Order. I have to ask the Member to ask a question. The reshuffle of Ministers will take place later on today, and then we will see who can make statements. However, at this point this Minister has made a statement, and I ask the Member to ask a question on it.

I will indeed, Mr Speaker. The substance of my question is contained in the statement.

I ask the Member to ask a question.

OK. That is a shame. Yes. You have interrupted the flow, Mr Speaker.

If it is too difficult for the Member to find the question, he can hardly find fault with my wondering where it is. This is an opportunity for questions not speeches, and I made that clear before I called any Members.

Mr Speaker, to make sense of a question, there must be an introit. I will keep going.

The introits do not always make sense of the question.

Mr Speaker, I can assure you that this does. Does the Minister see the Golden Jubilee as a unique opportunity to emphasise the Ulster and Irish origins of the British monarchy?

There are many themes coming through that reflect our heritage. We have a rich and varied heritage and culture, of which the monarchy forms a pivotal part. As I said, it is only the fifth time in 1,000 years that a monarch has reached a Golden Jubilee, which is a major historic event and something to be celebrated on that level alone.

There are connections to the monarchy that run through these islands. It is important to point out that every opinion poll taken in the UK shows that the monarchy and the Queen have the overwhelming support of the general public, and that speaks volumes.

TOP

The Minister's statement will come as a big disappointment to the House. Given his comments last week, we were expecting much more. However, at least today he is speaking and not huffing as he was last week, and we welcome that.

The Minister's statement and the lack of commitment by his Department tell their own stories. In his statement he says that events are costly to organise. Given the amount of money that he is placing at the disposal of those who want to organise events, you would almost think that they were cheap. He has set aside a budget of £200,000. To date, there have been 260 applications, so that works out at an average of £769 per event, which would just about pay for the liability insurance. It will come as a disappointment to those who wish to go forward -

I must ask the Member to come to the question.

Will the Minister assure the House that, in the event of the Department of Education's not carrying out the wishes of the House to give every schoolchild a suitable souvenir to mark the Queen's Golden Jubilee, his Department will step in and make such provision?

I must correct Mr Morrow. He said that I was huffing last week. I thought that I made it clear to Mr Morrow that I was following the wishes of the palace. The Department for Culture, Media and Sport issued a statement with the agreement of the palace to the effect that there would be no announcements or pronouncements on the Golden Jubilee, and that is why I kept quiet. So it was not a question, Mr Morrow, of huffing; it was a question of obeying the wishes of the palace.

The Minister should address the Chair.

The Member can point at me if he wants. However, it is a matter that merits a degree of respect, manners and decency. This is the Queen's Golden Jubilee, and it is inappropriate for anyone to use it to score cheap, party political points.

Mr Morrow spoke of how disappointed he is. This is not primarily about money. The proposed celebrations will not cost large amounts of money. The Queen's express wish is that there should be no undue expenditure from public funds on the programme of celebrations.

Mr Morrow, you should be careful. Please do not point - it is rude to point.

Order. Members should speak through the Chair. It would be wise, particularly in situations such as this, for Members to avoid addressing one another directly.

The award scheme to which I refer is a non-lottery fund, which was set up by the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure. There is no closing date for applications to the Awards for All scheme. Several organisations object to taking lottery funding, so the Department set up a non-lottery fund, the fund to which I referred. As I said, given the uptake, I can make a case for increasing that fund.

The Department has been working on the matter for some time. In July 2001, it established a Northern Ireland Golden Jubilee advisory group. It also set up and publicised the special funding scheme, established the local government forum to brief district council Golden Jubilee officers, and briefed Lord Lieutenants and Deputy Lieutenants. General information leaflets were published, some 20,000 of which were distributed throughout the district council areas. The Department has also worked with other devolved Administrations and Buckingham Palace to arrange, for example, the Golden Jubilee poetry competition. A great deal has been done, and I am sorry that Mr Morrow is disappointed.

