As it would have taken at least one day for the letters to arrive at the addresses, it means that the planners, with their busy schedules and numerous other pending plans, took only three days to consider the petitions and plans for the mast. It took them three days to decide that a mast on which a decision had previously been deferred because of visual intrusion was no longer so when it was moved closer to the caravan park.

Sir William Stewart noted such problems in his report. He recommended that a robust template be set in place within 12 months of the publication of his report, which was published at the end of April 2001. It takes longer for the Assembly to debate the implementation of a report than it does for the planning applications and the Department to replace those masts. At the speed at which the Ganaway mast was installed, around 122 masts could have been decided on by the time the Assembly got around to debating the issue.

Some of those masts, including the one built in Ganaway, are within 10 metres of dwellings. I agree that there should be exclusion zones set up across Northern Ireland. They should be seen as physical barriers and should be part of the template of planning protocol. However, we should go further. Northern Ireland should not only have no-go areas for humans where the recommended exposure guidelines have been surpassed; it should have no-go areas for telecommunications masts. Those should include populated areas, or should at least put exclusion barriers around housing and shops, extending for a minimum of 300 yds from any dwelling. I use that figure because those who have concerns about telecommunications masts suggested that 300 metres was a comparatively safe distance from dwellings.

Sir William Stewart's recommendation of an independent ombudsman to provide a focus for decisions on the siting of base stations - [Interruption].

I cannot comment on the safety of mobile phone masts, but I can say that it is out of order for mobile phones to ring in the Chamber. All Members should attend to that.

Sir William Stewart's recommendation that an independent ombudsman should be appointed to provide a focus for decisions on the siting of base stations when agreement cannot be reached locally is the only way forward.

On a point of information, Mr Speaker.

I can take a point of order, but the Member will need permission for a point of information.

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Does the House know if the mobile phone that was ringing belongs to a Member? If so, do we know which Member?

There is not perfect stereophonic hearing in this part of the Chamber, but I got the impression that it may have been the speaker's - not this Speaker's, but that speaker's.

Is the Member happy to confirm that?

The Member may certainly be able to confirm it.

As I said earlier, we all have mobile phones, myself included.

Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. Has the Member confirmed that it was his mobile phone?

It sounded very much like a confirmation to me.

It was a confirmation that I have a mobile phone.

Thank you for that confirmation, Mr Speaker.

I suspect that everyone in the Chamber has a mobile phone. They are a part of life, but we are trying to address the issue of telecommunications masts.

Sir William Stewart's recommendation that an independent ombudsman be appointed to provide a focus for decisions on siting base stations when agreement cannot be reached locally is the only way forward. Certainly, we all want mobile phones. After all, we have come to depend on them. Members use them to contact constituents, the Business Office and researchers, to touch base with party advice centres, and sometimes to tell our wives that we will not be home that night, or perhaps the next night, because we have constituents to see.

However, we are unsure of the exact consequences of habitually using mobile phones, or of what they do to our bodies. People do not know whether they are predisposed to developing cancer or whether they have accelerated the disease because they use mobile phones or are forced to live near a mast because mobile phone companies have had carte blanche to site masts as close as 10 metres to homes across Northern Ireland.

If an ombudsman were employed to investigate planning issues solely concerned with telecommunications masts and base stations, those who worked for him could access specialist information - and not just information from telecommunications companies that are working for their own benefit. The ombudsman should be informed of all the latest research and should listen to the thousands of people who feel that their health has been affected by telecommunications masts that have left them with memory loss, headaches, skin problems, ear problems, leukaemia, childhood cancers, sleep problems, mental and heart conditions, blood problems, calcium interference and difficulty concentrating. Can we ignore those? I think not.

I call for an independent ombudsman because of controversy over whether researchers in the industry are truly independent. 'The Observer' reported that a doctor who acts as a consultant for Microwave Consultants Ltd, which researched links between microwave radiation, health worries and tissue conductivity in particular, also just happens to be a senior consultant for Orange plc. It is also true that people researching links between microwaves and the ill health of those living or working with radios, mobile phones, et cetera, get half their money from companies that make mobile phones and erect masts across the country. That practice cannot be allowed to continue unchecked - after all, it is only good business sense to pay for the results that one wants.

In addition to the independent ombudsman, Departments must be involved in mobile phone research. The Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety should be involved in funding research into health problems that sufferers blame on mobile phones and the proximity of their houses to telecommunications masts and base stations. There is no smoke without fire. Research into that might, in the long term, cut down on the number of people who are being diagnosed with incurable cancers, because the information gleaned would enable some to remove themselves from situations or places that encouraged the onset of such diseases.

