Since the Minister is specifically referring to the point that I made, it seems that he is to some extent answering the concerns that I had by saying that he does not take them seriously. If the situation arises where nothing can be done by the community without the agreement of the hard men, the agreement of 95% will be overruled. The Minister has restated my point about that. It will create the fears that I expressed about community agreement, meaning that nothing will be done by the Executive.

I am not saying that nothing should be done until the hard men permit it - quite the reverse. I am saying that the only approach that can achieve a long-term solution to sectarian tension and related territorial activities is the creation of capacity in those communities to resolve the differences that lead to those symptomatic activities. The illnesses of society are not resolved by simply addressing the symptoms. We must do much more than that. We must cure the illness that gives rise to those problems. That is my point.

Mr Ford also said that integrated education was growing in response to demand. The criteria for primary schools in the integrated sector were revised in December 2000. The criteria for new post-primary schools have been revised from a year 8 intake of 80 pupils to an intake of 50. Those revisions followed discussions with interested parties; they were based on professional educational advice from the inspectorate and others, and they took account of the fact that the previous criteria acted as a barrier to the growth of both sectors. The change reflects the statutory duty of the Department of Education to encourage and facilitate integrated and Irish-medium education, and the commitments in the Good Friday Agreement to support the Irish language and integrated education as ways of embedding parity of esteem and reconciliation. The revised criteria represent a balance between the real facilitation of parental choice and the need to ensure that public funds are used to best effect. I will come back to that later, when I will refer to points made by Mr Beggs and Mr Kennedy about pre-school education. Similar considerations arose in that sector.

Mr Ford also asked about the commitments made in the first Programme for Government. Some 250 targets were set, or specific actions promised, in that first programme. Thirty-six of those were completed in the first six months. More have been completed since. Many of the others, which were more than one-year commitments, are under way. Mr ONeill made the important point that we could do with more information not just on actions completed, but on actions that were under way and whether they were near to completion.

Mr John Kelly said that expanding North/South co-operation would improve social and economic well- being in Northern Ireland, and I agree with him. Chapter 6 of the draft programme covers several areas in which mutual benefits should flow from enhanced co-operation in education, the competitiveness of the two economies, health promotion and tourism. Apart from the implementation bodies, there is a great deal of scope for beneficial North/South co-operation in the areas specified in the agreement for such co-operation, but without any structures other than the interaction of the two Administrations.

Mr Beggs and Mr Kennedy referred to the pledge that there should be one year's free pre-school education for every child whose parents wish it. The pre-school education expansion programme is providing - and will provide - places all over Northern Ireland, not just in the conurbations and areas of high density population. We are conscious of the need to ensure that children in rural areas enjoy the same advantages as city children. There is a requirement that any pre-school playgroup that receives funding for free places must have a minimum peer group of eight children. That requirement is based on the professional advice of the inspectorate, and it reflects the need to ensure that funds derived from the taxpayer's pocket are spent efficiently. A line must be drawn somewhere. A pre-school playgroup cannot be provided at every crossroads, where there may be only one or two children able to benefit from it.

Mr Beggs also referred to the low levels of adult literacy and numeracy in Carrickfergus and Larne. The Executive are taking action to improve those levels and regard such action as being at the heart of improving economic performance and competitiveness, and achieving the sort of personal and social development that they wish to see. The Department for Employment and Learning is developing a comprehensive strategy and action plan that will be the subject of extensive consultation towards the end of the year. That is an important issue because it is one for which no quick fix exists. Improving the literacy and numeracy of individuals is a complex issue, especially when those individuals are in work. It requires action at various levels of government. However, its importance in ensuring the economic, community and personal development that the Executive want to see means that it will continue to be a priority.

Ms Lewsley mentioned the flaws in the statistical data in the working group's report on travellers and stated that there was no local government representation on the working group, despite the experience of local authorities in making provision for, and delivering services to, travellers. Consultation on the recommendations in the promoting social inclusion working group's report on travellers has ended. Separate arrangements were made for focused consultation with travellers. Departments are considering responses with the aim of publishing a strategic response by March 2002. I accept Ms Lewsley's point about local government involvement, but each council was sent the consultation document and given the opportunity to comment on it.

Ms Lewsley also referred to the single equality Bill. The Executive are fully committed to promoting equality of opportunity and to tackling discrimination, and we shall pursue that through strong legislation and effective policies. The Executive will bring forward legislation to harmonise existing anti-discrimination legislation as far as is practicable. We shall improve it wherever practicable and take into account developments in Great Britain and recent European Directives relating to gender, sexual orientation and age. The Executive have consulted on the scope and measures to be included in the legislation, and we shall seek views on the draft Bill early in the new year.

