I want to express some disappointment that the Soccer Strategy report will not be ready until the autumn and will be followed by a period of consultation. Having raised this matter in earlier days, the Minister indicated there would be a report before the end of the current season. I am not sure that time is on our side in this matter. It might be interesting to hear whether the Soccer Strategy fits into the Department's programme.

Staying with sport but moving to perhaps the more leisurely but equally popular pastime of fishing, I note from the programme that a couple of actions are included. However, it is worth noting at this stage that the report from the Culture, Art and Leisure Committee, which will shortly be before this Assembly, will contain a number of recommendations, which I hope will be fitted into the programmes of the Departments concerned.

I want to draw attention to the lack of recognition of minority sports and the difficulties faced by our disabled sportsmen and sportswomen. The minority sports, which include many of the contact sports, such as karate and boxing receive little recognition and are unable to access funding. Again, society has been thankful for their contribution through troubled times. These sports were able to instil discipline in young people, which stood them in good stead as they progressed through life.

I was equally disappointed with the treatment of disabled sports people. Most of us would have been surprised by the current figures, which indicate that one person in six in our society is registered as disabled. What was even more shocking was to learn of the extent of the lack of purpose-built training facilities, which are virtually non-existent. Urgent progress must be made, to allow our talented disabled sports people to compete in equal terms with their overseas competitors.

One cannot help feeling that the current language policy has gone over the top. When speaking to people in my own community, it is increasingly difficult to explain how so much money and resources can be given to what in reality is only a pastime and a hobby for an unquantified number of participants. This is especially so when our hospitals, social services and educationalists are crying out for assistance.

Everyone should be proud of his or her culture and should respect others within realistic constraints.

I note the aspects of the programme relating to the arts. This area has been falsely perceived at times to be elitist. The Committee will soon be embarking on an inquiry into accessibility to the arts, and we look forward to that.

However, I believe the term "socially disadvantaged" should be changed to "wider community" as there are many people at all levels of society from the socially disadvantaged to the middle classes who have never been in a position to access the arts.

Another item of interest in the programme is that of the cultural quarter concept of designated areas for locating cultural activity. I hope that any forum established to co-ordinate and promote such a dimension will look to do so outside Belfast. There is much potential in some of our historic towns, which would benefit by locating cultural activities there.

I turn now to the other Departments. In my constituency, there are concerns about the Department of the Environment's proposals for waste management. I am concerned that the Department has dragged its feet on the matter - the timescale indicated in the programme is totally unacceptable. Many district councils cannot wait a year. I am aware of at least one council that is still unsure of where its waste will go after 31 March. I appeal to the Department to review its timescales, treat the matter of waste management with the utmost urgency and give a better lead.

I also have concerns about infrastructure, particularly in east Antrim and my town, Carrickfergus. While I welcome the efforts in the programme to stabilise the transport system - and I hope that east Antrim receives its fair share - there is disappointment that the A2 between Silverstream and Ravenhill on the Shore Road still does not feature. I again appeal to the Department about that matter, considering the growth of and development in the area that that part of the A2 serves.

Another area of concern about infrastructure relates to the old town system in Carrickfergus. Every year there is an increasing level of complaints about flooding and overflow, particularly in the older part of the town. Pressure on the old system is increasing, because it has to cope with continual development. I ask the Department to review the operations in the Programme for Government.

Finally, I refer to health, social services and public safety issues, especially the Ambulance Service. I note that the Department is to provide a modernisation programme for the service, initially targeting fleet replacement. I have been told that on at least six occasions ordinary vans were purchased and converted instead of purchasing six purpose-built ambulances. That cheaper option provides inadequate vehicles that could be a danger to those who operate them. I hope that any replacement fleet will be the real thing.

There is also concern about the state of some ambulance depots and the conditions in which crews are expected to work. Reports about Templemore Avenue, for example, have been particularly unfavourable. In addition, when the Department plans any staff-support programmes, it should take account of the increasing number of attacks on personnel.

In conclusion, as other Members for East Antrim have done, I ask the Department to consider Carrickfergus again as a location for a depot if the service is expanded or if there is a static situation. The location of an appliance there would dramatically improve the response times in the rural areas of east Antrim.

