Free school meals entitlement can affect schools' budgets in a big way - for some schools more than others. However, I know from my work in the Agriculture Committee that some areas were in serious difficulties as a result of the recent foot-and-mouth disease crisis. It was plain for all to see that people in those areas had suffered a loss of income and should have been entitled to claim free school meals but were not doing so.

People who were entitled to claim free school meals were not doing so in some small schools in the Glens of Antrim, for example, and that is an indication of the difficulties some people were facing. The Department must consider another method of financial help and try to remove the stigma associated with the entitlement to free school meals. The provision of decent meals to all pupils - not just those entitled to free school meals - is an important element of the school process, and the situation may become untenable if the take-up of free school meals is avoided because of the stigma attached. Some money needs to be spent on finding out the reasons for that view.

The Committee has also considered special needs in schools and has found that there is little money to meet that problem - in fact, the budgetary allocation hardly moves the scales at all. Money must be invested in special needs - perhaps not much money is needed but it necessitates a hands-on approach to learning in schools, rather than spending on books or other aspects which the Department thinks require funding. That is a big issue for parents, and it must be considered soon.

The problem of fees and costs for pupils moving into third-level education has not been addressed by the relevant Department. Those who wish to take a Masters degree in certain subjects, outside the Six Counties, must fund themselves. We need to accommodate at least some of those people and address their costs. If we do not, the rich will be educated, and those who are at the lower end of the spectrum will not.

Many points have been made about agriculture, and the vision group document has tried to grapple with those. It addresses some of these issues very well, and it might be worth taking a second look to see what can be implemented. There does not seem to be a budget to implement the recommendations of the vision document, and the funding, which should be allocated to agriculture in the next few years, will not be allocated. The vision document will then gather dust, and that should not and cannot be allowed to happen. It would be a serious omission to ignore the prioritised recommendations, and, as a matter of urgency, there must be a budget to implement those and to provide for a growing and competitive economy.

Considerable amounts of money have been directed at disease eradication and control. My difficulty is that year-on-year money is spent on that, but we need to successfully eradicate diseases. That would save our budget in the long term, because the resultant savings could be directed towards areas such as education or health programmes. Much of that money has been the subject of fraud recently, and the fraud is not necessarily confined to those areas to which the DUP often points.

The health issue is of interest to me, and the recent moves on waiting lists are welcome. Winter pressures also create waiting lists, and in my own area those lists have been alleviated.

Community care is also tied closely to waiting lists. The blockage of beds at hospitals in the Southern Board area and parts of the Western Board area has led to budget difficulties. Many in the Western Board area consider the implementation of the Hayes review to be the most important factor in the siting of hospitals there. It has massive implications for the future budget. The Minister should consider taking an early decision - perhaps before deciding on the overall implementation of Hayes - on the issue of hospitals in the west. It has been suggested that that will be the greatest contribution of the Hayes review. I urge the Minister to do that as quickly as possible.

Top-slicing and removing parts of the budget before it is drawn down is another question. We would be happy enough if it were drawn down to the Western Board area, but that has not happened. Last time, £3 million of the budget went to two different areas, for whatever reasons. The budget should be distributed equitably and top-slicing should be stopped, if that is the intended approach in the future.

There has been a considerable increase in the number of elderly patients, certainly in areas such as Fermanagh. There will be considerable extra spending this year on flu immunisation for the over 60s. That must be considered and accounted for. I support the points made about the sickness benefit system. One could almost imagine that that system operates without the Minister's knowledge. People must go through a very severe system to get the money that they are entitled to. Many have obvious chronic illnesses, and it is not necessary to use Special Branch tactics against such claimants, who need money and support to live in their homes. That should be examined.

I support the point by Members from all parties that the administration of Government, local government and quangos must be looked at urgently. Administration is top-heavy: perhaps more so since the establishment of the Assembly. All other bodies are still operating. Go raibh maith agat.

Devolution has revealed, if anything, the problems that developed during direct rule, when many public services were grossly underfunded. One of the big challenges that lies ahead for the Assembly is to deal positively with those issues.