The Chairperson of the Committee of the Centre, Mr Poots, stated that the Executive had made only a marker bid with regard to the appointment of the children's commissioner. That is how things are done. Until one gets an accurate fix on the amount of resources required to establish an office, one cannot make a firm bid. However, the Executive have made a marker bid, to which we shall return. The Minister of Finance and Personnel understands the procedure.

Mr Poots also made a point about the review of public administration. That matter rests with the whole Executive, not with the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister. It is a complex issue on which differing views are honestly and validly held. Until the Executive resolve those views, the work cannot proceed. However, the Executive are working hard to finalise the draft criteria and methodology for the review of public administration. I am confident that those issues will be resolved soon and that, early in the new year, the Executive will make progress on the matter. Mr Poots and all his DUP Colleagues have left the Chamber, but it would be helpful if that party's Ministers were to participate in the processes that lead to the resolution of those issues.

I am sure that all Members are suitably chastened by Mr Poots's strictures, specifically on the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, more generally on the entire Executive and even more generally on the agreement and devolution. I reject the notion that the success of any Department is down, not to the Minister, but to the advisors, whereas all the failures of that Department may be laid at the door of the Minister. Mr Poots had in his sights the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, Ms Rodgers, who is at the moment fighting the case for Northern Ireland's farmers in London. She has done that with singular success in recent times. The farming community would take issue with Mr Poots on that matter. Ministers will be dismayed by Mr Poots's criticisms, but the Civil Service will be greatly cheered to hear that all successes are due to it and all failures are due to the Ministers.

Mr McCarthy referred to the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission's recent publication on the human rights of the aged. I can assure him that I have read that document thoroughly, that other Members of the Administration have done so and that we are as committed to the rights of elderly people as we are to the rights of any section of the community.

Carmel Hanna made an important point about the need for the Administration - and of Northern Ireland generally - to play a credible role in international development aid. I will recommend to my Colleagues that we reflect on, and perhaps take some initiative on that issue. I cannot commit the Executive at this time.

Joan Carson referred to the need for consultation with Committees. The Programme for Government was launched with the Executive's position report on 18 June, the draft programme was presented to the Assembly on 24 September and the consultation is due to end on 20 November. We hope that the Committees have had sufficient time to make an input into the consultation exercise. The Committees' comments are extremely important to the Administration in developing the Programme for Government. It would be difficult to extend the time for consultations, as there are time constraints involved in any procedure. We hope that we have got it right, or as near to right as we possibly can.

Jane Morrice referred to the relative passivity of our community about the problems that the introduction of the euro will cause. Northern Ireland is likely to see a higher level of euro cash use than other parts of the United Kingdom. When junior Minister Nesbitt and I met the Welsh First Minister, Rhodri Morgan, he was exercised about that point. He made the case that much of the west coast of Wales, especially around the major cross-channel ports, is heavily dependent on the tourist and commercial trade with Ireland, and will have to become a dual-currency zone. That is also the case around our border with our neighbours to the South. Much of south Down and south Armagh and parts of Tyrone, Derry and Fermanagh are dual-currency zones. It will be a little more difficult, but not that much more, for traders in that dual-currency zone to convert their Irish pound accounts into euro accounts. That unfortunate problem will resolve itself, and will reach a level of ease of movement similar to what people have today.

Ian Paisley Jnr alleged that only 10 of the 250 actions in the first Programme for Government had been completed. I must correct him: in fact, 36 actions were completed in the first six months. Many more have since been completed, and more are nearing completion. We are on target to build on that progress and to complete our commitments. That is not to say that there will be no slippage. We would have to be more than human if there were to be no slippage at all. It is unrealistic to expect 100% effectiveness and perfection from the Administration. However, where slippage occurs, we are determined to identify the reason for it, and we shall ensure that it will be dealt with and that any actions so delayed will be delivered as soon as possible. We shall report to the Assembly and the public at the end of each financial year on progress made on every Programme for Government commitment and action during that year. The first report will be published at the end of the current financial year.

Minister Nesbitt will deal with other points that were raised.

I apologise if you thought that you were only getting one address, Mr Speaker, and if you were about to leave. It is not quite like that - you will be here for a few more minutes.