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I have waited a long time, but it appears that the debate is going to last a while longer.

I also welcome the Programme for Government, particularly the public service agreements and the important possibilities that they have for the equality agenda. This is similar to other Government documents: it is well put together and reads easily. However, much can be read into it or read out of it. It is very wordy - perhaps trying to hide what it will eventually deliver.

I examined the rural development section. It mentions modernising and diversifying the structure of farming. It makes me wonder what "modernise", "structure" and the "ability to produce food that is trusted throughout the world" mean, particularly given the current situation with foot-and-mouth disease and other difficulties. It states that during 2001 the Department will consider the feasibility of schemes for early retirement and to assist new entrants into farming. What does "consider" mean?

Many of the targets and objectives are only aims. That is my difficulty with the programme. There is too much leeway and no specific details on targets and objectives - they could be removed. It will be a year or three years down the line before we see if anything in the Departments' public service agreements or in the programme comes about. We will have to wait at least 12 months before getting an idea of what is happening. That is a failing in the document.

With regard to employment matters and Reg Empey's Department, my area of the Fermanagh and South Tyrone constituency expects the Budget and the Programme for Government to deliver on many issues relating to job provision, small businesses and offsetting the serious situation agriculture now faces.

It does not look as if the policies contained in the programme will help to alleviate the effect of the loss of around 700 jobs in areas west of the Bann in the past three years. Those are the targets that we want to see the Government meet.

Members have mentioned the road and rail system, and there was talk of the budget being halved. I would not like to see much more of the roads budget going towards rail if it means that people in rural areas will have to drive on bad roads every day. People in urban areas could use the rail links but do not do so. We must get the balance right before we start playing off one thing against another without taking into account the fact that most people use cars and will probably continue to do so for some considerable time.

I welcome the TSN targets for the various Departments. We can use them as a barometer to judge how well Departments are delivering. In particular, it is important that we have accountability and openness from Departments, especially as we now have a local Government. The public can already see the benefit of that.

Other Members who have spoken about agriculture have said that there was a clear lack of commitment to help the farmers in the Programme for Government and the Budget. The emphasis is on targets, re-training and administration; very little is delivered at local level. That is a serious failure which will have to be put right, and we will press for that. The role of women in agriculture - in the Department or anywhere else - has not really been mentioned. Farming delegations are still dominated by one gender. The role of women should be promoted.

We need more focus on the real issues that affect people in rural areas. I told the Agriculture and Rural Development Committee that we need to think about rural development. Our Committee has spent a lot of time on mainstream farming issues, to the detriment of rural development. Communities are waiting for the second tranche of EU funds, and it is important that our programme is aimed at helping those communities to get access to the new funding, so that the programme delivers for them. The programme talks about delivery in the context of rural development, but I have had some experience of that, and that simply has not happened. It must happen the next time around, and we will watch out to make sure that it does.

The Department of Agriculture and Rural Development and, indeed, its Minister seem to find it difficult to take criticism about their handling of the current situation. They will find that they will have to take criticism from everybody; it is well founded and is not simply for political purposes. Go raibh maith agat.

I rise to general approval, Mr Deputy Speaker. Members should not clap - they should just throw money. I am grateful for the opportunity to speak. The debate has been an endurance test for Members, especially those in the Chair and the junior Minister.

I am disappointed that the Education Committee, like all other departmental Committees, had very little time to consider the draft public service agreement and to make an effective contribution. That is unsatisfactory, and the matter must be addressed to ensure that all Committees have appropriate time to consider and carry out proper scrutiny in future.

The Education Committee welcomes the fact that investment in education and skills is an Executive priority. That is only right; education should and must remain a priority. Education is a key component in ensuring that a strong, vibrant and competitive economy is created for Northern Ireland. It is an investment in Northern Ireland's future. It is also imperative that all young people be given the opportunity to gain knowledge and skills that they will need to take their place in the modern-day workplace and society.

