we intend to have approximately five months in which to continue negotiations with the Commission. Last week, I met the cross-border council groups, and I am aware of their interest in INTERREG III. At that meeting it was agreed that an action team would be established, which would include representatives of those cross-border networks. The team would include officials from both the Department of Finance and Personnel in the North and the Department of Finance in the South. It would be chaired by the Special EU Programmes Body with a view to it's giving a report to the North/South Ministerial Council when it meets in sectoral format in March.

I thank the Minister for the element of his answer which covered question 5. The special support programme for peace and reconciliation will have an important role to play in the change in funding arrangements. Will the local devolved delivery mechanisms have a role to play under the Peace II funding? Will these local partnerships be a continutaion of the existing district partnerships?

The Executive Committee have agreed that Peace II should be delivered by a similar mix of delivery mechanisms as was used in the previous programme. There will be a tendering process for intermediary funding bodies to operate under the new programme, and local partnership arrangements will operate in each of the 26 district council areas These would necessitate a closer working relationship between the existing district partnerships and district councils, involving Government Departments and statutory agencies which also work locally. The aim is to develop, at a local level, structures which are sustainable beyond Peace II.

1.

asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel to detail the progress made on the review of public procurement.

(AQO 556/00)

Improving public procurement is an important commitment in the draft Programme for Government. Following a decision taken by the Executive Committee on 23 November 2000, a small implementation team is being established to take forward the findings and recommendations of a review undertaken prior to devolution. It is planned that the first meeting of the team will take place in February after its membership has been finalised. Further proposals which take account of the equality dimension will be brought forward by June 2001.

Will the Minister give an indication as to the level of devolution dividend which can be expected from such a review?

The findings of the initial review conducted prior to devolution indicated that if we were to set similar targets to those set for Departments in Great Britain we would achieve public procurement savings of £30 million out of a budget of £1 billion.

Such significant savings would fall to the devolved Administration to administer and direct, according to some of our own spending priorities. As we know, there are many pressing priorities being pursued by Departments and Committees in this Assembly. The more efficient we can make our procurement procedures and the more value for money we can get, then the more we can allocate to other public service needs.

Are there any mechanisms that can be employed against organisations who default in the various equality or fair employment legislation so they might not be able to avail of public procurement contracts?

Public procurement rules are guided not just by our priorities and concerns but by EU regulations also. Therefore, we try to ensure full conformity with EU regulations.

As regards the implementation team that I referred to, we are making provision to ensure that membership of that team will include people with particular expertise on equality matters. The potential for procurement arrangements to impact on equality is already recognised in various Departments' equality schemes and in the Programme for Government. We will address the impact assessment of any policy as we map out the way ahead in pursuing the implementation of the key recommendations from the procurement review.

3.

asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel to detail what representations he has had from district councils on the issue of the regional rate.

(AQO 545/00)

Prior to the suspension of devolution in February 2000 I received letters from Ards and Fermanagh District Councils about the then proposed increases in the regional rates for 2000-01. Since devolution was restored at the end of May 2000 I have received further correspondence from both councils, in addition to letters from Coleraine and Newry and Mourne District Councils about the regional rate increases agreed for 2001-02. Fermanagh District Council has also proposed the separation of the regional and district rates.

I thank the Minister for his reply and take this opportunity of wishing him a happy and prosperous New Year - something that many traders in Northern Ireland will not have, unfortunately.

Will he comment on the recent report by the Small Business Federation, 'Barriers to Survival and Growth in UK Small Firms', which demonstrated that among small traders there was over 90% dissatisfaction with the level of business rates? Will he agree with me that if he continues to go down the path of imposing a further 8% increase in the regional rate in this year and in the following two years, he will achieve 100% dissatisfaction among small traders?

First, for small businesses it is the increase in the regional rate for non-domestic properties that is relevant. The projection is 6·6% for next year, and in the indicative budget figures we produced in December for the further two years the projection is 5·5%. We will not be in a position to settle the final figures for next year for a few weeks yet, when we will have the aggregate net annual valuation total for Northern Ireland. I have indicated previously that if the figures show that we can raise a similar amount of money with a lower increase then the Executive will want to give positive consideration to that.

The Executive do recognise the important contribution of small businesses and, along with the various Departments, will want to support small businesses. That in turn means that the Executive, and their various Departments, need the money that rates revenue provides.

