Four years ago the annual intake to Saintfield High School was cut from 90 to just over 60. Given that the aim is to address the competition for school places, it would have been wiser to increase the percentage of local pupils who attend the local high school. Unfortunately, a situation has arisen whereby children who have family ties with the school travel from Belfast, Comber and Downpatrick, while some children from Saintfield are turned away.

Flexibility is needed to deal with the problems, and finance must be put in the right pockets to ensure that these issues are addressed. To date, the criteria have been applied so rigidly that pupils' education is being put in jeopardy. The heart of the problem lies with the closure of schools in the area, and until this is addressed a system is needed to accommodate local pupils, because they deserve better. Without such action the problems can only get worse.

If the people of Newtownards and district are not to be exposed to the same crisis in secondary education as we have witnessed in mid-Down, it is essential that Scrabo High School be retained. There is already competition for places at Movilla High School and Regent House Grammar School in the area, and it is clear that within the next five to ten years the problems concerning secondary education places in Newtownards will continue to grow. We witnessed the same short-sightedness on the part of the board towards Killyleagh High School, when education standards were not maintained so that a few pennies could be saved.

The situation in mid-Down has now reached crisis point, with so few secondary places available that students are forced to travel to either Downpatrick or Comber to receive their education. At least we still have the option of reopening Killyleagh High School. To continue with the sale of Scrabo High School is utter lunacy. It may save a few pounds in the short term, but it will cause pain and anxiety for many local parents in the not-too-distant future.

In the same vein, special schools throughout Northern Ireland require increased funding if they are to meet their current demands. There are real shortfalls in special needs education for children in the Ards area. A wee bit more funding for Killard House Special School would be sufficient to bring in another class and ensure that the special educational needs of the children in the area are addressed. That can only happen if the funding is there. That 9·7% of the education budget must go where the need is. There is a need for secondary education in the Ards Borough Council area. There is a need in Strangford, and we should examine that.

The plight of the non-maintained sector has been directly precipitated by the openly prejudiced behaviour of the Minister in command of the Education Department in ignoring the needs and the requirements of the state sector, preferring instead to give priority to the maintained and integrated sectors. I fear that the crisis in education will continue until he is removed from office.

It is very important that we are discussing and approving this Supply resolution today, because only a few years ago this scene would have been unimaginable. We are working together across all parties - and I stress all parties - on issues that unite rather than divide us.

We know that the resources we get from the Treasury are not sufficient to meet the needs of our society, and so does the wider public. We also know that the rates are one of the few sources of funds for health, education, roads and the other services so badly needed by our people. We all hate the rates but we should realise how much we actually need them, because this is real politics. What can we do when our only way of raising revenue is through the rates? We can pretend, score political points and ignore the reality, or we can accept that however unpalatable it may be, we need them.

We also need to develop other areas of funding and efficiency so that we can reduce our dependence on the rates. It is important that we approve the Supply resolution, but it is also immensely important that we support and approve the action of our Finance Minister. He does a difficult and complex job fairly and professionally. Even his sternest critics would commend his professionalism on these issues.

However, it is insufficient to merely congratulate from these Benches. All of us in this Assembly, in the Committees and in the Executive must work ceaselessly in pursuit of the goals of the community. We need to increase the resources available for allocation to meet the needs of our people. Therefore we should be watchful of expenditures that do not meet the priorities that we know exist. We must continually question the use of resources in every Department and ask whether such usage represents value for money. We must strive to find innovative ways of funding our services, not just through the private finance initiative or public-private partnership, but also through using not-for-profit organisations to deliver services in a way that ensures professionalism and, at the same time, derives other benefits in terms of secondary goals.

We must ensure that our public procurement is used in ways that not only satisfy a need but also, where possible, liberate opportunity for the people and the economy. There are many ways in which we can wage war on need, utilising resources more efficiently and effectively, and thereby maximising the return to our people. We need to explore these, no matter how small. We can be rightly proud and happy with this Budget and the increases achieved, but we cannot be complacent or rest on this success. We must build and innovate, develop and continuously improve our activities. We need to get behind Mark Durkan, the Minister of Finance and Personnel, and support and encourage his efforts as he leads this Administration's effort to secure more resources, both from the Treasury and through actions internal to Government.