In the time afforded to me it is not possible to cover all the details of the Programme for Government. However, I will make some general comments and then refer to some of the education targets and actions. The Programme for Government is an important document that sets out the main priorities for the months and years ahead. It is a high-level document, but parts of the public service agreements section are vague and lack detail. Clarification is required with regard to some of the terms used. More specific linkages between the various actions and the allocations of finance also need to be clarified. Progress on the actions and targets will have to be monitored. Therefore clarity is essential to ensure that a meaningful and accurate assessment is made.

The actions outline a number of major policy reviews on school funding, the curriculum, post-primary education and, of course, the review of the transfer procedure selection in education and the future structure of post-primary education is ongoing. I am glad to see that account has been taken of the Education Committee's views and that the appropriate action point has been amended to prevent unrealistic expectations that the review of selection will be completed by June 2001.

That review has initiated an in-depth and crucial debate in Northern Ireland on its education systems. It should not be viewed in isolation. Consideration of those issues must not be rushed in order to achieve arbitrary deadlines. The necessary time must be taken to ensure that the review is done properly. The Education Committee welcomes the target to provide one year of pre-school education for every child whose parents wish it by March 2003. However, the Committee wishes to see more detail on the form that the pre-school education should take. That should be based on research and current best practice.

The Education Committee also acknowledges the vital role that rural schools play in their communities, and it is hoped that the Programme for Government will provide the support that those schools need.

I also welcome the commitment to raising educational standards and to addressing low achievement and underachievement. However, I have reservations regarding those targets outlined in the public service agreement, which have been set at a lower level than those outlined in the strategy for numeracy and literacy. While the targets have taken account of the levels of performance, I am concerned that the more challenging targets have not been retained, particularly given the timescale for achievement and the significant resources that will be allocated to address this issue. Targets should be achievable, but previous performance that has not met expectations should not automatically mean that the expectation is reduced. It should prompt us all to try harder to find innovative ways to achieve our goals.

I am pleased that account has been taken of the comments of the Education Committee regarding the need for more linkages between the Programme for Government and the public service agreements. This has resulted in specific targets on non-attendance, suspensions and expulsions being included as well as targets relating to information and communication technologies.

The inclusion of targets regarding major capital works is also pleasing. I am sure all Members have seen at first hand the major problems in school estates and the backlog of priority works that must be urgently addressed. I could say much more in a party political sense, but unfortunately time does not permit.

In conclusion, the final judgement on the Programme for Government will be what we achieve and whether we will have made a real difference. I welcome the programme and the actions and targets contained in it. Much work is required to ensure that these targets are met. This is the start of the process, and I have no doubt that the Education Committee will play a full leading part and will closely scrutinise the Department of Education's work to ensure that adequate progress is made, better services are provided and value for money is achieved.

I support the Programme for Government and commend the Ministers and officials involved in its production. I also want to pay tribute to those bodies who were consulted and who responded to the draft programme. However, as party spokesperson for health, I intend to concentrate on the many and varied health issues.

Northern Ireland has an unenviable health record with death rates from coronary heart disease and some cancers the highest in Europe. There are some issues which need to be urgently addressed such as lengthy waiting lists, particularly in the field of orthopaedic surgery, and ill health associated with social disadvantage. We have to encourage health promotion with regard to smoking. There are currently 3,000 deaths a year from smoking. We have to at least encourage people to try to stop. Alcohol is the most widely available and widely abused drug. People are a bit blasé about alcohol and do not see it in those terms. We have to, through education, reduce the numbers of teenage pregnancies. We have to encourage all major employers to have safety managers to avoid accidents at work. We have to encourage more young mothers to breastfeed to give their babies the best chance in life.

With regard to coronary heart disease, we have to teach cardio pulmonary resuscitation to the general public. We are all aware that those first few minutes after a cardiac arrest are the most critical. If there is someone on hand who can perform resuscitation the person has a better chance of recovery.

Children's concerns need to be addressed. We are all aware that a bad episode in hospital can give a child a philosophy for life that makes him afraid to attend hospital. We have to attempt to allay their fears. We must also encourage healthy eating. The fact is that we all know what to do but very few of us do it. We need to be more concerned about keeping people out of hospitals, rather than feeling that the only available option is inpatient treatment. We need to keep targeting social need (TSN) policies to the forefront in all decision-making processes and have section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 written into all contracts and agreements. We need to ensure a more equitable distribution of funds across the four board areas. We must ensure that those with disabilities are treated equally and have access to all facilities. We also need to ensure equality of opportunity and have day-surgery facilities available to all communities. At present we have an inadequate Ambulance Service. In Derry there was a very bad fire. The whole family, with the exception of one child, were fatally burned.