In recent months, the Committee has been carrying out an inquiry into energy matters in Northern Ireland. It is a very complex matter. Significantly, one of the first issues that the Committee dealt with was the development of the natural gas pipeline to the north-west. I welcome the First Minister's statement this morning reiterating the Executive's commitment to the development of the North/South pipeline and the one from Belfast to the north-west. The Committee has always been unanimous in its support for that project.

The First Minister also made reference to the terrible events of 11 September and how they will impact on the situation here. Northern Ireland is very much part of the global economy, and, even before 11 September, there were signs of a downward trend in industry, particularly in the IT sector. Unfortunately, that has been exacerbated by the events in New York, Pennsylvania and Washington.

The most recent report by the Recruitment and Employment Confederation shows that in the matter of those who are registered as unemployed, Northern Ireland was eleventh out of 12 regions in the United Kingdom. We were beaten only by the north-east of England. Our rate of unemployment in September was 4·9%; the figure for the north-east was 5·3%; and the top of the league - the south-east - had an unemployment rate of 1·5%. There is no room for complacency.

I draw the Assembly's attention to sub-priority 5 on working to attract inward investment. I quote:

However, the target in the February 2001 Programme for Government was 25 knowledge-based businesses each year. In many ways that shows a great weakness on the part of the Executive. It is important that we hold our nerve in these very difficult times.

The Committee recognises that the attraction of inward investment involves ups and downs. The budget must be flexible. It is important to adhere to that flexibility, particularly with the new difficulties that have emerged in recent months.

In the present session, the Committee addressed the dilemma faced by quarry owners in Northern Ireland, and the development of the aggregates tax. In the Committee's response to the document 'Strategy 2010' it recommended that the Assembly be given tax-varying powers. Bearing in mind the difficulties in various sectors, that issue should be addressed by the Executive.

I also draw the Assembly's attention to sub-priority 4 on promoting entrepreneurship, innovation and creativity. It states:

The Programme for Government of February 2001 refers to the creation of more sustainable businesses. While sustainability is implied, the Committee recommends that it be expressed with a firm commitment to ensuring that Northern Ireland's poor record of business failure for start-ups is addressed. We also recognise the important role played by small businesses in the Northern Ireland economy. Given the present situation, their role will probably be even more important. Therefore, the Executive should take up that issue.

The Departments faced restructuring following the creation of Invest Northern Ireland (INI). It is an important initiative, and I hope that INI will be a more effective organisation than LEDU, the IDB and the Industrial Research Technology Unit (IRTU), which it has replaced. A new drive is needed to attract inward investment and to create employment opportunities in Northern Ireland in the new situation in which we find ourselves.

I welcome the fact that that is happening. However, I alert the Minister to the Committee's strong feeling that INI should have a regional presence in the Province, similar to that of the LEDU offices. The Minister has taken that on board, but it is important to stress it again.

It is important that the Assembly creates joined-up government. I am pleased with the close co-operation between the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment and the Minister for Employment and Learning, particularly in the development of the skills that are required. We had an excellent debate on that issue. However, when we discussed the Programme for Government with departmental officials, we questioned them about the delay in setting up a science park at the Titanic Quarter. I was astonished by the response of a senior official. He said:

If there is to be joined-up government, it is important that all Departments work in partnership to ensure that there is understanding and collaboration. I have raised the issue of planning delays several times in the House. I referred in particular to a planning application to develop a major business park in my constituency. I was informed today that at long last, subject to the approval of the Minister, planning permission should be granted in the near future.

The role of the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, and the strategy that it will pursue, was reflected in 'Strategy 2010'. It is important that if the Assembly is to move forward, the Department takes on board the Committee's lengthy and detailed inquiry into Strategy 2010.

The Chairperson is unavailable today, but, as Deputy Chairperson of the Committee for Regional Development, I welcome the opportunity to debate the draft Programme for Government. I register the Committee for Regional Development's gratitude to the officials from the Department for Regional Development for their co-operation and assistance during the Committee's deliberations on the draft Programme for Government and the draft Budget.