Today's debate was a further stage in the consultation process. It has proved to be valuable and important. Mr Haughey and I sat through most of the debate and listened to the contributions. Members raised issues of particular concern to them. In some cases, Members raised constituency matters, in addition to matters relating to their role as a Chairperson or vice-Chairperson of a Committee. Such debate helps to inform the deliberations that we shall undertake before the Programme for Government is finalised later in the calendar year.

Members and, indeed, some Ministers raised many important points. The Departments will fully consider those points when revising their sections of the draft Programme for Government. Assembly Committees have commented on the priorities, individual actions and policies specific to their remit. Again, we shall carefully consider those comments - and others - in the wider consultation process outside the Assembly. All those comments will feed into the final draft Programme for Government for this year.

TOP

Several comments were made, both today and from other sources, about the changes that have been made to the public service agreements (PSAs). Indeed, some Members queried those PSAs and asked why they contain less detail. That is because we are trying to be more publicly accountable, and, to do so, we must be rigorous and disciplined in what we are trying to achieve. We are trying to establish baselines that reflect the position from whence we came and the targets that we wish to achieve. It would be good if there were also a benchmark alongside that to establish good standards and practices that could be accepted as the benchmark to which we wish to move.

The PSAs will be more streamlined this year. The Treasury and others advised us to identify a small number of high-level outcomes and performance measures of targets that we wished to achieve. That could become a collective target, reflecting many aspects of a particular element in a Department's administration. It is hoped that Departments will therefore be more clearly focused on their outcomes. The Executive presented the PSAs to the Assembly earlier this year. The Departments' PSAs set out aims and objectives, together with targets and their associated budgets. The principle of PSAs received broad support from consultees on the wider matter of accountability to the public. There was constructive criticism, as there has been today, on how they might be adapted, modified or improved, but respondents were generally supportive.

We are committed to the further development of PSAs. It is a learning exercise, not just for accountable politics and administration, but for all of us to learn to improve the process by which we are accountable to the electorate for the delivery of services in Northern Ireland. We therefore accept the constructive criticism offered. We constantly seek the improvement of PSAs on those of the previous year, and it is hoped that that improvement will continue.

We are embarking on service delivery agreements (SDAs) that convey actions needed to deliver the target for the performance measure in PSAs. Last year, we saw actions in PSAs, but those were not performance measures. Actions are the means by which the performance or the desired outcome is delivered. We are trying to streamline that and clarify it. We will monitor progress on previously published PSAs and targets, to which Denis Haughey referred, and we welcome the views about PSAs voiced in the debate. The SDAs are more detailed, and they will come through to the respective Committees and then to the Assembly.

Health featured prominently in many contributions, such as those of Mr McGrady, Rev Dr McCrea, Mr J Kelly, Mr Poots, Mr McCarthy, and Ms Hanna. Dr Hendron used the words "a daily crisis". At a meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council that I attended with the Minister for Health, Social Services and Public Safety, Bairbre de Brún, the phrase used was

That phrase was used throughout the United Kingdom.

When the National Health Service was set up in the late 1940s, those who set it up assumed that healthcare would become cheaper. All the ills would be cured, and fewer resources would therefore be needed from the public purse. The reverse has happened. People live longer, and more money is needed to keep them. Also, the diseases being treated and dealt with now are more costly, not only in relative but in real terms. More money is needed just for the service to stay still.

Against that background, many of the comments made about health are understandable. For example, waiting lists are at an all-time high. Fifty-four thousand people were waiting for in-patient treatment in June 2001. In the past year, waiting lists have risen by 9.5%. An additional £5 million was allocated non-recurrently for waiting lists last year, and, in the current financial year, a further £3 million was allocated. Last year's £5 million was then rolled forward recurrently into this year's allocation. The Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety has made action on waiting lists a priority for her Department. Last September, the framework for action on waiting lists was issued. It set out a comprehensive programme of action aimed at improving the efficiency of all stages in the process, including GP hospital referral and in-patient treatment. We accept that the task is difficult, but work is being done.

Roy Beggs and Carmel Hanna also mentioned evaluations of needs and effectiveness, not just with respect to health. The Executive agreed to initiate a programme of needs and effectiveness evaluation on our spending programmes.

Needs are related to policy, and policy to effectiveness. They are interrelated, and, unless one knows one's policy, one does not know the needs to address. Are we achieving our objectives? Of course, we are. Value for money was mentioned. We try to achieve our objective of effectiveness economically and efficiently.

