It is inappropriate to suggest why a consultant might have left a position and moved elsewhere, unless that consultant expressed a reason. I am not aware of any such suggestion in this case.

I have looked at the availability of intensive care and high dependency provision, and I realise that there is work to be done. I explained that in my answer to the previous question. It should be realised that a considerable amount of high dependency and intensive care provision has already been brought into service, and there are plans for further expansion of high dependency provision.

I have been advised that most cancer patients requiring surgery do not need an intensive care bed. However, the increased provision of intensive care and high dependency beds that has already taken place, together with plans for expansion, will make a significant contribution to the care of very ill patients. Worthwhile work has been done. There are some shortcomings in intensive care provision which have an impact on services, and that highlights the need for further investment. Planning has been developed and further progress will be made.

7.

asked the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety to provide an update regarding neo-natal screening for deafness.

(AQO 283/01)

I ndiaidh measúnú ar na hiarratais ó iontaobhais, táthar ag súil go mbeidh Otharlann Ríoga Victoria ina láithreán píolótach do scagadh éisteachta nua-naíche anseo. Mar sin féin, braithfidh seo ar cé acu a riarfaidh sé ar na riachtanais bhreise a aithníodh le linn na cuairte leis an láithreán a mheasúnú.

When the trusts' applications have been assessed, it is anticipated that the Royal Victoria Hospital will become the pilot site for neonatal hearing screening here. However, that is subject to its meeting the further requirements that were raised at the site assessment visit.

When will the pilot scheme start? It was, after all, supposed to start in June of this year. Deafness in between five and 10 babies may have gone undetected through their not being screened.

This was part of a wider pilot scheme. The main pilot scheme, which is based in England, is not due to commence until the end of this year. That is because of problems encountered with many of the applications with regard to the need to ensure uniformity, the adoption of protocols and the development of standards and appropriate information technology support. The pilot scheme in the Royal Victoria Hospital is scheduled to commence early next year, only a few months after the main pilot scheme.

Finance and Personnel

1.

asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel if he is apprised of all press cuttings that are kept by other Departments relating to public comments, statements and actions made by civil servants who also serve as elected representatives.

(AQO 261/01)

The Department of Finance and Personnel is not notified as a matter of routine of instances where the activities of members of staff have been reported in the press. Each Department is responsible for retaining such information as it deems necessary for the effective management of staff. The decision on whether particular information is relevant to an individual's employment rests with that Department.

Can the Minister give an assurance that if civil servants who are elected representatives make statements that are reported in the media, these statements will not be used by their superiors in the Civil Service to discriminate against them?

All civil servants are bound by rules of conduct and behaviour in and outside the workplace. A Department may grant an individual permission to participate in political activity, but such permission is subject to a code of discretion. It is for the employing Department to determine whether there has been a breach of the rules and to take appropriate action in the light of all the circumstances and with regard to civil service policies on harassment, bullying and equal opportunities.

2.

asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel to give his assessment of the performance targets set for the Government Purchasing Agency for 2001-02.

(AQO 263/01)

The targets that I set for the Government Purchasing Agency for 2001-02 and that I announced to the Assembly in July are designed to demonstrate to the agency's customers and to other stakeholders how their needs and expectations are being met by the agency. They cover two main areas: the efficiency of the agency itself and the benefit that it brings to customers. They fall under four headings: finance, output, quality and efficiency. These targets are demanding but achievable; achieving them will ultimately benefit the taxpayer.

I thank the Minister for outlining those categories. Why are there no references to equality objectives in the performance targets that he has set for the Government Purchasing Agency?

I have already listed the areas covered by the performance targets. The agency is a key entity as far as Government procurement policy is concerned. It is in the context of the review of public procurement, which is now the subject of consultation, that we considered equality and targeting social need. The procurement review will consider Government procurement and matters covered by the work of the Government Purchasing Agency.

3.

asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel to outline the criteria upon which PFI/PPP projects will be considered.

(AQO 280/01)

6.

asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel if the PPP working group forum will be encouraged to take submissions from those groups/agencies that have an interest in this subject.

(AQO 281/01)

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will take questions 3 and 6 together. The key criteria used to judge whether a project should be taken forward through PPP include whether there is a reasonable prospect of obtaining an outcome which would give value for money and be viable and affordable. This is tested through the completion of an outline business case before a project is approved for PPP procurement.