If the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety were to spend some money on researching the issue, other Departments could contribute and take up some of the research provision. For example, the Department of the Environment could research exactly what masts and stations do to the environment. Does the environment pass on its exposure to microwaves to humans through the food chain? The Department of the Environment could answer that question.

In the Stewart Report, Sir William stated that, in the matter of mobile phones and telecommunications masts, areas to be investigated were the effects on brain function, the consequences of exposure to pulse signals and the possible impact on health of subcellular and cellular changes induced by radiation.

Our investigations must be further-reaching. The lives of everyone in this country depend on that. It has been said that one in three of us will develop cancer. How many cancers could be prevented by a thorough investigation into the effect of radio waves? It is for us, as elected representatives, to ensure that everyone is safeguarded and fully informed of the possible dangers.

The most dangerous thing about this is the amount of hearsay and misinformation gleaned by people from newspapers and television documentaries. We have all seen the scaremongering. Not only does that hamper the truth and the real results of investigations into the effects of mobile phones and telecommunications masts, it makes it harder to find out the truth because the companies are defensive, and their researchers are the only ones with sufficient expertise and specialist information to research the full extent of long-term exposure to those emissions.

Sir William Stewart also recommended that the masts and their base stations should not be placed in any schools without the consent of the school and the pupils' parents. There have been two such examples in the past few months: one in Killinchy and the other in Comber. The mast at Comber Primary School was moved, and I understand that the board of governors has asked the South Eastern Education and Library Board to remove the mast at Killinchy Primary School. To my knowledge, that recommendation has largely been ignored. Everyone -

Order. The Member has now been on his feet for nearly 17 minutes in a two-hour time-limited debate. I appreciate that the term "It's good to talk" in the context of phones is a popular one, but many Members wish to talk in this debate, and very few will get a chance unless the proposer brings his introductory speech to an end, knowing that he will be winding up as well.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I was unsure how much time I had.

I want to address two more issues: mast-sharing and roaming. I suggest that telecommunications firms should consider sharing masts. Until now they have appeared to be reluctant to do so. I do not know whether the Minister of the Environment or the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment would be responsible for it, but the viability of such a suggestion should be investigated.

The other issue relates to emissions from mobile phones and masts. It is recommended that the widespread use of mobile phones by children for non-essential calls should be discouraged. That also forms part of the report. The Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety could support that recommendation by ensuring that information on the health risks from the use of mobile phones is available to everyone, and especially to children and their parents.

I urge Members to support the proposal.

I must urge Members to restrain themselves to about five minutes each, and even with that all Members who wish to speak may not be able to.

Does that include phone calls? I welcome the opportunity to speak on the topic, as it has directly affected my constituency for years, particularly in the past 12 months. We should take the opportunity to ensure that the impending legislation is appropriate. We already know that the Department is allowing for public consultation. That is not enough. The amount of mobile phones and masts has increased dramatically in recent years, and their safety has always been in question. It is not appropriate that this should be solely a planning matter.

Planning leaves no room to discuss health issues. The arguments about mobile phones and their masts usually boil down to the sufficient evidence debate. Mobile phone companies defend themselves with the argument that radio frequencies have not been adequately proven to cause health defects. However, the World Health Organisation (WHO) confirms that current studies to ascertain the real effects of radio frequencies are inadequate, and it proposes that more testing be carried out to establish the lasting effects. WHO states that

WHO estimates that it will take up to four years for all required research to be completed and evaluated. I am not happy to continue as we are for a further four years, especially as we do not have access to available evidence, such as the studies carried out by Dr Neil Cherry and Dr Gerard J Hyland, to link telecommunications masts to disturbed sleep patterns, brain activity and various cancers.

WHO refers to a 1997 study that identified the increase of lymphoma in genetically engineered mice that were exposed to radio frequency fields. The independent expert group on mobile phones (IEGMP), which produced the Stewart Report, concurs with WHO by saying that the present evidence for the safety of phones and their mast units is insufficient. The group says:

In the light of that expert advice, I urge the Assembly to be especially stringent when dealing with mobile phone coverage. A spate of applications in my area has held no truck with local people. One company had the audacity to propose a site in the middle of my home town of Castlewellan. Not only would it have been sited in the middle of shops, businesses and local crèches, and en route to the schools in the town, but it would have been in a conservation area. That proposal was incredible.

Another attempt to erect a mast in Newcastle was carried out in the middle of the night, as the company knew only too well that the local people were against it. The company did that after promising residents on the Castlewellan Road in Newcastle, after much intervention, that it would withdraw the application. The base of the mast is still sited on the road; it is possible that BT Cellnet is waiting for the opposition to abate. I assure it that it will have a long wait. However, in the meantime, the base remains an invitation to any child who wants to use it as a leg-up on to the high wall against which it is built. If a child were injured, I wonder who would pay the compensation.