At that particular time there was only one ambulance available. When the paramedics came, one of the policemen had to drive the ambulance. A dead person had to be put onto the floor. That is unacceptable in this day and age. We need better ambulance cover in all the board areas.

In relation to cancer, I agree with Edwin Poots's point that men's cancers have to be addressed. We need to address the issue of testicular and prostate cancers. There is now a very simple test for prostate cancer, which was not available in the past. It is not currently available here, but I think that the Health Service should be looking at that. We also have to make sure that the cancer services are friendly services. At the minute, cancer is the number two killer in our community. If we do not take action soon, it will become the number one killer. This afternoon we had a meeting with Prof Roy Spence, who is the leading cancer clinician in Belfast. Some of the figures he gave us on deaths from cancers made very sad reading.

These death rates are rising. The incidence of lung cancer is rising, as is the rate of other cancers. Some can be cured if they are caught in time, so early detection is the answer in that regard. We are currently very short of oncology services in Belfast and throughout the North of Ireland. There are two oncologists. We need more oncologists in Belfast. We also need a magnetic resonance imaging scanner available in Belfast. At the minute that is not the case, and it is a disgrace that a major city does not have one.

We need a dedicated cancer centre day unit that is linked to treatment. It is wrong that people have to travel to Belfast, but if they cannot get their treatment locally they must do so. If the disease can be controlled, people should be available to give the necessary palliative care and counselling. Patients should not have to travel 70 miles to get it, as happens at the moment.

I am aware of three patients who have been diagnosed as having cancer in the last five years. One is a young woman who travels daily from Omagh. She travelled initially to Belfast by bus for chemotherapy, although she has now managed to get alternative transport. That is staggering. Anybody who has had chemotherapy will know that some of the drugs can make you very sick. Day patients going for chemotherapy at the City Hospital are suffering at present. There are no toilet facilities available and no water fountain near the day patients' entrance. Some people are sick and have to walk - perhaps while receiving drip-fed treatment - through the treatment room. That is unacceptable.

We must ensure that we get a proper service here - a dedicated cancer service available in the City Hospital. Space is currently available, and we want that provision now rather than having to wait for another couple of years for it. I hope that this will be taken on board by the health and social services in the very near future, and that they will not wait until more people die.

The Programme for Government could be considered as being the wish-list of the Executive and the various Departments. That is where the problems really begin. Many questions have been asked here today, and more need to be asked.

What is the structure by which the public are to determine what outcomes have been achieved? Take mental health, for example. A target of 35,000 consultations seems to be excellent news. How will the public know that this target is genuine and that it will genuinely be met? Given the amount of dishonesty and massaging of figures in Government circles, how can this be determined?

What about the issue of effectiveness? Is there any way that those outcomes can be determined? What about those who are already having consultations? How effective are they? I note with interest that some dates are given for parts of this wish-list to be achieved. The public's problem will be in assessing which targets have been achieved.

Let us take, for example, the acute hospitals. The target on page 35 is to agree a way forward by December, but that depends on other reviews and strategies, some of which are listed. How can the one be achieved if the other is not in place?

Let us look at the plan to provide 40 to 50 specialist staff by March 2002. Are those people already being trained? If not, how is that going to be achieved? There is a target to recruit 640 nurses by 2003-04. Are sufficient numbers already being trained? What about the failure to retain those already in nursing? How can we meet such a target if we are continually losing staff in the Health Service? Why are these real problems not included?

The capital programme for health in the document aims

"to finalise and begin implementation of a strategic development plan to modernise the forty-year-old Ulster Hospital"

and

"by September 2001, to finalise plans for the Belfast City Hospital cancer centre."

However, there is no mention of any action taking place. It was staggering to hear - during a presentation by the Ulster Cancer Foundation this afternoon - that by the year 2004 cancer will be the number-one killer. It is a tragedy that there is no action plan in this Programme for Government to deal with this serious problem.