Some 260 events are planned under the non-lottery award scheme alone. There are many other applications, and I can argue for more funding. The Awards for All scheme is also available. Northern Ireland has planned some 450 events, roughly a quarter of all the events planned in the United Kingdom. That indicates that Northern Ireland is doing well. More people want to celebrate here, and we are organising more events than any other part of the United Kingdom. The arrangements should not be a matter for disappointment.

The Department is still considering providing a memento of the occasion, and I am happy to provide further details.

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. How can the Minister tell the House that he was silent last week? He was not silent; he was speaking on a motion that was not even before the House.

The question of the Minister's silence arose in an accusation by someone else, which the Minister repeated. I do not normally take points of order during ministerial statements. Some points of order arose - not that which the Member has just raised, but that to which I referred. Members should keep to the normal order of business, and questions should be concise so that as many Members as possible can speak.

What about the answers?

I refer to everyone who speaks, whether they are asking or answering questions. It would be helpful if Members could be as concise as possible.

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. As an Irish Republican, I share the view of British Republicans that the monarchy is a costly anachronism that should be abolished.

Does the Minister agree - [Interruption].

Order.

Does the Minister agree that the Act of Settlement of 1701 is the bedrock of the Union, the Church of England, Parliament and the independence of the judiciary because, by ensuring that no Catholic ever ascended to the British throne, and by preventing a future monarch from marrying a Catholic or bringing up children in the Catholic faith, it remains the last great repository of anti-Catholic prejudice in the British Constitution? Will he further agree that the language of the Act of Settlement, which refers to papists and persons marrying papists, is offensive and a positive encouragement to lingering discrimination? Will he lend his weight -[Interruption].

Order. There has been some misunderstanding. Questions on a statement should relate to the statement and not to issues surrounding the statement. I cannot allow the Minister to reply to the question that the Member has just asked because it does not relate to the statement - fascinating though that question may be, and one to which many Members would be delighted to respond. If the Member has a specific question on the statement about the jubilee celebrations, I will happily give him a chance to ask it, but I will not allow questions on other matters.

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. The Minister's statement makes it difficult for Nationalists even to contemplate celebrating the jubilee. Will the Minister lend his support to the abolition of that bigoted Act?

It is perfectly understandable that the Member may wish to explain why he does not want to participate in the matter. However, that question does not relate to the statement.

I welcome the enthusiastic statement on the Golden Jubilee celebrations. I hope that it will be a wonderful opportunity for all of us to celebrate it appropriately and that the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure will facilitate those celebrations as much as possible.

To the Minister's knowledge, has there been cross- community take-up of the Awards for All scheme, and has the invitation to participate in the awards been extended to the whole Province? Will the celebrations that are being organised complement those of the district councils, and are there any plans for councillors and Assembly Members, working together, to join the celebrations so that it appears that the Province's public representatives are celebrating?

We have had discussions with every council. Most have taken forward ideas, and many have produced budget lines. I am not familiar with all the details of the cross-community element. However, one of the events that I attended - the launch of the poetry competition - had a strong cross-community element.

There has been a widespread take-up of events throughout the Province, and every area and district council will be represented. It is a matter for each district council to determine how it liaises and works with Assembly Members.

I welcome the Minister's statement. Has he been involved in discussions with the clerk of the course at Down Royal to organise an event? After all, horse racing is known as the sport of kings, and everyone knows of the Queen's commitment to horse racing since she was a young girl. If there is a block on having an event because of the fixtures, perhaps we could arrange for such an event to take place on a Sunday.

I have not been in direct contact with anyone at Down Royal. I am aware that horse racing is regarded as the sport of kings, and it is well known that Her Majesty and the royal family have a deep personal interest in that sport and have followed it all their lives. With regard to a celebratory horse race at Down Royal, I do not know how things stand. That is not a matter for me.

I commend the Minister and his Department on the statement. Can the Minister describe the Department's award scheme and explain why there was such an early closing date for it?

Rev Robert Coulter refers to our in-Department non-lottery scheme. The Awards for All scheme is still open - it has not closed - and will continue. We launched our non-lottery scheme with some £200,000 for grants ranging from £500 to £5,000. It is a small grants scheme and in keeping with the themes agreed with the palace - themes such as the Commonwealth, looking forward as well as back, community service and a giving thanks celebration.