The Committee for Regional Development was gratified to see a strong commitment in the Programme for Government to improving our infrastructure. It states on page 39 that

I fully endorse that statement, and it should be a priority for the Government. Failure to address the deficiencies in the infrastructure and public transport has had, and will continue to have, serious repercussions across many aspects of society, and particularly to the economy. For example, 99% of all Northern Ireland goods are transported by road. A well maintained road network would help to reduce the time and cost of transporting freight, which, in turn, would help to improve business profitability and competitiveness. Other areas, such as tourism, the environment and health, would benefit from a properly funded and maintained infrastructure.

The Government are beginning to appreciate the seriousness of the situation and have started to address the years of underfunding in our infrastructure. The Committee for Regional Development was heartened by the increase in the Department's budget of £42 million, which represents an 8% increase on 2001-02. This will enable additional funding to be targeted at roads and public transport improvements, such as the purchase of new trains, which is long overdue.

The Committee for Regional Development also welcomed the announcement on 24 September, by the Acting First Minister, that an additional £40 million is to be made available for the trans-European Network route from Larne to Belfast and from Newry to Dundalk. It also referred to a significant contribution to be made available for the upgrading of the Westlink. These increases are indeed roundly to be welcomed. However, it is important to view this additional funding in its overall context. The impact of the additional expenditure will allow only a few small holes in the dyke to be repaired. There is a £100 million backlog of road maintenance work to be done, so there is clearly a long way to go before we have a modern, reliable, and safe road network.

It is also important not to forget the pressures that the water infrastructure has been under. The lack of major capital investment has manifested itself in a number of ways over the past few years. There have been several health scares, such as outbreaks of cryptosporidium. On top of this, an antiquated and crumbling sewerage system has shown its inability to cope with heavy periods of rainfall, resulting in flooding.

The Committee for Regional Development welcomes the provision of £48 million in the 2002-03 Budget for the purchase of new train sets. As with the road and water infrastructures, investment in the public transport system is in a catch-up situation because of years of underinvestment. New trains will undoubtedly make train travel more appealing, and the proposed Railway Safety Bill will ensure a high standard of rail travel safety. However, there is still much to be done if rail travel is to become a major form of commuter transport. Considerably more money will have to be invested not only in train sets, but in improving access and facilities.

A similar situation exists with the age and standard of Northern Ireland's buses. Additional funding should be made available to reduce the average age of the bus fleet. I noted that in the Programme for Government in October 2000, although it was removed from the final version of the programme in February 2001, there was a commitment

The Committee believes that consideration should be given to reinstating this commitment.

Achieving a shift in commuter attitudes to the buses can be realised only by major up-front investment to enable the provision of quality, efficient bus services. Getting commuters out of their cars and into trains and buses would alleviate congestion, particularly in the Belfast metropolitan area, and make a positive contribution to the economy and the environment.

A reliable, efficient bus network, particularly in rural areas where up to 30% of households do not have access to a car, would also make a positive contribution to promoting social inclusion, which is a key Government priority. There are genuine, growing concerns that rural bus services may be significantly reduced if private operators continue to target the more profitable routes, forcing Translink to reduce services on the less profitable rural routes. The Regional Development Committee will encourage the Government to give priority to public transport, to provide additional funding for improving Northern Ireland's bus fleet, and to keep the average age of buses in line with those of GB.

The Committee, conscious of funding pressures right across the Northern Ireland block, believes that new approaches to funding should be considered. It welcomes the decision by the Department of Regional Development to set up a unit to look at new and innovative ways of funding. One specific measure that should be considered is leasing, rather than purchasing, new trains. The Committee is aware that leasing arrangements are in place in GB. If leasing were introduced, it would release funds for investment on other infrastructure improvements.

Regarding public service agreements, the Committee is content with the targets set by the Department of Regional Development. However, paragraph 1.6b of the PSA refers to resurfacing 350 lane kilometres in each of the next three years. The February 2001 Programme for Government referred to a target of resurfacing 500 kilometres in each of the next three years. The Committee sought clarification from the Department and was advised that, due to the assistance provided for roads in the draft Budget, the figure of 500 kilometres would be reinstated. I should be grateful if the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister could reassure the Committee on that point.

The Committee noted that the action section had been removed from the public sector agreement. It is the Committee's understanding that this detailed information will be reproduced in the service delivery agreements that will be available later in the year.