Let us turn to education, where there is another range of problems. On page 40 there is a reference to upgrading buildings. This is laudable in itself, but how is it going to be achieved when the bulk of the money is all going one way? Considering his current practices, how will the Minister achieve that unless he really means that he will only be concerned with the integrated sector?

The problem is not that there is no Programme for Government but that it is so huge that what is called the "Durkan tax" would need to be trebled. This seems to me to be the real issue: is the programme sensible, achievable and workable?

All of these things will not be achieved in two or three years, which leads me to a further point; if these plans are put into operation - requiring huge sums of money - then there is no sane reason why we should need another Programme for Government for at least two years. All we would be getting would be a simple update. What is more, there is no possibility of flexibility in such a system. By aiming at everything, there is the danger of achieving nothing.

Finally, the Executive's own agenda says nothing about developing and enhancing the UK dimension. Aa great deal is said about the North/South dimension, and it is evident that the First Minister, Mr Trimble, has not even bothered to try to do anything about that disparity. He has capitulated completely. It is little wonder that my party.refuses to take its seats on such a body of united Ireland promoters. I oppose the Programme for Government.

A LeasCheann Comhairle, go raibh maith agat. I support the Programme for Government, although I have reservations. If we are honest about it, there are many proposals in the document, but they are bland enough to cover all circumstances. However, we also have to recognise that a great deal of work went into this, the first programme. We will need to keep a tight reign on it to see that it is implemented in full.

My concerns centre around the rebalancing of services, facilities and infrastructure, east and west of the Bann. This is one of the main issues, but there is no mention within the Programme for Government - either in a Department context or even from an overarching point of view - that this re-balance is necessary and will be carried out.

Today's Finance Committee did not give me any extra details about the Programme for Government, however I welcome the commitment given by the Minister, Mark Durkan, and his promise of swift action to review the Civil Service to decentralise its jobs. I hope that this move can be rural-proofed to ensure that we get the jobs out of the city - not just into Derry city, but west of the Bann as well.

Perhaps the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development could be rural-proofed. It would be good to see it based in a rural area.

Finance-raising powers have been limited to rates collection. Rates are a crude way of collecting taxes, which we must re-examine. I welcome the review of rating policy by the Minister, although there is certainly an opportunity to review rating policy and taxation in general.

We must look at who is paying rates - namely, the town centres. Much damage has been done to town centres over the past years. We must look at out-of-town shopping to ensure that there is fair rates distribution. As regards domestic rates, we must have a situation where we target social need.

We must look at businesses. We must look at their location, their turnover, and their abilities to pay rates, rather than simply basing our rates on the square footage of a building. That is an unfair system of tax collection.

I welcome the cross-departmental approach proposed by the Executive as regards agriculture and rural development. However, I question whether rural-proofing ought to be left to self-regulation. There is a big question mark about who polices who in such a situation. I am concerned that the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development could not define what rural proofing meant during the Committee meeting with the Minister last week. Perhaps we could measure proposals against what happens in reality.

I support the Chairperson of the Agriculture and Rural Development Committee's statement yesterday in relation to the fishing crisis. There is not only an agricultural crisis, there is also a fishing crisis. There is a crisis in rural development and in the entire rural structure. The fishing industry was once a strong major resource, and many good fishing areas existed. However, that was long before we joined the European Community. Stocks are now depleted. Our fishermen are being restricted in the areas they can fish, whereas everyone else seems to have free reign. Our fishermen have been sold out. Their stocks and their rights have been sold off for seats in the European empire.

The Minister told the Committee last week that she could not restrict cattle and traffic coming from England, Scotland and Wales into the North. That flies against all the advice that has been given in the past. Certainly, every vehicle leaving the North has been searched umpteen times. We were told that there would be no borders in the European Union, and now we are seeing the effect of having no internal restrictions. The situation exists in the European Union that our Minister was unable to stop the influx of sheep into this country.

The European partnership and rural development are in danger of collapse if the Executive do not deal with the gap funding. This is one of the main causes of rural decline at present.