Telecommunications companies can freely erect masts under prior approval notice without getting full planning permission. The spate of applications is the result of mobile phone companies trying their best to erect masts before new legislation is introduced. According to the Minister of the Environment, the aim of the legislation is to strengthen public opinion in the decision-making process. However, will the forthcoming legislation only give the public more of an opportunity to object? Is the Department putting the onus on the public to object and to take responsibility? That will mean that it is up to local groups to oppose such masts. Therefore, what happens in smaller villages that have fewer people to organise a successful opposition campaign?

Order. The Member's time is up.

I am grateful for the opportunity to contribute to such an important debate. I welcome the motion. All Members receive regular representations about masts being located in inappropriate places.

In their capacities either as MLAs or as members of local authorities, Members are receiving strong representations from concerned constituents. I welcome the Minister of the Environment's earlier indication that planning procedures will be regulated and shaped into a proper and satisfactory form.

Many of those who have made representations to me are especially concerned about health issues. It is a matter of regret that the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety is not present. Her attendance would have been appropriate, given her and her Department's responsibility to ensure that the public have confidence in the Executive, and that constituents feel that their concerns are being adequately dealt with. I invite the Minister of Health to make an early statement on the issue. She could undertake a major new survey to establish once and for all the health risks that are of great concern to people throughout my constituency of Newry and Armagh, and throughout Northern Ireland in general.

I welcome the presence of the Minister of the Environment. I pay tribute to his commitment to reaching a fair and equitable settlement on the issue. Is he considering, or will he consider, my concern that the masts are being provided for commercial reasons by commercial companies? In the cases of all the applications of which I am aware, it is clear that the masts are required to provide not only coverage for mobile phone users, but coverage that many of the leading telecommunications companies will sell as a commercial interest. That leads to a concentration in certain areas of not only applications, but sites and equipment, and that is a matter for concern.

It is one matter for the Government, as part of their overall policy, to wish to extend national coverage for mobile phones, but it is another matter when such action has a negative effect on the health of people who live in the affected areas.

I am grateful to the Minister of the Environment for listening to ongoing representations on the masts on a couple of sites outside Newry. I hope that he and the Department of the Environment can make progress on the matter of moving the Jerrettspass mast to an appropriate location. Moreover, I hope that the Department will take on board the concerns that many people in the Newry area have about the concentration of masts there.

We must consider the practical outworking of the motion. It concerns sentiments with which we all sympathise. I shall be interested to hear the Minister of the Environment's reply. However, I shall be especially interested to hear the response of the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety, whose duty it was to be in the House to respond to the health concerns that Members are expressing on behalf of their constituents.

I wish to draw a matter to the Member's attention. He must not be familiar with our procedure. It is not possible for two Ministers to make winding-up speeches in a debate. It is possible for two Ministers to speak, but one of them would simply be speaking as another Member and would not have the opportunity to make a winding-up speech on behalf of the Executive. The reason for that ruling is that it is important for the House to receive the considered response of the Executive. Without the ruling, two Ministers could potentially give different responses, which is not helpful to the House.

Although more than one Minister may be present, it is appropriate for only one Minister to respond. On this occasion I understand that the Minister of the Environment will be making the response. I say that for the clarity of the House. In order that Members are clear: even if the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety were here, she would not be able to respond as a Minister, and she would not be able to give a winding-up speech in the debate, save if the Minister of the Environment were not participating. I am just making that point for the record.

On a point of order, Mr Speaker, I am aware of the procedure of the House in this respect. The point that I was trying to make is that it would be helpful for the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety to be in a position to listen to the representations, particularly on the health concerns that Members will undoubtedly raise as part of this important debate.

I understand that, but I was listening quite carefully to the Member and I think he said: "to reply to the concerns" - hence my intervention.

I am grateful to you for listening carefully, Mr Speaker.

I always listen carefully to all Members, however much a strain that may be.

Not wishing to add to your burden, I will quickly get to the point.

I welcome and support the motion. Most Members will recognise very readily that telecommunications technology is essential to ensure that our economy is capable of competing in the global market. This technology will be a key element in ensuring that we establish a level playing field throughout the North, both in economic opportunity and development. Therefore, if we accept that the economy will either succeed and prosper or contract and fail depending on our ability to deploy this technological infrastructure, it is incumbent on us to address the clear problems that exist.

