Will the Member give way?

No. I thank you all the same.

I cannot, therefore, support the amendment, and I encourage all Members present to support the motion. In respect of the amendment, I re-emphasise the ambience of what we do here. Despite the different backgrounds and opinions of the parties who sit around these tables this afternoon - and we see who sits around these tables - we are here together to try to endorse a Programme for Government. That itself, I trust, will heal the divisions of our society.

The Programme for Government contains special commitments, some of which I will examine in turn. Mrs Bell mentioned integrated education. The Programme for Government indicates our support for greater diversity in education. The Department of Education encourages and facilitates the development of integrated education, but it does not impose integration. Rather, it responds to parental demand for that form of schooling. The emphasis for future development of the integrated sector has increasingly been on transforming existing schools to integrated status. All schools will have received information on the requirements for the process of transformation to integrated status.

Mr Kennedy raised the issue of targets for literacy and numeracy at Key Stage 3. The Executive remain fully committed to improving literacy and numeracy levels. The targets for English and mathematics at Key Stage 3 have been reduced; that was done in the light of new information on the progress being made below that level. We are all disappointed, but we must make a realistic and honest assessment of what the education service can be expected to deliver in the period until 2004. That does not mean, however, that there has been any diminution of our efforts to improve standards of literacy and numeracy.

Mr Kennedy also referred to the Burns Report. I can confirm that the Programme for Government commits us to bringing forward proposals by September 2002 for the future structure of post-primary education. Mr Maskey also asked about that.

Targets are important. They must be meaningful and challenging, but, above all, they must be deliverable. If there is slippage, we will report it and try to understand and explain it. We are trying to have achievable baselines and targets. That is progress on our position some years ago.

Mr Byrne spoke about the infrastructure in the north-west region of Northern Ireland. I want to restate the Programme for Government's commitment to making sure that the road infrastructure in Northern Ireland is maintained to a satisfactory standard. There has been other help for the north-west. The Toome bypass is one example of that, but there is also the recent announcement about the extension of the gas pipeline to the north-west.

Dr Paisley spoke about rural proofing. I mentioned the importance of rural proofing in my response to Mr Ford. I understand that the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development intends to discuss her proposals for the implementation of rural proofing shortly and that the first meeting of the interdepartmental steering group under her chairmanship will soon take place. Dr Paisley also raised the issue of funding for the work flowing from the vision exercise. At this stage the Budget does not include any additional resources. However, the need for resources for the exercise will be considered following the current consultation and the preparation of the draft action plan in spring 2002.

Dr Paisley referred to fishing and to the important meetings that will take place next week. I can empathise with those concerned about the fishing fleets, and I am mindful of the constituencies in which they are harboured; I shall say no more than that, Madam Deputy Speaker.

Mr Gallagher asked about proposals for the future of our acute hospitals, and I understand that the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety has undertaken consultation. I hope that that will help the Minister to reach decisions on the best way forward with the Executive. She also proposes to issue a consultation paper following discussion with her Executive Colleagues and believes that there is a need for a further consultation paper because of the importance of the issue. Since Mr Fee mentioned the word "consultation" three times - and I will check that Mr Fee is in his place; he is - I am conscious that he made reference to "consultation fatigue", and in his concluding remarks he made a plea for some implementation after four and a half years of consultation. I share his concern, not about the specifics in relation to the Health Service, but about an over- abundance of consultation that can lead to a delay in the delivery of services.

Rev Dr William McCrea raised some points about sustainability in the Programme for Government, which makes clear our commitment to promoting sustainable living and achieving effective protection of the environment. Our desire to secure a competitive economy is not inconsistent with that commitment, and the programme recognises the need for our region to develop sustainability.

The Member also raised the issue of water quality and questioned why we do not have a more ambitious target for river water quality. We are doing much on that. The Assembly needs to bear in mind that action is being taken where river quality is below the standard required to enable us to meet our commitments. The Environment and Heritage Service, an agency of the Department of the Environment, has identified a number of targets on which specific action is being taken to address water quality problems.

I will comment now on targets, actions, public service and service delivery agreements. The service delivery agreements should now be with Committees for consultation and discussion. I ask Members to look at them carefully and to contribute to their improvement - they are more detailed than the public service agreements and are in their formative stage. The Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister looked at the service delivery agreements as part of a developmental process, and the Committees' contributions will play a very important part in formulating them.

Mr Cobain spoke about housing and fuel poverty. The Programme for Government commits us to ensure that everyone can get access to decent, affordable housing. In the Executive's first Programme for Government - and I hope that the second one will be endorsed today - the Assembly committed itself to undertake a range of actions. Those commitments in last year's programme included the building of new dwellings every year in the social housing sector, and arranging for the adaptation of properties to ensure that house design meets the needs of older people and those with disabilities. We aimed to raise the standard of the Housing Executive's stock by making improvements to dwellings. We also had a commitment to carry out heating conversions to gas or oil each year to ensure more economic and efficient heating. These actions from last year's Programme for Government remain valid and are supported in the Department for Social Development's public service agreement, which forms parts of the Programme for Government document, which has comprehensive targets for reducing fuel poverty in 2002-03. One example is the Department for Social Development's objective 2.1:

Action will be taken in support of that target - we will support heating and insulation work to vulnerable households under the warm homes scheme. By carrying that targeted action through, work will be completed on 6,250 homes in the year 2002-03. There are clear, identifiable targets and actions to deliver that aspect of housing and address the poverty of the housing sector. It is to be hoped that those clear aims will be sustained.