We have had a large number of applications, and we need to be able to assess them in detail. Since the budget does not cover all the applications, I can make a case for further funding. As I have said, this is not about money. People want to celebrate, and whether they get a grant or not, they will go and celebrate. Some of the schemes are for street parties organised by primary schools. This is about small events, people coming together and celebrating and a sense of community. It is also about other themes such as giving thanks. The grants scheme in itself will not be the index of how many awards or events come though. Ultimately there will be far more events than awards, because that type of enthusiasm is in the Province.

TOP

If the Minister were to be judged on the criteria he has set, degree of creativity and imagination, this programme would not even get a pass mark, never mind a credit or distinction. His programme is a failure. The Minister must take up the decision of the Assembly and give the children the right to a proper memento of Her Majesty's illustrious 50-year reign.

When the Minister is not busying himself playing hokey-cokey with IRA/Sinn Féin's Martin McGuinness on the front of the 'News Letter' in preparation for evensong in Armagh, perhaps he could practise the new words of an old song:

Surely this sums up the Minister and the programme before us. I note the cries from his Sinn Féin supporters - that is no surprise. [Interruption].

Invitations from other Members for the Member to convey his question in a song are not appropriate, even though this particular Member could do it extremely well.

Thank you for that vote of confidence, Mr Speaker. It is a general vote of confidence from the public of Northern Ireland.

Coming back to the memento, I ask the Minister to take the matter raised in the Assembly seriously. Some may consider it a waste, but if the work is done now and the schools and children contacted - those who want to be - this would be the proper way to mark the illustrious reign of Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II.

Dr McCrea says he is disappointed with the programme, yet he does not know what the programme is. I gave only some examples. It is unfortunate that the 260 people who are organising events should be treated to that sort of criticism from Dr McCrea - that they all have to try harder. [Interruption].

It is criticism of a "do nothing" Minister.

Mr Speaker, I had hoped that this debate would not descend to this level. Of course, I should have realised that Rev William McCrea was in the Chamber. When I made reference to setting the tone, I was indeed referring to some things that have been said to me by Dr McCrea.

The themes we are discussing exhort that the Golden Jubilee be relevant, appropriate, leave a legacy, keep within reasonable cost. Those are the themes set down by Her Majesty - they have been agreed for some time - and they are to be realised through celebration, giving thanks, service, community, looking forward as well as back and the Commonwealth.

We have looked at the prospect of celebrating the jubilee through the schools, and if Dr McCrea had asked simply whether I agreed that all children had the right to a permanent souvenir of the jubilee, then, of course, the answer would have been "Yes". It is vital, however, that the souvenir should be in keeping with the spirit of the jubilee celebrations and the Queen's wishes. We have considered medals, and I have samples of mementos that seem to be dear to the hearts of some. No decision has yet been made. However, the cost ranges from £350,000 to £1·25 million, and I am afraid that the cheapest one looks like something you would want to take the paper off to eat the chocolate.

I wanted the children in our schools to receive something of value, something that they would appreciate. For example, one of the ideas was a small bursary per school so that each could celebrate the jubilee in its own creative and imaginative way. I have investigated that idea, and I can find the budget channel for that.

Another idea was the production of a CD-ROM that would provide educational interest to children. We do not simply want a memento. This is not about sentiment. It is about looking forward and giving something of value to our children. The CD-ROM, for example, can provide a permanent educational resource for all schools, including information of specific relevance to the Golden Jubilee, perhaps looking back at Northern Ireland 50 or 25 years ago as well as looking forward, which is a key theme.

An educational outreach resource was another idea. For example, Museums and Art Galleries of Northern Ireland (MAGNI) will hold some exhibitions, and I have mentioned one or two - for example, the Queen's loan of the Leonardo da Vinci drawings. We could organise it in the same way as the 'Kings and Conflict' exhibition, through educational outreach and perhaps through education packs.