As regards European programmes, there is no infill between the Peace I and Peace II programmes. The Minister must clarify when Peace II funding will be on the ground and when the rural communities will benefit from it. Otherwise, we will lose a major asset in the rural community.

On the matter of health, which is another issue close to my heart, Mr McGrady said that the Hayes review was becoming a barrier to action, and I agree. Action cannot be taken as everything is being put back until after the review has been completed. There is much pending its completion. There is a lot of pressure on the shoulders of Dr Hayes and his group to come up with a new health structure. It is a flaw that we are left waiting for the Hayes review to rectify all the wrongs of the past 20 years. We need a new direction, but the Programme for Government does not give a clear direction as to what resources will be put into the Hayes review. If Dr Hayes were to say that we should rebalance services east and west of the Bann, that we were going to have an end to the "golden six" hospitals and that rural hospitals would be provided for us, there would be no money in the Programme for Government to do anything about it.

We can see that the Royal Victoria Hospital is continuing with its build programme. I welcome that. There is certainly a need for centres of excellence. But all centres of excellence do not need to be in Belfast. They can be anywhere. What about the acute services review? That has not restricted the build programme.

The Assembly needs to give a clear indication that services east and west of the Bann must be rebalanced to provide the rural community with the hospital service, infrastructure and facilities it needs. Otherwise, it is wasting its time.

Discrimination west of the Bann was a trademark of the old Stormont Administration. If we continue in that vein, we will be as guilty as those who have gone before us. Discrimination was exercised not only against the Catholic community but against the entire community west of the Bann. The whole service was restructured when hospital services and many others were taken from those rural communities and put into such places as Craigavon. We need a clear indication that we will rebalance all of that.

Please bring your remarks to a close.

I will finish by saying that we need a clear and definite line of action in the Programme for Government if we are going to succeed. Go raibh maith agat.

I, like others, welcome the document with reservations. It is historic, being the first locally drawn up action plan for the Government of Northern Ireland. However, as my Colleagues and I are pointing out today, it must also be an opportunity for concerns about the overall ethos of the programme and - more importantly - for its implementation for the benefit of all the people in Northern Ireland.

As regards education, there is a commitment in the programme to provide high-quality education for all, with equal access for all. Last week, the Minister of Education announced a practical commitment in the capital spending programme to improve the quality of school buildings and equipment. However, there is still a long way to go to create an ethos of equality - perceived or otherwise - in a number of areas of educational life. I regret to say that one of the most glaring omissions is that of a full commitment to children with learning disabilities. If we are to have equality of opportunity to achieve the potential for each child, whatever his or her ability, surely some definite promise of action should have been made.

On the subject of integrated education, some progress has been made in the funding and setting up of schools, but the viability criteria are still far too restrictive to the extent that most integrated schools are turning away large numbers of potential pupils every year. Integrated schools are often criticised as being a minor part of the education sector, and there will be clear discrimination against pupils and parents if some action is not taken to promote the free choice of integrated education.

I must point out that pre-school education has been largely integrated until now, and it is hoped that the Government will encourage the continuation of that under the action programme.

I am also concerned about the comments on the 11-plus in the programme. It states that by June 2001 consideration will be initiated on the review body report on post-primary education. What exactly does that mean? Where, and between whom, will that discussion take place? How can this implement the process for higher-quality education for all, when the current system has been largely discredited? The key to any programme should be the swift implementation of all its actions to promote equality of opportunity, but much of the education section must be clarified before that can be done.

The promises made for education by the Executive are to be welcomed for their attention to the enhancement of pre-school education, the vocational element in education and the promised aims of providing lifelong education opportunities for all. However, it must be accepted that these promises need to be fully explained so that people know they can be delivered.

The First Minister and the Deputy First Minister did commit the Executive to carrying out equality proofing in all their schemes, but it is still not clear if the forthcoming Single Equality Act will consolidate all existing legislation. We would ask that it does that as soon as possible. In that, I welcome the commissioner for children, but again I have to say that the remit and status of this position must be transparent to ensure the basic necessity for it, which is that all children should feel confident of equal treatment.