All of those evaluations are being carried out on health, education, housing, training, vocational education and financial assistance to industry. The five areas in which we are conducting needs assessment exercises account for 70% of planned public spending in Northern Ireland. They are major pieces of work, involving not only the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, but also the Department of Finance and Personnel and other relevant Departments. When the findings are produced, they will be used to support arguments such as those raised earlier about the Barnett formula. They should also help to give us a much better understanding of how effective the services that we provide are, and to prioritise, because, as Members said, money is limited. Nothing crystallises the mind more than knowing that you must live within a budget. That is a difficult thing to do, and that is where the Barnett formula fits in.

The focus of the evaluations has been mainly on identifying the levels of need for public spending. They should be completed in early spring next year. Consultation should then take place, and the evaluations will finally be resolved in September.

Mr J Kelly said that the ministerial group on public health should take a cross-departmental approach. That group is meeting; it is alive and well and meets regularly under the chairmanship of the Minister - or should that be chairpersonship? I am not sure how it should be phrased, Mr Speaker. Perhaps 'Erskine May' has the correct term.

You could say it in Irish.

Perhaps you can say it in Irish. I may be able to think it, but I am not sure that I can say it. Would you like me to give way so that you can say it in Irish? No? Could the Member say it in Irish? I see that I have called his bluff.

The group comprises senior representatives from all Departments, including the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, and it has actively contributed to the Investing for Health strategy that, following consultation, is being finalised.

Jane Morrice and Kieran McCarthy raised the issue of free personal nursing care. Earlier this year, the Executive agreed in principle to the introduction, from April 2002, of free nursing care in nursing homes. Unfortunately, the draft Budget proposals do not provide sufficient resources for that. Therefore, the implementation of that important initiative has been deferred. However, the measure to facilitate free nursing care will be carried in a health and personal social services Bill. With that provision in statute, it should be possible to commence free nursing care when resources permit.

Eddie McGrady and Carmel Hanna raised the issue of radiotherapy services. The radiotherapy equipment at Belvoir Park Hospital is used to its full capacity. It is nearing the end of its useful life and, in the longer term, it will be replaced by new equipment at the new cancer centre on the Belfast City Hospital site.

Residential child care places are another important issue. Phase one of the Children Matter task force regional plan for the development of residential child care sets out a programme of 22 new capital developments that will provide 77 additional places and 70 replacement places by the end of March 2003. Two of those developments, providing 13 extra places, opened before the end of March 2001. There are other aspects to that development. Capital funds that amount to about £8 million and revenue of about £3 million are required for those developments. So far, £1 million capital for this year and £3 million for 2002-03 has been secured through Executive programme funds.

Dr Hendron suggested that Executive programme funds be used for the cancer centre at Belfast City Hospital. The next round of allocations from the Executive programme fund for infrastructure will be considered by the Executive next spring. All I can say at this stage is that the Executive will consider carefully any bids that are made for that fund and the other funds. I am conscious of health provision, and of what Members have said on that topic today. I have dealt with the subject of health quite extensively, because it kept reoccurring.

We have listened to many comments about agriculture from Mr McGrady, Mr Savage, and Rev Dr William McCrea. The Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development commissioned a desk study on the value and effectiveness in Northern Ireland of retirement schemes for farmers. She has commissioned further primary research into the economic, social and environmental aspects of early retirement and new entrants' schemes. The results will be available in summer 2002.

The Deputy Chairperson of the Agriculture and Rural Development Committee raised the issue of the priority of rural issues in the Programme for Government. Again, that was considered carefully. Our rural population and its economic future is important. We are still a rural community to a great extent, and many people here come from a rural community: "Scratch us all, and we come from the soil" is a phrase sometimes used in Northern Ireland. We are significantly different from England and the rest of the United Kingdom in the importance that we place on the gross domestic product (GDP) and the agriculture sector in Northern Ireland. There is a key need to develop policies to deal with that aspect of the rural economy. We must be more sensitive to rural needs in our attitudes to industrial development, education, training, the location of services, planning, and the environment. We must overcome the many problems that face the agricultural industry, but we must also ensure that there are new business and employment opportunities in the countryside and rural towns.

The Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development advanced proposals for the implementation of rural proofing, to which the Executive remain fully committed. Rural proofing is essential. It is designed to ensure that the legitimate concerns and aspirations of people who live in our extensive rural areas are fully taken into account when drawing up proposals for policies across the full range of responsibilities.

Ms Rodgers's proposals, which she plans to discuss with the Agriculture and Rural Development Committee later this week, will include the establishment of an inter-departmental steering group, under her chairmanship. The proposals will also include the creation of a rural proofing unit, the head of which has recently been appointed, within the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development. I hope that we have given an indication of the importance of rural proofing, to which the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development and the Executive are committed.