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Can I dissent from my Colleague's call for Mr McCrea to burst into song? Nonetheless, the Minister will be aware that my Colleagues and I are not avid supporters of the British royal family. Indeed, Mr McGimpsey did acknowledge that many people in the North, perhaps 50% of the population, do not share his sentiments with respect to unstinting duty and that kind of thing. In other words, Irish-minded citizens will not share in the celebrations. Seamus Heaney said

To toast the Queen."

Can the Minister assure us that he will draw the line where there is an attempt to impose this subject on those who have no interest? I also seek a commitment from the Minister that he will use his considerable influence in his liaison with Belfast City Council to adopt a more even-handed approach with regard to funding celebrations for St Patrick's Day as well as the jubilee celebrations.

Of course, the point of all of this is that it is entirely voluntary. I do not agree with Mr McElduff's figure of 50%. It is much higher than that. Indeed, in the kingdom as a whole it is an overwhelming majority, and there is a clear, strong will, which is evidenced by the number of applications we have received and the number of events that are being planned. They will be published in our 'Golden Jubilee Diary of Events' and Mr McElduff can also see that the response is high and strong.

He spoke to criticise the words "enforcing" and "imposing"; nothing is being enforced or imposed. This is an opportunity for everyone to celebrate. Even if one's outlook prevents one from celebrating, it is an important historic event. It is the fifth time in 1,000 years that there has been a Golden Jubilee. It is something for us all to celebrate in our own way. That is the point of the award schemes. It is certainly not something that Republicans or Nationalists should feel they should oppose. We can all enjoy it, because it looks to the future not just the past.

St Patrick's Day is a different matter. As Members will be aware, Belfast City Council required that the organisers of the Belfast St Patrick's Day celebrations adhered to the criteria laid down by Down District Council. They refused, and that was why the application failed. Had they agreed to the criteria, such difficulties would not have arisen and there would not have been the failed court cases.

I welcome the wide-ranging and inclusive nature of the Golden Jubilee proposals outlined by the Minister, which respect the Queen's wishes. I regret that some people have attempted to politicise the event. I welcome particularly the suggestion of a CD-ROM, which, using new technology, would enable children to celebrate the event and to learn through the occasion. Will the Minister agree to consider a commemorative scroll celebrating the Golden Jubilee, which could be designed centrally and distributed efficiently by CD-ROM? It may then be possible for every child who so wished to receive a personalised scroll so that he or she could celebrate the Golden Jubilee and retain a memento of the occasion.

A scroll is something that we are also considering. Several ideas have been floated - for example, a jubilee medal, a scroll, a CD-ROM, schools' bursaries and so forth. Some people have even suggested mugs, pencil cases or pens. There does not seem to be a big difference between the costs of each item. I have set up a jubilee advisory group, which has been in operation since July 2001. I shall take that group's advice, but Mr Beggs's idea is under discussion.

Is the Minister aware that his truculence of last week has gained my party seven members? They felt insulted by his behaviour. They found it to be almost an act of disloyalty to the Queen. Just as people received a memento at the time of the coronation, they make the legitimate demand that their grandchildren receive a memento of the fiftieth anniversary of the Queen's accession. The Minister says that this is not about values or beliefs; then he wisely used the word "celebration". Is the Minister not aware that this celebrates the brilliant concept of a constitutional democracy and recognises unstinting work over 50 years? Is it not befitting that this Government gives every child a memento for the future?

First, I want to reiterate what I said in my statement. Mr Gibson spoke of "truculence" and claims that his local branch has now increased by seven members - that is probably a threefold increase.

From those benches - [Interruption].

As I said in my statement - and I reiterate it for the benefit of Mr Gibson - I kept a silence, motivated entirely by my determination to comply with the wishes of Whitehall Departments and the palace. Mr Gibson stated that I said that this was not about values or beliefs. I did not say that.

Mr Gibson again asked the question - and I thank him because this is getting finally to the question. It is the question that I have already asked myself publicly twice this morning, and answered myself. I asked: "Do I believe and agree that all schoolchildren have the right to a permanent souvenir of the jubilee?" The answer is yes. I have said that twice already, and I am now saying it for the third time. Mr Gibson clearly missed the answer on the first two occasions, as he missed what I said previously when he described it as "truculence".