One and a half pages of the Programme for Government tackle the divisions in our society. These include a large paragraph on the need to encourage and support the celebration of cultural and linguistic diversity. I fully agree with that, but I would like there to be a better appreciation of the diversity among our people; this should also be noted in the same specific language.

One of the first priorities should be community relations and work to combat sectarianism. However, given my direct knowledge of the good and the bad occurrences of many communities in Northern Ireland today, there is no real comfort in the promises made in the Programme for Government. With due respect to the Deputy First Minister, it is not enough to say that good community relations are inherent in the whole programme, without taking specific steps to counteract the sectarianism which is ingrained in our society.

The Community Relations Council must be strengthened and it needs to be shown more appreciation through increased support and funding. In this way, the positive work, past and present, of the many different community groups, including women's organisations et cetera, can be built upon rather than thrown away.

There are many points in the Programme for Government about which one can be hopeful, and no one can deny the direct and constructive effect of the Executive and the Assembly on Northern Ireland to date. However, the Alliance party needs to express its concerns along with its praise because there is still no real acknowledgement of the diversity of our society, including its variety of cultures and religions, which requires positive recognition here and now. There is still a perception abroad that in Northern Ireland, if one is not a Protestant or a Roman Catholic, one is outside the norm. Unfortunately, this programme proposes nothing that will change that perception at all.

I support the amendment.

Several Members have spoken at length about education. I was pleased that both the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister highlighted the need to meet targets, particularly those relating to literacy and numeracy at Key Stage 3. Until now, targets set by the Department have not been met, but they are now enshrined in this document. We have a firm commitment that our children will have a fundamental right to an education that will spare them the agony of going through life with serious literacy and numeracy problems. That is the best news any child could hope to receive. It is a fundamental basic right of children, and it will be protected by equality legislation. If the Department fails, we can ask questions. I, along with others, have been doing that.

Many other targets have been set. As politicians, we have a duty to ensure that the Department meets those targets in the interests of those who matter most - our children and young people. Funding is allocated for a modest increase in youth service provision, and help is to be provided for young people with severe learning difficulties in particular. More provision is needed if we are to give our young people a healthy start in life, free from the influence of drug pushers, paramilitaries, joyriders and all of the other anti-social elements which have destroyed so many lives in Northern Ireland for many years.

There are now opportunities to address the education needs, through life-long learning programmes, of those who have been let down by the education system in the past. There is to be funding for education guidance organisations such as the Educational Guidance Service for Adults (EGSA), which has done a great deal to give hope to the 250,000 people between the ages of 16 and 64 who need their help.

I am concerned that there is insufficient funding to address the problems that exist, but at least we now have a direct influence on widening access to education for everyone. Surely, that marks the first real step towards progress. Young people in further education colleges now have some sense of equality with others in universities - who in his right mind would be opposed to that?

In the past, those who suffered from social disadvantage have been exploited for political gain. This programme aims to make those people equal in every respect. It is not simply telling them that they have been discriminated against; it is providing them with the resources and tools to allow them to raise their heads above the parapet as equals.

The funding allocated to the Northern Ireland Audit Office will transform the way in which the Government spend taxpayers' money. For some time now, Members from all political parties have had the right to scrutinise reports prepared by the Comptroller and Auditor General. That simple but effective exercise has the potential to save millions of pounds of public money and redirect it to other areas.

Sadly, a small number of Assembly Members who continue to draw their salaries have decided not to sit on the Public Accounts Committee, or on any Committee, to carry out the crucial work to which I have referred. Others enjoy Ministers' perks but refuse to sit in the Executive to make the collective decisions that are so important to our people.

My earliest childhood memories are of listening to politicians who preached doom and gloom from platforms at seasonal intervals. While they lectured society, the rest of us were forced to endure appalling housing conditions and suffer the indignity of seeing our parents without jobs. That day is now over. It does not matter whether the prophets of doom spew out their negative views from the backs of lorries or from hilltops - things are not going back for me, my family or anyone, no matter what their colour, class or creed. Members of the public are not fools. They know that for the first time they are being represented and that their views are being listened to. Why else would so many Assembly Members in the "No" camp have opened advice centres?

TOP

<< Prev / Next >>