The Committee will be unsure whether the removal of the action section has been an improvement until it has had an opportunity to examine the contents of the service delivery agreements. The old format allowed immediate examination of the Department's work programme in relation to the overall targets. I suggest that the service delivery agreements be made available, in draft form at least, at the same time as the public service agreements.

Pages 42 and 107 of the Programme for Government state that a target of 60% of urban housing growth is to be provided within urban limits, without town cramming, by 2010. This does not reflect the wording of the regional development strategy document. However, the Department assured the Committee that the regional development strategy is the authoritative document. Therefore, the Committee would welcome the exact wording used in the regional development strategy being used in the Programme for Government. That would avoid confusion.

The Department for Regional Development has finalised its regional development strategy and is due to finalise its regional transportation strategy shortly. The regional development strategy would provide a planning framework for tackling the deficiencies in our infrastructure and helping the development of our economy and society. The regional transportation strategy aims to produce a transport system which reduces adverse economic impacts, improves safety, contributes to economic growth, promotes accessibility and social inclusion, and provides integrated transport.

Those key targets, if properly implemented, will address many of my concerns and the priorities outlined in the draft Programme for Government. However, both the regional development strategy and the regional transportation strategy will impact on other Departments and will require cross-departmental co-operation for their successful implementation. Adequate funding is crucial to their success. There must be speedy progress in determining alternative funding that is appropriate and available, so that there is no further deterioration in the roads and water infrastructure, and so that the proposals contained in the strategies and Programme for Government can be successfully implemented. That ends my contribution as Deputy Chairperson of the Regional Development Committee.

My Colleagues on the Health Committee have highlighted detailed problems. However, I must issue a dire warning.

Such is the crisis in the Health Service that the Executive must set up a task force to help the Department take strong and immediate action before the service implodes. The crisis should be a top priority, and must be addressed immediately.

I apologise for having missed many of the earlier contributions. I am aware that health has been a major subject in today's debate on the draft Programme for Government.

Many important aspects of the Health Service in Northern Ireland are slowly disintegrating, at all levels - including primary care, hospital care, secondary care and care of the elderly.

An article from the 'The Economist' of 27 October quotes remarks made by the then First Minister of Scotland, Mr Henry McLeish, on the issue of healthcare. He said:

He continues:

The key point is that there is more spending on health in England and Wales than in Scotland. There are more beds in England and Wales and more doctors in those territories. Therefore, there is a greater number of people on waiting lists in Northern Ireland than in England, Wales or Scotland.

The five priorities set out in the Programme for Government are still relevant and should continue to directly influence public expenditure. Poverty and social disadvantage, including poor housing, are directly linked to ill health. Many of the actions detailed in the Programme for Government should already have been implemented. There is an ongoing crisis in the health service, and the main cause of that is gross underfunding. I in no way point the finger at the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety. The crisis was imminent before she took over. However, now that the Assembly seems bedded down again, the Health Service in Northern Ireland should be its number one priority - and that includes the Minister, her Department, the Executive, and the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister.

Paragraph 3·6, sub-priority 4 of the Programme for Government, page 27 states that

However, I do not agree that our target should be to maintain waiting lists at the March 2002 level, as it is not possible to determine what that figure might be. In the Programme for Government of February 2001, the target was to reduce the waiting lists by a quarter by March 2004 - that is by 51,000 to 39,000 - with the immediate aim of a reduction to 41,000 by March 2002. However, the most recent waiting list figure is 54,000, and it continues to rise.

I am sure Members are aware of the issue of cancellation of out-patient clinics. In Northern Ireland, between nine and ten per cent of all waiting lists are cancelled. Therefore, thousands of people in Northern Ireland are grossly disadvantaged each day. Our Committee has written to the relevant trusts to find out why that happens. I am sure many of the reasons are perfectly genuine - nonetheless we are entitled to know them.

Many Members, including Carmel Hanna, have spoken about cancer. In this decade, cancer is expected to surpass heart disease as Northern Ireland's leading cause of death - if it has not already done so. Statistics show that one in three will be diagnosed with cancer, and one in four or five will die from it. Thus cancer is a major clinical problem that will confront our society in the future.