I support the Supply resolution and ask this House to do the same. To build the resource base for the future society needs this approach, and the people demand it.

One Member has withdrawn, leaving only three others to speak. Minister, how long will you require for winding up?

I do not know yet.

We can continue until 6 o'clock, but we must finish then and resume the debate tomorrow. However, we have 45 minutes remaining, and it is possible we might finish it now.

Mr Deputy Speaker, can I assure you, the Minister and the House that I will be extremely brief.

I have to agree with much of what Patricia Lewsley had to say. We cannot ignore reality. I doubt there is anybody in this House who does not enjoy the opportunity that the Assembly has afforded us to look at and control our own Budget. It is a great pity that we all know we are facing a threat to the continuation of this. I appeal to those who pose that main threat to this institution to do what is expected of them in the agreement - to start the process of decommissioning of weapons and allow us to continue here with proper government for Northern Ireland.

I would like to say to Mr Shannon that I am in total agreement with his Colleague Mr Gibson. In the west Tyrone area we do have the worst roads in Northern Ireland.

I was under the impression that he has not spoken yet - perhaps I am wrong.

I am talking about previous addresses to the Assembly. We are totally together, and I believe we were called "Team West Tyrone" earlier in the Chamber.

There is a threat to the roads network throughout Northern Ireland. A danger may exist in the future strategy of concentrating on the main transportation corridors, and the rural network could suffer through that. Like Mr Shannon, I appeal for the Minister of Finance and Personnel to ensure that the regional development budget is sufficient to ensure that the total transport infrastructure is dealt with in a proper way. It should not be allowed to constantly go down, down and down to the point of becoming unreasonable.

I am seeking clarification from the Minister on the subject of European funds, which he mentioned with regard to one or two Departments. Indeed, in respect of his own Department he mentioned a sum of money that struck me as being laid aside as pump-priming. What additional funding does the Minister expect to come through that he will have to deal with? Also, can he assure Members and clarify to the House that the Assembly would be dealing with additional funding available to it from Europe, as opposed to the previous situation?

I said I would be brief, Mr Deputy Speaker.

Mr Hussey, you are a man of your word.

What the Minister of Finance and Personnel has announced today is fine detail. That is important and good for us all. Usually when the Minister announces a Budget, we get a run around west Tyrone roads.

One point concerns the maintenance of roads. There is no doubt that if we cannot maintain existing roads, we will find it more and more difficult to raise capital money for new schemes. The Department for Regional Development sees roads maintenance as a priority, because defects are increasing every year, and there is no money to repair them. How are we going to address that problem?

The Department has asked for additional funding of about £40 million to address this. We also have to raise the matter of the Roads Service's capital budget with the Minister, because that concerns us deeply, not only in the west of the Province, but across Northern Ireland. That capital budget causes great concern. Officials tell those of us who managed to get re-elected to councils what they have to spend in our areas, whether for maintenance, capital schemes or whatever. Meetings between officials and councillors in all the 26 district councils are usually fairly lively.

Councillors ask whether the situation has improved since the setting up of the Assembly, and the public assumes that, because we now have an Assembly here, we have more money to spend and it should not be a problem for Mr Durkan to get a few million pounds if he needs them. Members of the public do not understand why we do not have extra money. To get the necessary money to deal with priorities is as difficult for the Minister of Finance as it is for any Minister. Irrespective of how the Minister of Finance announces extra money, he is criticised, because some of us will say that it is still not enough, and no matter how much money we get from the block grant, it will never be enough to address some of the serious issues that concern us, whether they be health, education, or the Department for Regional Development.

We will never have enough money to address the needs that must be looked at. We must look at other ways of raising money. That is where the difficulty arises. However, there are other models and methods that have to be considered.

Some of us who sit on the Regional Development Committee know the serious situation that the Water Service is in. Some of the issues that it has raised with Committee members would make your hair stand on end. We have heard about our sewerage system and water treatment system, and we are trying to find out exactly how to move things forward. We were simply told that there must be massive investment in those two areas in the Department for Regional Development. It could take five years, 10 years, or even longer, to reach the point where we have a modern system - whether it is a roads system or a water system.