I had hoped for a degree of decorum in this discussion - [Interruption].

Order.

- bearing in mind the important subject that we are talking about - the fiftieth anniversary of the Queen's accession to the throne. That is an important event historically, and an important event on several other levels, not least in relation to values and beliefs.

I welcome the fact that the Minister has confirmed that it is his view that all schoolchildren should receive a permanent souvenir to mark the Queen's Golden Jubilee. I welcome also the other practical suggestions that he has made - and is considering - for schools and schoolchildren.

Given the high rate of response in applications to the grant scheme from those people who are not happy to accept lottery funding, will the Minister provide an additional tranche of funding to reward the efforts of those who are attempting to organise events throughout Northern Ireland?

The Awards for All scheme is still open. It has not been curtailed, and there is no closing date. Mr Kennedy is referring primarily to the non- lottery scheme that I, through the Department, set up for those people, organisations and groups who have a moral objection to applying for, and receiving, money from the lottery because of the gambling component. A criteria for the non-lottery fund will be that groups that have a reservation about using lottery money will receive priority. We are still assessing and working our way through the applications.

The scheme is heavily oversubscribed. However, I believe that I can make an argument for further support and resources. It would be wrong for me to make promises, because I am not in a position to do so. I repeat again, however, that I believe that I can make a strong argument for obtaining further resources to supplement the non-lottery fund.

I regret the tone of today's discussion. However, it is the Minister who has set the tone, and it was the Minister who set the tone last week with the comments that he made.

This proposal was in the pipeline for a long time, and it was put before the House before the death of Princess Margaret. Had the Minister genuinely wished to have the motion withdrawn, he could have spoken to the proposer and advised him of the situation. Instead, he chose to make a political point out of it.

Is it not the case that in his contribution today the Minister is using bombast and attacking the Democratic Unionist Party to cover up the fact that he is doing nothing? He said that he is aware that the idea of giving every schoolchild a commemorative memento is being floated. It is not an idea that is being floated, it is a resolution that has been passed by the House. He is choosing to ignore that resolution. What is the Minister doing to move that resolution forward? What consultations has he had with other Departments? Has he looked to the private sector to help to supplement the funding that is required to carry out the will of the House?

I do not want to go over old ground as far as setting the tone is concerned. However, I could repeat what I have just said to Mr Gibson. It is tiresome of Mr Poots to repeat the same shibboleth, which I reject entirely, and with which any reasonable person would not agree. He said that I attacked the DUP. I neither attacked nor criticised the DUP. We shall take the matter forward in a spirit of goodwill. Mr Poots also accused me of doing nothing. I have listed what we have done since July 2001.

TOP

Nothing has been done about a memento.

I have explained the situation concerning a memento. I believe that every schoolchild has the right to receive a souvenir. I have told the Member that we are considering that. I have even managed to bring in some examples to show him how seriously we are taking the matter and how we are addressing it. We have received samples and quotations.

The memento could take the form of a CD-ROM or a bursary for every school. The latter would provide a legacy to allow each school to determine, in its own creative and imaginative way, how it can provide children with a souvenir to make the event memorable. It has been proposed also that linkages be created through the Museums and Galleries of Northern Ireland (MAGNI) to provide educational packages. That mechanism was used previously for the 'Kings in Conflict' exhibition, at which educational packs were provided for schoolchildren.

There is a range of ideas. However, the important thing is that we leave a legacy. That is one of Her Majesty's requirements. That legacy must be of value and should follow the themes of the Golden Jubilee. It should be relevant, appropriate, leave a legacy and be kept within a reasonable cost. It should follow the themes of celebration, giving thanks, service, community, looking forward as well as looking back, and the Commonwealth. The ongoing discussions must determine whether that type of memento or souvenir fulfils those aforementioned requirements, or whether it should take another form. I have mentioned already some of the ideas that we are considering through our own jubilee advisory group, which was established last year and which is advising the Department and me on the matter.