Mr ONeill also dealt with homelessness. The new housing Bill will impact on that issue by refining the definitions of homelessness and intentional homelessness. The Housing Executive launched a review of its homelessness strategy and services on 24 September 2001. Statutory and voluntary agencies that work in the area of housing, as well as probation, health and social services and community groups have been consulted. With apologies to Mr Fee, consultation will finish on 31 December 2001. The review will be finalised by March 2002, and an implementation plan will be produced to progress work on the various recommendations.

The Housing Executive has identified additional need - totalling £300,000 - in relation to voluntary agencies in the community which assist the Housing Executive in delivering its obligations to the homeless. A bid for that funding will be made in the December monitoring round, and it will be aimed at the most vulnerable people in the community.

Mr Poots made some points about the review of public administration. This is an important issue. One Member described it as, perhaps, the single most important element. The Executive are committed to ensuring that there is greater accountability for all services in Northern Ireland through a more efficient and effective structure of administration at local and regional levels. We are committed to undertaking a comprehensive strategic review of public administration. We realise that there have been difficulties in advancing that, but it is a difficult matter, and it will take time. A range of complex issues must be resolved before we can embark on such an ambitious project. All aspects must be taken into account, such as health provision or the Burns Report on education. A complex project is being considered, but I remain committed to it, and I am confident that it will commence early in the new year, with clear terms of reference to be seen. The Assembly and its Committees will have a full opportunity to give their views on the review.

Mr Poots also raised the issue of the commissioner for children. As Members know, the consultation period closed on 8 November. We are in the process of analysing the responses and making decisions on the way forward. The Executive remain committed to having a commissioner in place by June 2002. We have invested considerable effort in ensuring that the consultation was as comprehensive as possible. We tried to find out not merely what adults think children wish, but what children wish for themselves. That was not easy; it was difficult and sensitive.

Over 11,000 copies of the consultation document and 260,000 information leaflets were distributed. In answer to the specific question, the commissioner will be appointed in line with public appointment procedures.

Mr Poots also asked about the equality impact assessment. The Equality Commission issued practical guidance on how equality impact assessment should be carried out. The guidelines relate to individual policies. It is not practicable to apply them directly to the Programme for Government, which covers a wide range of policies, programmes and actions. The problem of how best to link them together has been, and will continue to be, discussed with the Equality Commission. As Departments develop proposals for inclusion in the Programme for Government, the commission will consider whether those policies, programmes, actions and matters, which are included in the sub-priorities, will promote equality of opportunity and/or address inequalities for any of the categories under section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998.

Individual policies mentioned in the Programme for Government will be subject to full equality impact assessment by Departments, in accordance with their equality schemes.

I agree with Mr Dallat on the issue of proper and effective management of public resources and the review of public administration. Our services should give value for money. Whether we are in a Committee, in the Chamber or in consultation with those in the community, we must at all times try to secure the best output for the given input of resources.

I hope that new initiatives such as public service agreements and service delivery agreements will have an impact. Committees must make their contribution to the improvement of service delivery agreements so that our services are managed properly and effectively. Six needs and effectiveness evaluations are being conducted throughout the sector, and they will make a contribution. All those measures should give better value for money.

The issue of cancer services was raised by Iris Robinson. Since September we have been examining how we can improve the Health Service, including services for those suffering from cancer, heart disease and renal failure. Paragraph 3.6 of the Programme for Government commits us to improving access to cardiac surgery, strengthening treatment processes for cancer suffers at local units and at the cancer centre in Belfast, and increasing the number of renal dialysis sessions.

When I last spoke on the Programme for Government, I mentioned the money that is being spent on health, and the feeling in the 1940s, when the Health Service was set up, that the service would become less costly. However, it has become more costly simply to stand still. An additional £41 million has been allocated to health and social services. To put that in context, that is an additional £224 million, or a rise of 9·7%. That includes a transfer of £19 million from the social security budget, so that the actual cash increase is £205 million, or a rise of 8·9%, which does not allow for inflation.

The bulk of that extra money is required to meet the rising cost of providing essential services. The £41 million will go some way to improving healthcare. However, I have a caveat: it is not enough simply to provide money. It is the management of services that will make the difference. There will be value for money if the output is maximised for the given level of input. Therefore, the needs and effectiveness evaluations are important.

Finally - [Interruption].

You know what they say about the opposition and the enemy. Perhaps I am totally confused, and perhaps that will be recorded for posterity and people will not know what I really mean.

I am not sure what side you are on.

Mr McCarthy raised the issue of free personal care. Earlier this year the Assembly resolved that the Executive should implement in full the recommendations of the Royal Commission on Long Term Care for the Elderly. We put particular emphasis on that provision.

An interdepartmental group has been established to consider the scope for moving to the provision of free care, resources permitting. That group will advise if or when - I hope that it is when, not if - free personal care for the elderly might be introduced. The costs have been estimated to be at least £25 million per annum. The interdepartmental group will take account of the findings of the Scottish Executive's care development group's recent report, 'Fair Care for Older People'.

Ms McWilliams referred to public-private partnerships (PPPs). The Committee for Finance and Personnel's report and recommendations are being fully considered by the PPP working group, which was established by the Executive in accordance with the commitment in the Programme for Government. The group will review the use of PPPs to achieve value for money and to address the infrastructural deficit in Northern Ireland. The working group is also considering alternative sources of funding for improvements to public services. The group will provide useful information. A report is expected by March 2002, and it will be the subject of public consultation prior to any final decisions. I hope that those decisions will have been taken by September 2002.

The Programme for Government is a comprehensive document. Many parts of the programme try to heal the divisions in our society, which was the central concern of those who tabled the amendment. I commend the programme to the Assembly.

Question, That the amendment be made, put and negatived.

The Assembly divided: Ayes 46; Noes 18

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Is it not the case that the motion requires cross-community support? The figures were not given.

There is no requirement for cross-community support for the Programme for Government.

<< Prev