EU regulations are driving forward the issue of the water system. We are having to try to keep abreast of regulations that change year after year, and it is costing the Department a huge amount of money to do that. I want to know how the Minister plans to raise the extra money needed if we are going to resolve some of the Northern Ireland's serious problems.

All Departments need money - each needs a large amount of money to address the serious issues that are concerning us in Northern Ireland. As I said earlier, each time the Minister announces the Budget, or extra resources, it is only a small drop into what is really needed by every Department. The public perceives that the Assembly can address some of these problems very quickly. We know that some of the issues could take many years to address across every Department.

It is important that we try to come up with new ideas on how we can raise the necessary finances to address our problems. The public will not wait five or 10 years for the problems in health and hospital waiting lists to be dealt with. They will not wait much longer for problems in the transportation network to be addressed.

I heard Mr Hussey talking about transportation networks. There is no network in west Tyrone or throughout the west of the Province - an area starved of resources for many years. We could spend all day debating why that happened, but, as someone from the west, and who has represented the west of the Province for 20 years, I can say that the resources have not been there. They have not been there for a long time. The west of the Province comes from a lower base - it always has done.

When I see the road networks in other parts of the Province and come back to the west I ask myself "Where did it go wrong?" The problem has existed for about 30 years. I have no doubt about that. I remember when Roads Service officials came to council. There were occasions when we did not meet them at all. We did not even allow them to open the book, because we were so fed up with them continually telling us that there was no money for any capital schemes and that there would be no money for the next five to 10 years. I remember that we closed one council meeting after five minutes because there was no point in listening to them - they had nothing new to tell us since the previous year.

That is how bad it was. Things are slightly better now, because they understand the concerns of the west of the Province, but we could be debating the same issue in two or three years' time and still have no real resources to show for it.

I congratulate the Minister on the presentation of the Estimates, and I welcome the increase in the funding for the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development. However, there would be something wrong if, as elected representatives, we did not seek a little more.

What percentage of the estimated £223 million will make its way directly to the farming community? I hope that that is not an unreasonable question. I would also like to say, following on from what the Chairperson of the Agriculture Committee said, that it is my party's view that an early retirement scheme would be beneficial to the industry. Such a scheme, combined with a newcomer scheme, would have been welcome, but we may, regrettably, have to wait for at least another year. I hope that the Minister will take note for next year and put that near the top of his agenda. The Minister has earmarked £8·6 million for rural development. That amount will not create the desired vibrancy in rural areas. Therefore it is important that as much of that sum as possible reaches the people.

I acknowledge the efforts made by the Minister to help the agriculture industry, and I congratulate him on the Estimates. No doubt, he has burned the midnight oil in preparing the paper. Will he give an assurance that the spending of the £223 million will be closely monitored to ensure that every available penny reaches the farming community?

I come at the Budget speech today from a somewhat different angle. I was hopeful about the Budget; it is our first real attempt to assess our needs.

I want to put the case for the west of the Province. We have suffered a serious battering from bomb and bullet that has torn our social infrastructure apart. The Orange halls that were once community centres for the rural Protestant population have been neglected because of intimidation and other forms of discrimination. The halls are in a state ranging from good to very basic, but they are still part of the social infrastructure. If that community is to re-emerge as an active part of the west Tyrone community, it must be helped to develop and renew its social infrastructure.

Removing the rates from Orange halls would involve little effort, but it would help. Parochial halls, church halls and community halls are not rated, but they serve the same purposes as small rural Orange halls. The Orange halls are social centres for the local Protestant community but must pay rates. The cost of one cross-border conference would cover it. The Minister should consider that only a minor change to the legislation would be needed and that only a small amount of money would be lost by removing the rates. That would be a start to rebuilding the Protestant community's infrastructure and would encourage those people to recommence active social life.

I also suggest that in the whole budgetary allowance, greater consideration should be given to victims. I am not talking just about the Omagh bomb. I am talking about the 97 people who were murdered in my constituency before the Omagh bomb. These are the people who, over 30 years, have suffered deep-seated physical, psychological and mental disabilities. Homes have been decimated. I would have thought that we would have shown reconciliation in this Budget by demonstrating that there was going to be a willingness and a helpfulness to the community that has suffered so much.