Many Members referred to the City Hospital. The present chief medical officer, a person for whom I have great respect, produced the Campbell report in 1995, which stated that the City Hospital was to be the main cancer centre, with units located at various other hospitals. We now know that many people who go to Belvoir Park Hospital for treatment suffer because machines there break down. I know that the Minister has allotted money for new equipment recently, but the people responsible for building the new cancer centre, and patients across Northern Ireland, are frustrated. Prof Paddy Johnston, a world authority on cancer, and Prof Roy Spence, a senior cancer surgeon, are anxious to know whether the finance has been agreed, so that building can start as soon as possible, for it will take approximately three years. In fairness, the Minister and her people came before our Committee recently and we put those points to them, but they were already aware of them.

I would like some indication from the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister - in the Executive programme funds, I think that it is the infrastructure fund for 2002-03 which has £51 million - that a large portion of that money could be used to build the new cancer centre at the City Hospital. I am sure that many people would think that reasonable.

Objective 2 in the document is to ensure the delivery of effective, high-quality health and social care, and it is hoped that plans for the modernisation and improvement of hospital services to make them more responsive to people's needs will be published by December 2002. That is a long time to wait; there is a major crisis in our hospitals now.

We are familiar with the Hayes Report, and consultation on it finished at the end of October, but what I presume will be definitive proposals for the future of our hospitals will not be made until December 2002. Will they be put out for consultation then? We have waited for years for decisions to be made here. John McFall, a former direct rule Minister for Health and Social Services for Northern Ireland, produced a document in 1998, called 'Putting it Right', and he made specific proposals in respect of hospitals here for the years to come, but we cannot wait. The Assembly, the Health Minister, the First Minister, the Deputy First Minister, as well as the Secretary of State, must be deeply concerned.

Monica McWilliams and I recently visited the intensive care unit and the accident and emergency unit in the Ulster Hospital, and I was very shaken by what I saw. We read every day about patients lying on trolleys, but there was the reality - in fact they had run out of trolleys, and people were on chairs. One sister was in tears because of her inability to cope. There are major problems with accident and emergency units in hospitals across Northern Ireland.

I received a letter from a senior orthopaedic surgeon in the Royal Victoria Hospital, which, as everyone knows, is the main trauma hospital for Northern Ireland - and it is important that we all are aware of that. He states that the Royal Victoria Hospital is the level-one trauma centre for Northern Ireland, but the truth is that it is capable of looking after severely injured patients only on alternate days.

The function of dealing with fractures was transferred from the City Hospital to the Royal Victoria Hospital, along with all the trauma work which came with that, but the accident and emergency unit did not transfer as had been planned, so no resources to deal with that came with it. High-energy trauma work at the Royal Victoria Hospital has increased greatly, and the accident and emergency staff are on their knees. Staffing levels are still based on alternate take-in nights with the City Hospital, but for trauma, every night is take-in night. The situation is very serious. The good man is saying that it is time that this was made public. I received this letter only recently. Members of the Health, Social Services and Public Safety Committee have received a copy of that letter. So there is no way we can wait until December 2002 and then have further consultations on that.

Carmel Hanna and probably others have made reference to neurology, but I missed part of the debate earlier. In relation to that topic, a letter was sent out to every GP in the North of Ireland by the medical director of the Royal Victoria Hospital, Dr Ian Carson. He said that

That is a serious situation.

I want to finish by speaking on primary care. The Prime Minister, Tony Blair, said a few years ago that the whole National Health Service in these islands should be based on primary care. It should be based on the patient, who is the only important person in the Health Service. The Health Service should operate from the ground up. That is how it was to be.

Over 90% of people who are ill in Northern Ireland go through primary care; by primary care I am referring to all the professional people who are involved in primary care. We have received serial documentation of that. One example was 'Fit for the Future - A New Approach'. Again, under direct rule, the Minister John McFall brought out a document that was for this Assembly. That has been ignored, despite its massive consultation input.