Some Members raised the issue of the Barnett formula. When Northern Ireland was set up in 1920, it was assumed that it would be self-financing, but that turned out not to be the case. Therefore, Northern Ireland received deficit funding for many years, from the 1920s to the 1940s, and did not catch up until the 1960s. It required about 30% per cent more spending per head than the rest of the United Kingdom. That was a measurement of spending only - not need. The last major needs assessment exercise was conducted in about 1979.

We face the problem of establishing what is needed for the services that must be provided in Northern Ireland, and, in that respect, we have concerns about the funding that we receive. The draft Programme for Government acknowledges those concerns. We are carefully considering the Barnett mechanism, because, with regard to the allocation of funding, we do not get the same funding pro rata as England and Wales. When an announcement is made in Great Britain, there is an expectation that somehow that will read across to Northern Ireland with the same spend. However, that is not the case, so there is a difficulty.

To secure more funding, we must not only convey the need, but convince Her Majesty's Treasury that there is a need. That process will be ongoing over the coming months. We hope therefore to have reached a view later in the year about the appropriateness of the Barnett formula and to have a carefully argued case for funding to match the needs of the community in Northern Ireland.

Mr Ford and Mr Beggs asked whether we were making a difference. Mr Beggs asked where the money was going and if we were getting value for money. He said that he hoped that the process would progress quickly to demonstrating that we are getting value for money.

Mr Beggs also referred to the problems in the Health Service. The key difference is that all local politicians have a collective responsibility for decisions on policy and actions across a range of local services. The four parties in the Government are working with Committees to deliver better services in Northern Ireland. We have set out our priorities in the Programme for Government. We have set out the resources that are available for improving people's health and education. We have set out the challenges.

We heard Mr McGimpsey, the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure, giving a full account of his funding, for his targets and what he aims to deliver in that important sector. That is an example of local people having responsibility for the spending and allocation of resources. We are trying to make a difference. I emphasise the word "trying". It is not easy, but, as I said earlier, it is a learning process in which we are all putting our hands to the plough.

Dr O'Hagan and Mr Molloy mentioned public-private partnerships. We are considering that again through various mechanisms. We are gathering views, internally and externally, and considering recommendations. A working group has been established by the Executive in accordance with their commitment in the Programme for Government to review the use of private finance to address Northern Ireland's infrastructure deficit. The Committee for Finance and Personnel's report provides useful, important information, and the final report of the working group is scheduled for completion in March 2002 for consideration by the Executive. It will be published and will be subject to public consultation. The final decision on the way forward for the policy will be taken by the Executive by September 2002.

Dr Birnie raised the issue of community division, which was also mentioned tangentially by others. The Executive considered that matter carefully, because of its sensitive nature, before deciding what measures to take to tackle the deep and painful divisions in our society. Our proposals reflect the actions in the first Programme for Government, such as the development by 2002 of a cross-departmental strategy for the promotion of community relations, leading to measurable improvements in community relations. It is easy to say that. It is easy to have measures. However, as some have said, it is the change in the attitude of mind of the individual that is really needed. There are other actions that can be taken to promote, for example, integrated education and the concept of citizenship among children and young people.

Dr Birnie said that it was important to permit difference rather than try to assimilate all differences into one. We subscribe to that theory and believe that there must be support for cultural and linguistic diversity. No society or state today is made up of a homogeneous group. The vast majority of democratic states comprise heterogeneous groupings in which people must learn to live, work and enjoy their time together and, at the same time, celebrate their differences.

Edwin Poots, Roy Beggs and Esmond Birnie mentioned the review of public administration. We are committed to ensuring greater accountability - the Assembly is only a beginning. All services must be more efficient and effective, and there must be a better structure for local and regional administration. We remain committed to undertaking that comprehensive review of public administration. It is an important matter, on which the Programme for Government must deliver, and it is one of the Executive's key priorities. Those are complex issues, but we will deliver on them. The Executive are determined to get this right and have carefully considered all the issues. We hope we can reach conclusions, and we wish to launch the review by spring 2002.

Mr ONeill said that the budget allocation should reflect culture, arts and leisure responsibilities. We are conscious of the role that culture, arts and leisure play in supporting many priorities, and the needs of the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure's programme will be considered as part of the needs evaluation.

On behalf of Mr Haughey and myself, I commend the draft Programme for Government to the House.

<< Prev