The answer to the second question is "Yes". The PPP working group is inviting views and opinions through public consultation, and I encourage all those interested to make written submissions to the joint secretariat.

Will the PPP review group consider the possibility of involving the community and voluntary sectors in the provision of PPP solutions?

I thank Mr McMenamin for that suggestion. The working group established to review the use of PPP to address our infrastructure deficit and service needs as part of the Executive's commitment in the Programme for Government includes representatives from the community and voluntary sectors. We will also consider all feasible partnership arrangements. The work of the review is not confined to looking at private finance initiatives or public-private partnerships. Where feasible it will also include multi-sectoral partnerships.

Will the Minister assure us that every attempt will be made to ensure that public-sector employees affected by any PPP will be treated fairly, with comparable terms and conditions of employment?

I can assure Ms Lewsley that in all PPP projects which involve transfers of employees from the public to the private sector their terms and conditions of employment will be protected under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 1981. In accordance with Treasury guidance, comparable pensions provision will be made.

Question 4 has been withdrawn. Question 5 is in the name of Mr McNamee, but I do not see him in his place. Question 7 has been withdrawn.

8.

asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel what assessment he has made of the current level of absenteeism within each Government Department and what action has been taken to encourage improvements.

(AQO 276/01)

Each Government Department closely monitors its level of absenteeism. Mr Beggs will already be aware from my previous written answer of the average levels of absenteeism in each of the Northern Ireland Civil Service Departments during 2000-01. The different levels of absenteeism in Departments reflect, among other things, varying age, grade and gender profiles. Work undertaken by the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA) has provided Departments with a comprehensive overview of their sick-leave absences and a sound baseline to enable them to identify underlying trends and causes and to enable more in-depth analysis and targeting of problem areas. Departments are taking action to reduce their levels of absenteeism.

Does the Minister accept that there is a huge variation in absenteeism, from 4·4% to 8·4%? Does he acknowledge that this can be a result of local management or of the stress levels of the workers involved? What assessment has he made of the underfunding in the social care services that may have contributed to the high levels of absenteeism in that area?

There is a significant range in the absenteeism figures. I have said that some of those differences are related to the different age, gender and grade profiles in Departments. NISRA has been helping Departments to identify underlying trends and causes. Each Department must address its own cultural problems. I have no indication of serious problems of lack of care in any one Department. The point of these statistics is to identify any problems that exist. That task falls to individual Departments as well as to the central personnel group.

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Can the Minister tell us whether these levels of absenteeism compare well with other sectors, such as the private sector? Are they partly caused by the extra pressure of questions from Members of the Assembly?

I thank the Member for his confession. Comparisons of absenteeism levels can be made. Unfortunate comparisons have been made between the absenteeism levels in the Civil Service and those indicated in a postal survey carried out by the Confederation of British Industry (CBI). I caution that the figures in the CBI report do not provide a meaningful comparison, as they deal with absenteeism across the United Kingdom in a range of private sector organisations of very different sizes, and are calculated on a different basis. They do not allow for the sort of factors that are taken account of in our figures.

All Members are aware that different Departments have seen an increase in their workload, and that working pressures have been added to as a result of the greater accountability that the Assembly and other institutions afford. However, I do not believe that those pressures are expressing themselves in absenteeism levels.

9.

asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel if he has entered into consultation with HM Treasury to secure additional resources, and whether he will ensure that discussions on the Barnett formula reflect the needs of our society.

(AQO 284/01)

Earlier this year, the then First Minister and the Deputy First Minister met with the Chancellor of the Exchequer to discuss a range of issues, including the operation of the Barnett formula. Senior officials in the Department of Finance and Personnel have also had a series of meetings with Treasury officials to discuss Northern Ireland's funding allocations as determined by the Barnett formula. The 2002 spending review sets the context for negotiations on the Barnett formula with the Treasury.

Does the Minister agree that the Barnett formula is not widely understood, and that Northern Ireland is distinctly disadvantaged by it? Resources for our health, education, roads infrastructure and other public services are inhibited by the Barnett formula. We need to renegotiate it, and our local Ministers need to display the type of flair, creativity and imagination that will allow them to use resources to the utmost effect.

I am happy to agree with the Member that the nature and detail of the Barnett formula are not widely understood. Since devolution, people have become very familiar with the term, and the need for it to change has been a constant refrain in this Chamber. We also need to recognise that while we have one particular view of the effects of the Barnett formula on ourselves and how those effects can be compounded over time, other areas do not see its impact and our needs in the same way. We need to recognise that there are other regional views and there are other questions for us to face in regard to the spending levels of some of our programmes.