The Minister would agree with me that it would be unfair to deprive the vast majority of schoolchildren in Northern Ireland of a memento, when they would welcome one. I say "vast majority", because the gauge is that some children might not accept it.

The Minister mentioned certain events, which included the construction of a special garden in Newtownards designed for curriculum-based activities that will also cater for people with special needs, the elderly and pre-school children. I welcome that permanent feature in the constituency, which I represent in the House and in another place. Can the Minister provide me with more details of the location, and how the land was made available for that purpose?

I agree entirely that it would be wrong to deprive schoolchildren of a memento because of the objections of others. As I have already indicated, schoolchildren have a right to a permanent souvenir.

Several schemes have been proposed for Newtownards. Mrs Robinson represents Newtownards in the House and in another place. I live in Newtownards and have done so all my life. I am happy to share the information that I have on Newtownards with Mrs Robinson.

Most Members on this side of the House are astounded by the Minister's revisionism, given his comments in the Chamber last week. He did not keep his counsel as he claims to have done in his statement. Last week he made a comment that unfortunately cast a sad tone on what should have been a happier topic. The comments on page 1 of his statement further cheapened and party-politicised the matter. Only those who freed Mountbatten's killers could, in the same breath, profess that their loyalty is better than that of others.

In the depths of his statement, the Minister refers to "creativity and imagination". Does he agree that the opportunity for a more tangible and permanent tribute should be seized with both hands? Does he agree that a permanent motor sport racetrack or, as the Assembly agreed last week, a permanent memento that could be put in the hands of all the children of Northern Ireland, would be a more fitting tribute to Her Majesty and her gracious service to this nation than the one-off, short-term, one-day events that are planned?

I am unsure whether the applicants for funding for what Mr Paisley Jnr describes as "one-off, short-term events" would agree that those events are worthless. As for revisionism, Mr Paisley Jnr is a master of revisionism. He suggested that there be a permanent souvenir, but, as I repeated several times this morning, one of Her Majesty's stipulations is that there be no undue public expenditure for the programme.

A racetrack, which was suggested, would cost many millions of pounds. To build a racetrack would create strong reservations in the palace, because that would contradict the stipulation that there be no undue expenditure. The Department is considering the need for a racetrack through another device, the strategy for motor sport racing, which will be published later this year. That will determine the needs of the sport and whether the sport needs a purpose-built racetrack or the refurbishment of existing racetracks.

I have stated my position about the provision of a permanent souvenir. That should happen in accordance with the stipulations laid down by the palace and Whitehall Departments, and I will adhere to those stipulations. I need comment no further.

I hope that we can rely more on the Minister's comments today than on his statement. On page 1 he states that he kept a dignified silence last week. However, Hansard reports half a column of speech by the Minister, part of which is a political attack on a motion that was tabled in a dignified way by my Colleague Maurice Morrow. The Minister's words were not memorable, but I thought that at least he would remember that he spoke, even if no one else did. He has been around the House today on the subject of a personal memento for schoolchildren. The House, by a majority, passed the motion that there should be a personal memento. The Minister has spoken about the costs of a memento. He spoke about providing CD-ROMs and other types of personal mementoes for schools.

Will the Minister accept the will of the House that each child who wishes it should have a permanent and lasting memento? Is he so in hock to the Minister of Education, whom he seems quite happy to swing with and play hokey-cokey with, that he will not do anything to offend him, and hence will try to avoid the question of a personal memento? As far as the total cost is concerned, a figure of £200,000 has been given, but other events are mentioned that have not been costed. What is the total cost and total budget in the Minister's Department for jubilee events?

Sammy Wilson, not for the first time, is one of the Members who did not get beyond page 1 of my statement. He said that my words last week were not memorable; clearly they were, because he remembered them.

With regard to the memento, I have covered this issue over and over again. The question was not forthcoming so I had to ask it myself, once, twice, three times, and I will do it again: "Does the Minister agree that all schoolchildren should have the right to a permanent souvenir of the Jubilee?" The answer is yes. What type of memento or permanent souvenir should that be? We are working on that, and I will bring forward ideas to the House in due course. We have set up a jubilee advisory group, and it is important that the views of people who are working voluntarily to support the jubilee should be listened to.