As regards the concerns expressed about current rate levels and whether or not the distribution is equitable, that is precisely why the revaluation for non-domestic properties is taking place. The aim is not to try and raise more money from the rates; it is about trying to make sure that there is an equitable distribution of the rates burden. The revaluation will apply to the non-domestic sector.

Also, the Executive are bringing forward, as part of the Programme for Government, a more fundamental review of rating policy.

Does the Minister agree that the majority of local councillors has been very much against the 8% regional rate increase? Is the Minister aware that party representatives from those councils that he mentioned - including some of his own colleagues in the SDLP and those from the Ulster Unionist Party - voiced clearly and loudly their complete opposition alongside the DUP and the other parties who voiced their opposition in the Assembly? Does he therefore feel that his proposals are truly representative of the business life and of the people of the Province?

The recommendations relating to rate increases for next year, which have now been approved by the Assembly, are there as a result of our spending plans. If we had spending plans, that involved spending less money on fewer services, then, in turn, we could afford to go for a lower rate increase.

We recognise the strong concern that people feel, whether they are domestic ratepayers or non-domestic ratepayers. That is one of the reasons why we want to pursue the review of rating policy. That will be aimed at looking at the fairness of the rates burden not just in the non-domestic sector but in the domestic sector as well. We recognise that the rating system as it stands is not entirely popular and that, from many perspectives, it is not particularly satisfactory, but it is the one means of raising additional revenues beyond the one that the Treasury allocates us. We are trying to improve the fairness and the sense of the rating system. I hope that all Members of the House will support the Executive in their efforts to that end.

4.

asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel to detail the proportion of civil servants relative to the population of working age in Northern Ireland.

(AQO 540/00)

The proportion of civil servants relative to the population of working age in Northern ireland is 2·8%.

Given that particular figure and given figures that I received from the Minister in a written answer, the Minister will be aware that the percentage figure in West Tyrone is 1·8%. In fact, in one part of West Tyrone - the Strabane District Council area - it is 0·7%. Does the Minister not agree that it is long past time that the redistribution of Civil Service jobs throughout Northern Ireland was undertaken?

The number of civil servants employed in an area relates to the business needs of Departments. However, in line with commitments that have been made in the draft Programme for Government and in the context of an accomodation review, I intend to examine the scope for decentralisation of Civil Service jobs. The current target for completion of the review is June 2001.

6.

asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel to detail any discussions he has held with his ministerial colleagues and the European Union concerning the allocation of further "gap funding" in order to sustain projects; and if he will make a statement.

(AQO 535/00)

The Executive fully recognises the difficulties that some projects may have in sustaining their activities until new EU programme funding comes on stream. This issue was considered by Ministers attending the Executive meeting on 16 November 2000. As part of the October monitoring round, a further £3·6 million "gap funding" provision was anounced, bringing the total in the 2000-01 financial year to approximately £9 million.

I thank the Minister for his reply. I am sure he is aware, as I am, of the growing concern within community groups and the intermediary funding bodies about the continuing delays of the tendering process for applicants for the delivery of future services within the European programme. In fact, it is going to impinge greatly on the sustainability not just of the projects but of the very bodies themselves. Can the Minister indicate if there are any further measures which he might consider, such as reintroducing further funding to smoothe over that gap and, it is hoped, to hasten the implementation of the new programmes?

The Executive is keeping this problem under review. We are aware of the concerns that exist in the local groups, the partnerships and the intermediary funding bodies. I met the intermediary funding bodies shortly before Christmas.

We also need to address the fact that a significant proportion of the Peace I moneys has still to be spent. Although all the Peace I funding has been allocated, not all of it has been drawn down. Approaching 30% remains to be spent, and it must be spent by 31 December of this year. We want to address that problem and the problem of "gap funding", as it is called. Of course, we have to be careful that any decisions do not run afoul of our own provisions and commitments, and the European Commission's requirements, by pre-empting the proper allocation and bidding process that will be in place for the Peace II programme. To date, the Executive have proved by their responses in the monitoring rounds that they are trying to respond to this need.

We are also seeking a better method of tracing the different problems as they affect different programmes. For instance, we are aware that there are different end dates for different measures. That affects some of the same groups, and it obviously makes their management challenge all the more difficult. We want to look at all those problems to see if we can resolve them without giving rise to others.

7.

asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel to outline what is the current state of the Senior Civil Service review.

(AQO 561/00)

The First Minister and the Deputy First Minister were consulted on proposals for the composition of the review team. These have been agreed, and I am pleased to announce that Sir Herman Ousley has agreed to chair the review team. Other nominations to the review team from my ministerial Colleagues are currently being contacted as to their availability. When responses are received, I will bring proposals back to the Executive Committee before making a public statement on the review arrangements and terms of reference.