While we can argue that some key programmes, such as health, are being increasingly jeopardised by the Barnett formula, others can point to spending programmes where we are continuing to spend at a rate considerably higher than the UK average. That raises issues for us concerning the prioritisation of, and within, spending programmes.

I agree with the Member that we cannot always be looking for more money from the Barnett formula or from some other funding formula. We must do more with the money we have. We must provide the essential services needed by the most efficient and effective means possible, and thereby release valuable resources to develop other services.

10.

asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel to give his assessment regarding the potential release of moneys from departmental budgets to alleviate the crisis in the Health Service.

(AQO 296/01)

Ministers will consider the views of Assembly Members, Committees and others in respect of proposals for modifying the draft Budget for 2002-03, in accordance with the timetable set out in the document I presented to the Assembly on 25 September. The Executive will shortly consider the scope for reallocating resources for 2001-02 in the monitoring round, and that will include consideration of Health Service funding issues.

I thank the Minister for his reply, although I am surprised by it. He is aware that I have attempted to table questions to individual Ministers regarding the possible release of moneys from their respective budgets, only to find that those questions were kicked into touch through being referred to him. Is this a case of passing the buck? Is someone afraid to grasp the nettle?

The Member has asked Ministerial Colleagues a series of questions. He asked several Ministers if they would be prepared to release £10 million from their departmental budgets next year to the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety's budget. The questions were referred to me because they are common to the Budget; they are not specific to any individual Department. The questions are relatively speculative.

In the Budget deliberations, the Executive set out to achieve more room to manoeuvre than the Executive's position report indicated that we had. We examined several options and tested several issues including uniform cuts in resource budgets across Departments; uniform curbs on departmental running costs; and an examination of other means to release more assets. Departments made clear the difficulties they would have if they were to get a smaller allocation than last year's indicative allocations had suggested.

The Executive recognise that there are very real pressures on all Departments. However, we also recognise that there are very acute pressures on Health Service spending, and that is one of the reasons why in this draft Budget the allocation for the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety has increased significantly above the indicative allocation that was announced last December for 2002-03. The Executive have tried to address the particular pressures within the Health Service.

The Member will appreciate that the Executive had the benefit of the report from the Committee for Finance and Personnel on the Executive position report, which reflected the views of the various departmental Committees. There was no suggestion in the various departmental contributions that any of them could do with less money. On the contrary, representatives underlined the needs and pressures of their own Departments.

It is not only the release of moneys that is needed to alleviate the crisis in the Health Service. Does the Minister agree that his Department must also monitor the spending on health board offices, such as those of the Ulster Community and Hospital HSS Trust, to ensure that money is spent cost-effectively?

Funding levels do not determine the full value that can be obtained, through services, out of public expenditure. As I have previously said, we must not only ensure that we have bids and ambitions for services; we must also have sound plans. Those plans need to be implemented efficiently and effectively.

It falls to Departments to manage the more precise allocations beyond the general headings that are presented in the Budget. It also falls to those Departments to monitor the performance and effectiveness of the public bodies and other entities that are used to deliver departmental services and programmes.

Given the crisis in the Health Service, what consideration has been given to reallocating funds which have been put into the Executive programme funds but which have not yet been placed in any destination?

The Executive programme funds are an important device created by the Executive, in the context of devolution, to try to drive a wedge between the patterns of spending that we inherited and the patterns that we need to create under devolution to reflect our distinctive priorities. There has already been one significant tranche of allocations from Executive programme funds and there will be another one soon.

Members will be aware that some advance commitments have been made to cover, for instance, the gas pipelines and the commitment to expenditure on roads that was reflected in the Programme for Government.

In looking at further allocations from Executive programme funds, the Executive are well aware of some of the pressures that are facing particular services, not least the Health Service. We have already allocated significant funds from Executive programme funds - including the infrastructure and capital renewal fund - to the Health Service. There is no reason to believe that the Department, with its service pressures, will not be in a position to usefully bid for allocations from Executive programme funds in the future.

11.

asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel to give an update on the Peace II programme.