I have indicated, ad nauseam, what the budget line is for non-lottery funding, and lottery funding is a matter for the lottery distributors. The scheme is called Awards for All, and there is no fixed closing date, so groups can continue to apply. I repeat for those who missed it - and I am repeating it for the third, fourth or fifth time - that I can make a strong case for further resources for non-lottery funding. That will allow people who have a moral objection to the lottery, because of its connections with gambling, to come forward and not be disadvantaged.

Budget Bill: Consideration Stage

Mr Speaker:

No amendments have been tabled. Therefore I propose, by leave of the House, to group the seven clauses, followed by the four schedules and the long title.

The Bill stands referred to the Speaker.

TOP

Personal Social Services (Preserved Rights) Bill:
Second Stage

The Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety (Ms de Brún):

I beg to move

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Molaim go dtugtar a Dhara Céim don Bhille Seirbhísí Sóisialta Pearsanta (Cearta Forchoimeádta).

Is í aidhm an Bhille seo an 1,700 conaitheoir i gcúram cónaitheach san earnáil neamhspleách agus i dtithe altranais ó roimh Aibreán 1993 a thabhairt faoi na socruithe bhainistíocht cúraim chéanna le cónaitheoirí eile tí cúraim.

Mar a chuir mé in iúl do Chomhaltaí inné, mhol an Coimisiún Ríoga ar Chúram Fadtéarmach do Dhaoine Scothaosta go mbreithneodh an Rialtas ar chóir íocaíochtaí ceart forchoimeádta i leas sóisialta a thabhairt faoin chóras mhaoiniú cúraim phobail atá ann ó 1993; nó an bhféadfaí teacht ar réiteach éigin eile le haghaidh a thabhairt ar easnamh mhaoiniú an ghrúpa sin. Chomh maith le comhchomhairle an Choimisiúin Ríoga, chuathas i gcomhchomhairle go háitiúil faoi na roghanna. Bhíothas den bharúil tríd is tríd gur chóir go n-aistreofaí freagracht as cásanna ceart forchoimeádta go gnáthshocruithe bhainistíocht cúraim na seirbhísí sláinte agus sóisialta.

The aim of the Bill is to bring approximately 1,700 residents in independent sector residential care and nursing homes since before April 1993 into the same care management arrangements as other care home residents.

When the current community care arrangements were introduced in 1993, some 9,000 people in independent sector residential care were exempt from new health and social services funding and care management arrangements. Instead, they acquired a preserved right to an enhanced rate of income support to pay for their residential accommodation, and health and social services boards and trusts were barred from taking responsibility for the care management arrangements for these residents in all but a few limited circumstances.

I informed Members yesterday that the Royal Commission on Long Term Care for the Elderly recommended that the Government consider whether preserved rights payments and social security should be brought within the post-1993 system of community care funding, or whether some other solution could be found to address the shortfall in funding experienced by that group. As well as the Royal Commission's consultation, further local consultation on the options was carried out. Overall opinion supported a transfer of responsibility for the preserved rights cases into normal health and social services care management arrangements.

The Bill is being brought forward to transfer responsibility for the preserved rights cases into health and social services trusts' normal care management arrangements from April 2002. It is considered inequitable that these residents should be treated differently from those who entered the care system after April 1993. The Bill provides that where a trust has been unable to assess a person's need for services before the appointed day, it assumes responsibility from that day until it makes whatever arrangements are considered necessary, or until the person notifies the trust that he or she does not want to be provided with services. Regulations will also be brought forward to enable trusts to recover all or part of any payments made in these circumstances.

In relation to the disclosure of information between the Social Security Agency and the boards and trusts, the Bill specifies the type of information that can be shared, and with whom. That exchange will enable more effective identification of the relevant residents and ensure that when the trusts assume their responsibilities, no one slips through the net.

The Bill also contains a provision requiring the Department for Social Development to exercise powers under the relevant social security legislation so that provisions relating to higher rates of income support and jobseeker's allowance, payable to people with preserved rights, will cease to have effect on the relevant day.