I am appealing today to the Minister to take on board those very human aspects of healing and reconciling those in the west of the Province who have suffered because of their remoteness and their religious affiliation. Their social infrastructure has to be activated and redeveloped to bring it up to modern needs and requirements.

I agree with William Hay that it did not matter how much the Minister announced. I thoroughly congratulate the Minister on presenting this Budget, with the increases therein. But let me take you to seven of my constituents who are waiting for heart bypasses - those operations that cast gloom over a family. Take a farmer who has been told some weeks ago that his condition is such that they will not allow him out of hospital. Priorities come into play. Finance comes into play. The man is sent home, and he is still at home, waiting for a call. It is to be hoped that he will get someone who has either dropped out of the queue, or who has died while still on the waiting list.

That is the reality of our provision at this time. I can think of seven others in my constituency about whom I have written to the Department of Health, asking that special consideration be given to them. They are the breadwinners of their families, with the whole family waiting in fear, trembling and desperation.

Budgetary consent is something that has to be examined. Where are our priorities? I think of those who are waiting for hip replacements and those who are struggling to get money to go into the private sector to be relieved of the serious agony of a hip joint replacement. I am told that there is a marketplace that ranges from £6,000 in the Royal Victoria Hospital to £2,000 in Letterkenny. There is something seriously wrong with our system when people are forced, despite having paid every required contribution to the Health Service, to go to their own private financial resources. This Budget does need examination.

I will move on to the area of rural proofing, which we were assured would take place. This Budget has not indicated how we are going to rural proof. How do you rural proof to give equality of opportunity to the people of my constituency as well as those who live in the more wealthy, opulent Strangford area? This Budget has to take consideration of Government policy statements. If the Government statements do not measure up - [Interruption].

It was the voice from Strangford.

The voice from Strangford was just trying to compete with me.

The roads issue has already been very well dealt with, but I want to make another plea, because the Minister and the finance people have been good - [Interruption].

I must insist that this does not happen again.

I also insist that it be switched off, because I am speaking.

We have £20 million for the A5, but we have the worse problem of getting to the A5 on class B roads. Our roads are outworn. I am sure that the Minister is fed up hearing this from west Tyrone and the west of the Province, but the roads are rugged and outworn.

Yesterday evening I went to look at Oldcastle Road outside Newtownstewart. The last time I was on it, it was like a road into a quarry. The best they could do was darn the road, but the road has often been darned. I could take Members through Omagh and along the Hospital Road and the Derry Road, two arterial routes through the largest town in the west of the Province - but they are like test tracks for a Sherman tank. The surface has been rutted, relaid and re-piped - everything has been done to it. Driving on it now is like spending an hour on the bumper cars at Bundoran.

Serious consideration needs to be given to us. We do not have railways or airports; we have only one infrastructure -a roads system, and it is a terrible one. The question has been asked "Is it worn beyond repair?". It is now becoming an argument about value for money. A little repair over many years would have prevented the massive capital input that is now needed to bring the roads up to standard. Even if the Minister were to pour in millions of pounds per year, the contractors would probably be working and charging double the price because they could not keep up with the amount of work that needs to be done.

We have a desperate problem and, as my Colleague William Hay has suggested, alternative forms of financing our infrastructure must be sought and found, because we cannot go on living in a state of desperation. There is supposed to be a normal standard, but our roads are abnormal.

Finally - and I know that our time is nearly up - I want to deal with education and rural proofing. Rural schools are still a central part of our community, and there is always a push for rationalisation and great concern about viable numbers. However, other countries like Belgium and Holland have proved that you do not need to have such equations of numbers. They deliver a very good education system - in fact, one that is suspected to be better than ours at primary level - yet they can retain a rural school infrastructure. By clustering the resources and combining a number of other qualities of the provision of teaching staff, rural schools can be retained. However, no research has been done on that, and there is no indication in the Estimates that any research money is going to be put into that area.