Is it possible to tease out what the review's terms of reference will be?

The proposed terms of reference for the review have been cast relatively broadly to maximise the opportunity that the review provides. The review represents a chance to address not only the practical ways of speedily enhancing the representation of under-represented groups, but also to consider the efficiency of procedures against the business needs of Ministers and officials in a devolved Administration.

It also provides an opportunity to consider the roles of Ministers, civil servants and the Civil Service commissioners, and other issues such as perceived obstacles to participation. An announcement on the review's full terms of reference will be made in due course.

8.

asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel to detail when the review of accommodation will start.

(AQO 557/00)

A firm of specialist property consultants has recently been engaged to update the database of Government office accommodation that was compiled two years ago. That review has been completed and the report is to hand. It validates many of our initial thoughts on condition and overcrowding, and it identifies the level of need. We are now in a position to move to the main stage of the exercise. The process of tendering for the strategy review will start shortly, and we will move to appoint consultants thereafter.

Will the Minster consider relocating some local Civil Service jobs to areas of high social need in the Belfast region?

In the past, when asked to address the issue of accommodation and decentralisation, I have been at pains to avoid answers that pre-empted possible outcomes for specific locations. I will do the same on this occasion. Clearly, I accept that new TSN is one of the important factors that must be taken into account in a review of this nature. We will look at the whole of Northern Ireland from that point of view and the other considerations that we have listed - not least the business needs of the Departments, but also regional development strategy and equality considerations.

I will resist the temptation to appeal for jobs to remain in North Down. Instead, I will ask the Minister what guidelines will be given by his Department in terms of the criteria that will be used by this review group in assessing how best to allocate Civil Service jobs.

This is a review of accommodation strategy, so we need to look at whether we have a sustainable accommodation strategy or whether we accept what we have inherited and make do beyond that.

In this sort of review we want to examine the existing estate and accommodation portfolio and future needs. In that context, we will want to look at the opportunities for redistributing Civil Service jobs on the basis of decentralisation. That will be one aspect of the strategy review. We need to start on the basis of the actual service and business needs of civil servants, Departments and this Assembly. We also need to take account of the wide range of factors I indicated in my last answer.

Churchill House is, among other things, the headquarters of the Department of Social Development. In view of the plans for that part of Belfast, Victoria Square, and the development plans that I had the honour to announce when I was the Minister, is priority being given to the need to relocate that Department's headquarters?

The issue is current, and the accommodation implications of the proposed development of Victoria Square will be considered in the forthcoming accommodation strategy review; as they should be, given that the issue is so significant.

TOP

Assembly Committees

I call Mr McGrady.

Not moved.

I call Mr McGrady.

Not moved.

Adoption (Intercountry Aspects) Bill:
Committee Stage (Period Extension)

TOP

I beg to move

That, in accordance with Standing Order 31(4), the period referred to in Standing Order 31(2) be extended to 6 April 2001 in relation to the Committee Stage of the Adoption (Intercountry Aspects) Bill (NIA 8/00).

The Health, Social Services and Public Safety Committee welcomes the Adoption (Intercountry Aspects) Bill, which will implement in Northern Ireland the 1993 Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co- operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption.

Members must appreciate that an extension of the Committee Stage is necessary in order to allow the Health, Social Services and Public Safety Committee sufficient time to give due consideration to the important issues raised in the Bill while at the same time considering other current issues. Although I am seeking an extension until 6 April 2001, it is hoped that the Committee will be in a position to bring its report to the Assembly at an earlier date. I ask Members to support the motion.

TOP

Weights and Measures (Amendment) Bill: Royal Assent

I wish to inform Members that Royal Assent for the Weights and Measures (Amendment) Bill has been signified. The Bill became law on 20 December 2000.

TOP

Assembly Business

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. May I have clarification on the timing of the matters that have just taken place on the Floor? I understood - but this is subject to your clarification - that if Question Time were to finish before the appointed time of 4·00 pm, the House would adjourn until 4·00 pm and then the business would continue. This has happened on other occasions. I would like your clarification on what is correct procedure when Question Time ends early.

If Question Time finishes early the practice has been to continue with the business in order to save time. However, I am in the hands of the House in respect of this issue. If Members feel strongly about it, we will look at it in the future.

TOP

<< Prev / Next >>