The final clauses of the Bill contain technical and formal provisions relating to the commencement and interpretation of the Bill. That will enable the Department, by regulations, to make any necessary or consequential provision.

In summary, the Bill is targeted at ensuring that those individuals in care homes since before April 1993, and in receipt of higher rates of social security benefits to pay for their accommodation, are brought into the same health and social services care, assessment, management and funding arrangements that apply to other home care residents. These residents will, therefore, for the first time, receive an appropriate care assessment to determine the level of care required and whether their current arrangements are fulfilling those requirements, or if some further, or different, support is needed. They will have the benefit of health and social services contract and care management arrangements for the first time, and they will also have flexibility to consider and explore other care management options, if deemed more appropriate.

Members may have points to raise, and I will deal with them, if I can, in the course of the debate.

I have received no requests to speak and will put the question to the House.

The House will now, by leave, suspend and resume at 2.00 pm with a statement from the Chair about the resignation of a Deputy Speaker.

Sir John Gorman: Resignation as Deputy Speaker

Mr Speaker:

It is with much regret that I advise the House that Sir John Gorman has decided to step down as Deputy Speaker of the Assembly. He will, of course, continue to serve the Assembly in his capacity as an Ulster Unionist Assembly Member for North Down. I would like to take this opportunity to pay my own tribute to Sir John and to convey to him my gratitude for his assistance to me as Speaker.

For almost two years, Sir John has made his own distinguished contribution to the Chair of the Assembly. His dignity, patience and good humour, as well as his firmness when required, have added considerably to the conduct of debate in the Chamber. I know that I speak also for the other Deputy Speakers, Mr Donovan McClelland and Ms Jane Morrice, when I say that he has been to all of us a most congenial, thoughtful and supportive Colleague.

Sir John had wide practical experience of chairmanship, which equipped him well for his role as a Deputy Speaker. From 1996 to 1998 Sir John was Chairman of the Northern Ireland Forum for Political Dialogue, which was established as part of the negotiations that led to the Belfast Agreement. However, that was merely the most recent and perhaps the most public of his many roles of public service, which extend right back to his front line and highly decorated military service in the Irish Guards during the second world war.

Sir John's first experience of this House was when his father brought him to its opening in 1932. Many Members will be aware that Sir John is now the Father of the House. That is a particularly fitting title for him. He is the Father of the House not only in age, but, more importantly, in dignity and distinction. He has earned the respect of Members from all sides and, in his capacity as Deputy Speaker, has entertained many guests from overseas and represented the Assembly, most notably, perhaps, at the historic Tynwald ceremony in the Isle of Man. Sir John has been a splendid ambassador for the Northern Ireland Assembly. I am most grateful to him for his help and support and for his friendship, which I value greatly.

Sir John, I thank you, and I wish you all that is good.

I associate myself and my Colleagues with all the Speaker's comments about Sir John - his service, his character and the manner in which he discharged his duties here.

Six years ago, when several of my Colleagues and I approached Sir John with a view to his developing a political career, he had a distinguished record in public service, the army, the police, aviation and the Housing Executive. He was replete with honours and age. Nonetheless, he was prepared to start an entirely new venture by coming forward as an Ulster Unionist elected representative in the Forum. He found himself pitched immediately into the deep end in the Chair, where, I have the temerity to suggest, he had even less experience than you, Mr Speaker, when you found yourself in a similar situation. Despite that, he conducted himself admirably, won the respect of all those who participated in the Forum and did an extremely good job.

He continued that service as Deputy Speaker in a way that has earned him the good opinion of all Members. I would be surprised if any Member did not have a warm feeling for him and did not, rightly, regard him as a friend.

Members understand the circumstances that have led Sir John Gorman to stand down as Deputy Speaker. He is to have a minor operation in the not-too-distant future, for which the House conveys its best wishes to Sir John. The Assembly looks forward to his return to continue the excellent service that he has given to the House and to the people of Northern Ireland.

TOP

<< Prev / Next >>