(AQO 278/01)

The Peace II programme is a complex programme, under which a range of detailed stages had to be completed before calls for projects could be made. Those stages have now been completed or are nearing completion. Intermediary funding bodies have been appointed as implementing bodies under the programme, Departments are finalising arrangements for the measures for which they are responsible, and the detailed work of establishing new local strategy partnerships is nearing a conclusion.

Calls for projects will be issued over the coming weeks for some of the main aspects of the Peace II programme, with grants likely to be awarded from December or January onwards. As funding bodies call for projects, the application forms, and guidance on how to apply, will be available from the Department of Finance and Personnel and the Special EU Programmes Body web site.

The extension to the gap funding arrangements that I announced recently will ensure that funding continues for projects until the formal application and selection processes have been completed.

I thank the Minister for his answer. Can he confirm that the recent gap funding announcement will enable front-line community groups to carry on their vital work? Does the Minister agree that that would not have happened under the direct rule status to which some parties here would have us return?

The recent announcement that extends the current round of gap funding should go a long way to ensuring that funding for projects continues until the formal application and selection processes for Peace II have been completed. In this context, I agree that the relatively ready access of community and voluntary groups to Ministers in the devolved Administration has allowed concerns to be voiced directly to Colleagues and me. In turn, this has meant that we in the Departments have been able to take these considerations into account when planning and managing European structural funds and wider public expenditure issues.

I listened with great interest to that answer, particularly with regard to the gap funding arrangements, which will allow continuity to enable existing projects to enter into the next phase. In general that is to be welcomed.

Is the Minister confident that the Peace II programme will successfully address the difficulties we encountered in securing applications from the rural Protestant community? Will it redress the imbalance of the previous programme that was admitted to in the House by his party Colleague and present Acting Deputy First Minister?

The arrangements for Peace II have involved extensive and elaborate consultation and monitoring exercises as well as evaluations of Peace I. We learnt lessons from Peace I about measures, schemes and models that worked, but we also recognise that more has to be done in the targeting of some areas.

The point that the Member refers to was supposed to be the subject of some significant admission by Séamus Mallon, which was reflected in an interim report a couple of years ago by Northern Ireland's three MEPs who recognised that there was an imbalance. In that letter they also stated that there was no question of discrimination, that it was to do with patterns of application rather than with any skewing of allocations.

Horizontal principles will apply in the next programme. They include strong consideration of equality and balanced intervention. The horizontal principle is one in which all Government Departments have a conscientious interest, as does the European Commission. That interest has been reflected by the three monitoring committees of the Peace II operational programme for building sustainable prosperity and the community support framework monitoring committee. That interest will be followed through in all the work that is being carried out with respect to Peace II.

I looked forward to this Question Time - it is the hottest ticket in town. It has all been side- splitting stuff up to now, and maybe my question will be no different. However, I am being facetious.

Returning to the serious matter of the Peace II funding packages, does the Minister accept that the process to date has been painfully slow and that many community groups are at the end of their tether waiting for the situation to be sorted out? We have heard promise after promise that this would be dealt with, and each time the Minister has been asked about it on the Floor of the House we have been told that it would happen tomorrow. Tomorrow never seems to come. Now that we have reached the end of the tunnel, can the Minister give us a categorical assurance that every effort will be made to hasten the entire process? Will he devote his efforts, and those of his officials, to making sure that he can deliver on time, as many groups are suffering greatly as a result of the delays that his Department has overseen?

First of all, I refute any suggestion that my Department has been responsible for delays. Bringing the Peace II programme to land has been slow and painful. However, we have to remember that the community support framework is a document of the European Commission, and that was only agreed to last December. The Department was unable to move on the operational programmes and the programme complements until the Commission had delivered the community support framework. Following agreement on the operational programmes, the Department moved to agree the programme complements. Those were signed in March, meeting EU regulations.

The Department of Finance and Personnel and other Departments have worked to ensure that the targets and timetable requirements of EU legislation were met. The Department has also set up monitoring committees that are more effective and meaningful for this round of community support framework money than was the case in the last round. Parties in the House are represented on those monitoring committees, as are a range of other interests. Everyone involved in the exercises is aware of the quality and intensity of the effort that has been expended by my officials. The Department is now determined to follow through quickly for Peace II money. The Department has not been able to achieve that as early as it would have liked, and is, therefore, making further arrangements for gap funding. The Department has now moved forward with other aspects of Peace II. Some calls for projects are now taking place, and more will follow. The Department is moving with all possible speed.

<< Prev