If the Assembly is serious about the Budget proposals, there are areas of concern that need to be given priority. I appeal to the Minister to prioritise in order to solve some of the desperate rural problems.

The sitting must finish at 6.00 pm. Does that give the Minister sufficient time to give the House a sketchy version of his winding-up speech? If not, the House will adjourn until tomorrow.

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. Standing Orders state that the sitting can carry on until 6.00 pm. If the Minister is not finished his winding-up speech by then, he can do so tomorrow.

I will endeavour to respond to the debate, and I hope that I will not need much time tomorrow. When I opened the debate I was looking forward to a responsible discussion of the Supply resolution, and that has been achieved. The contributions have ranged widely, although not as widely as some previous contributions have, and Members' points have been made clearly and forcefully. I have noted each of the points, and if I am not able to address them all, I will follow them up and reflect further.

The motion before the House is the basis upon which the legislature, in the form of the Assembly, authorises the spending of Departments, the Assembly, the Northern Ireland Audit Office and other bodies to enable them to carry out their functions. That is one of the Assembly's most fundamental responsibilities. It involves the authorisation of expenditure and, importantly, it holds Departments to account as they seek to deliver on their Programme for Government priorities. I accept that time is limited, so if I leave out some significant challenges that have been made to me, it will have been conveniently so.

Mr Molloy, Chairperson of the Committee for Finance and Personnel, raised some questions about the Budget consultation - and I appreciate that Mr Molloy had to leave the House to attend a council annual general meeting at 7.00 pm. The Executive are committed to providing Committees with a constructive role in the development of the Budget for 2002-03. That is reflected in the proposals that have been set out for the Budget timetable, which I presented in a previous statement.

The Department has tried to deliver on the main aim as set out by the Committee for Finance and Personnel last year. It had concerns about the time available to consider the Budget, and we were keen to ensure that we would be able to take the Budget as soon as possible after the summer recess. To facilitate that, the Department of Finance and Personnel has today made the position reports available to the Committee Chairpersons, through the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister. Those reports will not only inform the Chairpersons of the Executive's consideration of the work in relation to the Programme for Government but also of the work relating to the draft Budget.

I assure the House, and particularly the Chairperson of the Committee for Finance and Personnel, that those position reports were only made available to Ministers in the middle of last week. Therefore, there has been no question of trying to pre-cook things separately through the Executive in ways that deny Committees anything.

The position reports that were made available to Committees today reflect the same information that went to the Ministers last week - bids for next year, for instance. Therefore information is not being withheld from Members in the way that has been suggested. Members will be able to discuss further issues relating to the future process when I make a pre-Budget statement tomorrow, after which they will be free to ask questions about next year's Budget, and also as the Department takes forward the work with the Committee for Finance and Personnel.

Many of the points raised have involved people seeking increases in various budget lines and emphasising the needs of particular sectors or particular localities. Many of those issues will be more pertinent to the consideration of next year's Budget, and the possible adjustments to the Programme for Government, than to the Supply resolution or the Budget Bill per se.

I remind Members that we are dealing with the second instalment - the major and final instalment - of the Budget for this year. The figures that are being referred to today, and the Estimates that were laid in the Assembly on 11 June, are figures that derive from the Budget. I have explained why some of the figures are not in exact accord with the Budget because of the nature of the Estimates in changing over to resource accounting and budgeting. Dr Paisley reflected on that in a point that arose in exchanges between his Committee and the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development.

Members have raised a number of questions. Mr Shannon, Mr Hay, Mr Hussey and Mr Gibson all raised issues about the roads budget. Some of the questions were about roads in particular localities, such as the Ards Peninsula, west Tyrone and the western area in general. I want to emphasise that the Budget that we adopted did commit new resources to roads. It also committed new resources to other significant areas of the Department for Regional Development's programme.

We are conscious of the historic underfunding that there has been in relation to infrastructure. The moneys that we made available in the Budget were further supplemented by allocations from the Executive programme funds and infrastructure fund.

In some areas, people are pressing for further attention to be given to maintenance and capital investment in roads. Those will be relevant issues for people to pursue and take up in the context of the preparatory work for next year's Budget and the Programme for Government. If Members have particular concerns about the relative priorities within the existing roads budget, those can be taken up with the Minister and the Department for Regional Development, as prioritisation within the budget falls to that Department.