Then we had further consultation. The Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety brought out a document last Christmas called 'Building the Way Forward in Primary Care'. I have here a document that contains a summary of responses to that. All over that summary of responses is the word "respondents". It states that a majority of respondents felt this, some respondents felt the other, et cetera. However there is no mention of organisations such as the Royal College of Nursing, the GP committee of the British Medical Association, and our own Health, Social Services and Public Safety Committee. All of those organisations, and especially our Health, Social Services and Public Safety Committee through its appointment to this Assembly, are representing the people out there - the people who are the only important ones in the Health Service, the patients themselves. Generally those points have been ignored. There were 190 responses to that document; the document is merely a summary which lumps everyone together.

Decisions must be made. I tabled an amendment on behalf of our Committee around nine or ten months ago, regarding the fact that we wanted a seamless transition into primary care services. The Minister announced her intentions separately from this document of responses. She stated that she was going to go for primary care groupings which would be committees of the four boards. I do not want to get into the whole argument of non- fundholders versus fundholders, but that is a top- down proposition; it is not bottom-up. The people of Northern Ireland deserve the best Health Service that they can get, and work must start at primary care, working with babies, children, elderly people and everyone. If we get it wrong at primary care, we will get it wrong in secondary care, in hospitals and all the way through.

I continue to make this appeal. The Minister has chosen again 1 April for the transition into the new primary care services. I have no idea how she is going to do that, but I have made my point and I will leave it at that.

Earlier, Carmel Hanna mentioned an audit of the Health Service. That came before our Committee recently, and I will be speaking on behalf of our Committee to the Comptroller and Auditor General shortly. I will finish by asking that this Assembly, the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety, the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, and the Ministers in all the Departments recognise that there is a crisis going on in the Health Service daily. Action is needed now, not two years from now.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the draft Programme for Government and to discuss issues that directly or indirectly affect my constituents.

I have watched most of the debate on the monitor in my office, and I noted criticism being levelled at various Benches across the House that were empty. Mrs Carson said that everyone was absent, and now Mrs Carson is absent. Most Members have used this debate to flag up issues that are of concern to them - rightly or wrongly, as the case may be - and they have followed the very extensive debate from their offices. If a Member is going to criticise other Members, she should do the House the courtesy of remaining here for everyone's speech, not just her own.

I have followed several contributions, and I wish to comment on some of them, which were outstanding and gave fair criticism of the draft Programme for Government. Do not think that I am going to re-designate, but I refer to the speeches by the Member for South Belfast, Carmel Hanna, and the Member for South Down, Eddie McGrady. Both Members brought genuine criticism to the debate, with expertise in the matters that they addressed. I will focus on some of the issues they raised shortly.

The Executive should recognise that good government is not measured by the amount of promises that they make, but by the amount of promises that they keep. The draft programme, like the last document that was produced, makes a lot of promises. The public can pass a final judgement on whether those promises are kept or not.

In the foreword, the then acting First Minister, Sir Reg Empey, and Mr Séamus Mallon, MP said:

People would welcome their starting to deliver on over 200 of those promises. To date, 10 have been kept. The Executive have a long way to go to keep their promises, otherwise they will be condemned as being a Government by cliché - as making promises in politically correct phraseology but failing to deliver on them, when it is their duty to do so.

They say that they intend to make a difference: people do not see that difference yet. They have a vision: people say that the vision is blurred. They say that they have a programme: I do not think that a start has been made on the programme, so there is no prospect of a conclusion. Those in charge of implementing this draft Programme for Government need to bring legislation to the House. As many Members know, we do not deal with much primary legislation, yet according to the draft Programme for Government primary legislation is needed.

Mr Durkan said that the House has a duty to govern responsibly. It is fair criticism to say that it must make up for its lack of credibility. David Trimble said that an Administration founded as this one is founded lacks credibility. Having read the draft programme I do not know how they are going to do that, but they should tell us.

The draft programme refers to common themes, and the Executive say that they want to establish a coherent, modern Government. Many of the comments from across the House, SDLP, Ulster Unionists, and others - whether they are designated or not - show that the underlying strategy is not coherent. Indeed, there is much criticism of the lack of a coherent, modern Government. Those who have signed up to the draft Programme for Government should recognise that their remarks on the Administration's lack of coherence and the legislation that flows from it will be challenged later.

Ms Hanna was correct when she said that an audit of the Health Service is essential. That is very important. It appears that the Health Service is becoming the black hole ministry. We have seen the major problems that exist in health funding. One simply has to pick up a newspaper and look at what has happened to the Royal Victoria Hospital. It is a shame and an indictment of the Government that a modern building in great demand should be padlocked and its new wing not used. That is a sad indictment of departmental policy and of the use of departmental resources. The fact that a promised new maternity unit for Northern Ireland has not yet materialised is also an indictment of the Government. That issue must be seriously addressed if the credibility gap is to be reduced.

Another indictment of the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety appears in this evening's 'Belfast Telegraph', in which the Department claims to be working for a healthier people. To achieve healthier people and a healthier community, it has to perform the operations that are required by those people. A parliamentary answer that my Colleague, Mr Shannon, received this morning from the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety has found its way onto the front pages of the 'Belfast Telegraph'. According to that answer, more than 4,000 patients in Northern Ireland have been waiting for operations for more than two years. A further 8,000 people have been waiting for 12 months, of which 34 are heart patients. The extra £8 million allocated this morning by the Minister of Finance and Personnel will not go towards addressing the particular needs of the 12,000 people on a one-year or two-year waiting list. In fact, just over 49,000 people were waiting for a wide range of surgical procedures to be carried out by the Department.

If the Government and the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety are working for a healthier nation and healthier people, they must address the serious situation in which money appears to be pumped into the Department at every opportunity. I would not deny it a penny, but if that money is not used accurately and effectively, not only the waiting lists, but their gestation period, will grow longer. The Government must face up to that important issue. If one Minister is not up to it, we all have a responsibility to insist that the job be done properly.

Many Members have mentioned the long waiting lists and the lack of resources. I am aware that Dr Hendron has already touched on those issues. However, the new Causeway Hospital in my own constituency faces many problems. That state-of-the-art hospital has insufficient resources. The Minister continues to waste money on other pet projects instead of ensuring that our first-class hospitals are properly funded and allowed to function.

I shall cite the example of the dermatology departments in the Antrim Area Hospital and the Causeway Hospital. I received a letter from a constituent who wanted to continue to receive dermatology treatment. However, the last dermatology appointment at the new Causeway Hospital has taken place and that service is now being withdrawn. The patient can either make the 160-mile round trip from the Causeway area to the Ulster Hospital at Dundonald, or can go private at the North West Independent Clinic, at a cost of between £80 and £85 for a few minutes' consultation each visit. Everyone knows that many appointments are required for the treatment of dermatology and that it can take a long time.

Therefore, the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety, in failing to address the needs of, for instance, dermatology patients, is suggesting that patients opt either for private treatment or travel miles outside their local area for treatment, even though their local hospital could deal with the ailment if it were supplied with the resources. That is an indictment of the Department and the Minister for failing to recognise that those problems exist. The problems must be addressed more effectively than they have been to date.

I am a member of the Agriculture Committee. The Programme for Government contains many promises regarding agriculture, but Mr McGrady made some serious criticisms of the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, and I echo those points. They are important and go to the heart of the needs of the rural community.

Mr McGrady stated - and I agree - that there is no flagship programme. For instance, for a long time the Agriculture Committee has advocated the need for a farm retirement scheme. The only way to address rural poverty sustainably is to create a farm retirement scheme and a new entrants scheme. However, that has been put on the long finger by way of another inquiry, another investigation, another consultation report. If that issue is not addressed soon, Northern Ireland will not only have an ageing rural population with the lowest wages in Europe but one that will be unable to sustain the beautiful Northern Ireland countryside that everyone remarks on and cries their eyes out about.

The rural and farming community needs practical help. It needs a properly thought-out farm retirement scheme that will allow older generations to get off the land and allow new entrants - their children, other people interested in farming or those wishing to diversify - to take it over and drive that new agriculture industry forward. It is unfortunate that the Agriculture Minister and the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development appear to be the pet poodle of EU bureaucracy, but they are not the farmers' friend because they do not address that important need.

I know the criticisms. The whole Budget could be used up on farm retirement. However, farm retirement could be the one major issue that would make a difference to farmers' lives in Northern Ireland, and it should be considered seriously. Unfortunately, it cannot be addressed by the resources identified in the Programme for Government because they have been directed elsewhere.

TOP

<< Prev / Next >>