I would like to make a similar point in relation to some of the questions that were raised about education. Members have emphasised the importance of ensuring adequate resources for schools. The Executive, the Minister of Education and I have made it clear that we want to make sure that we improve our school stock and the performance of our schools. We want to do that with proper investment, both in the education programme and in the schools capital programme. We have shown that in the previous Budget, again supplemented by the allocations from the Executive programme funds.

I stress to Members that I have noted the insinuation that there is some discrimination being practised either by the Executive or by the Minister of Education in relation to the schools' budget. I reject any such insinuation. If Members believe that any measure being pursued on behalf of this Assembly by any Department raises issues in relation to equality considerations, there are procedures that can be invoked on that. No one has ever invoked any of those procedures. People have traded on all sorts of insinuations. I stated in the House previously, when this question arose in the context of the Executive programme funds, that allocations are made on the basis of educational need.

The readiness of projects can also be relevant when it comes to spending money. It would not make sense to allocate money to projects not ready to make use of it. The information shows that the allocations are being made fairly and properly.

The question was asked as to what proportion of the agriculture spend will go to farmers. A significant proportion of the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development's Estimate will benefit farmers directly. In "Resources, Grants", £170 million is for subsidy payments direct to farmers under the common agriculture policy. Additionally, there is an allocation of £14 million for agrienvironment schemes. In "Resources, Other Current", there is an allocation of £12 million for animal disease compensation. A substantial proportion of the "Resources, Administration" total of £117 million reflects the cost of departmental staff carrying out essential work for the operation of the industry. This includes statutory and regulatory inspections and testing, the reduction of animal disease levels, ensuring access to EU funds and high-quality education and advice.

Dr Birnie raised a number of concerns within the context of a broad welcome for our ability to conduct our Budget business in this way. I reassure Dr Birnie that the Executive do appreciate the significance that many Members - particularly the members of his Committee - attach to improving our performance in relation to basic adult skills, especially numeracy and literacy. We have been able to make some moves in that direction, not least in the context of the Executive programme funds. As regards further improvements, I refer Dr Birnie to the preparatory work in the context of next year's Budget and Programme for Government.

Ms Lewsley stressed the need for us to look at efficiency, not just at the money that is becoming available for the Budget. Committees in particular - and the Assembly in general - need to make sure that we are not just watching the bids but overseeing the spending in a sound and proper way. Ms Lewsley referred to the fact that we have to try to find additional means to supplement our expenditure and ways of improving delivery in order to release other resources. The same point was made by Mr Hay when he emphasised the need to add to the scope that we have for improving the levels of money available for public services and for important capital programmes. Mr Hay and Mr Gibson welcomed the increases available in this Budget. I also welcome those increases, and that is why I have always voted for this Budget. However, some people who have welcomed the increases that are reflected in today's motion have not always voted for the Budget the whole way down the line.

When looking at areas of additional resources there is no simple solution. We cannot take an "over the rainbow" approach to the question of the Barnett formula. Dr Birnie's cautious words were correct in that we face difficult issues in relation to the Barnett formula. We do have some hard questions to put to the Treasury, but hard questions will also be put to us, and not just by the Treasury but by a range of other regional and national interests.

We must not believe that there is a magic bullet out there as far as the Barnett formula or finding additional moneys are concerned. Some of the ideas being suggested as magic bullets, such as the setting up of some type of bond, would not be easy to implement, because Treasury rules would count those as spending, and they would be scored against the departmental expenditure limits. It would not give us any additional public spending.

The time has beaten me. I hope that I have responded to most of the issues raised by Members. Any individual points not addressed in my general response will be followed up directly or will be brought to the attention of the Minister concerned.

I have looked up the Standing Order, and as long as I am on my feet, calling for a Division, we can go on for a few minutes after 6.00 pm. I must remind everyone that the Supply resolution motion is subject to section 63 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998. This means that it has to be agreed on a cross-community basis. When I put the question, both sides of the Chamber should reply.

<< Prev