The public have considerable doubts and concerns, and those are based on significant, empirical evidence. However, in some instances, the concerns are based on lack of clarity, information, and reassurance, and we cannot, and must not, ignore them. Therefore, although I support the motion to implement the Stewart recommendations, including the exclusion zone around buildings - particularly housing, schools, and hospitals, which is an important part of the motion - in the context of the Minister's recent announcement on subjecting the deployment of this infrastructure to the full planning process, we also need to be reassured that the Minister will take powers not just to monitor the extent of mast-sharing, but to introduce an element of compulsion to ensure that we minimise the proliferation of masts.

I hope that the Minister will consider and respond to a second point; it relates to serious concerns about the implications for health. I ask the Minister to consider establishing - as a condition of planning permission - a device that has been used traditionally in planning to ensure compliance with environmental concerns and other issues that pertain directly to planning. I do not wish to place any further disadvantage on the economic activity or development of this technology, but it is important that, as a planning condition, monitoring procedures financed by the industry, which will provide full information on emissions on an ongoing basis, are made available. That is the only way that we can overcome the public's reservations about the new technology. If it is necessary, the industry should be prepared to consider how to allay concerns and demonstrate that consideration in an open and participative way. I am certain that local communities would be prepared to be part of the monitoring process where such technology is deployed within their regions. Go raibh míle maith agat.

We have arrived at the moment of interruption. The debate is suspended and will be resumed after the statement by the Minister of Finance and Personnel, which will follow Oral Answers to Questions.

Oral Answers to Questions

Education

TOP

Question 9, in the name of Mr McElduff, has been withdrawn. Question 10, in the name of Dr O'Hagan, has been withdrawn because it was responded to through the Minister of Education's statement earlier today.

TOP

1.

asked the Minister of Education how he proposes to satisfy special needs requirements for children, given that the number of special needs cases far exceeds the places available.

(AQO 1173/01)

This is the first time that I have seen Annie Courtney since her accident; I am pleased that she is back in the Assembly, and I hope that she is keeping well.

Under special education legislation, education and library boards have a duty to arrange that the special education provision, indicated in a statement of special educational needs, be made for children. The boards may place special education needs pupils in mainstream schools where they are satisfied that the placement will meet the children's needs, without detriment to other children's education and with regard to the efficient use of resources. When special education needs children attend a mainstream school, the board of governors must use its best endeavours to ensure that the special education provision required is given.

The incidence of children with statements of special educational needs has risen over the past four years, but I am not aware that the number of special needs cases far exceeds the places available. There are a small number of children whose needs cannot immediately be met in the educational setting named in the statement. However, the needs of children unable to obtain places are catered for through the provision of classroom assistants; additional support by peripatetic teachers in mainstream schools; outreach support; and, in a small number of cases, home tuition.

I thank the Minister for his good wishes; they are appreciated. I was probably thinking more about my constituency when I worded the question. As the Minister will be aware, the closure of Templemore Secondary School in Derry has been proposed. It has a high percentage of special needs cases. They are currently in mainstream schooling. How does the Minister propose to deal with that added burden, and will he make a statement to the House on this problem shortly?

The situation at Templemore Secondary School has been controversial. As Minister of Education, I can only respond to a development proposal on behalf of the Western Education and Library Board. The board said at its most recent meeting that it intends to issue such a development proposal to my Department, and, as Minister of Education, I will have to give that due consideration. However, there will be opportunity for everyone who is concerned about the situation at Templemore to make submissions to me.

TOP

2.

asked the Minister of Education what proactive steps he has taken to ensure that townland names are used in departmental correspondence.

(AQO 1158/01)

I recognise the importance of townland names as part of our local heritage. In replying to correspondence, my Department will use townland names where correspondents have included them in their addresses.

I am disappointed with the Minister's response. Townland names are a precious part of our heritage. Unfortunately, during the early 1970s the new postal arrangements decimated many townland names. Fortunately, the Assembly voted to resurrect our heritage on postal addresses. I am disappointed to hear the Minister saying that he will go as far as he can, depending on the incoming correspondence. The Assembly voted that all Departments should initiate the use of townland names. That could be quite easily achieved through the Ordnance Survey of Northern Ireland, which is set up to provide such information. I plead with the Minister to tell his Department to issue townland names for all our rural communities.

My Department has no means to source accurate townland names easily for all addresses. I understand that the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure is supporting work to preserve and promote the use of place names. Mr McCarthy may wish to seek further details from Minister McGimpsey.

I appreciate that there has been a long-running campaign for the revival of the use of townland names. The Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure is funding two projects to preserve and promote the use of place names: the common address file project, which aims to establish a standardised form of address to be adopted by all Government Departments and the private sector; and the place names project at Queen's University Belfast, which researches the origins and meanings of place names.

I am sympathetic to Mr McCarthy's point. It is an issue for all Departments that everyone should be concerned about. My mother comes from an area of County Donegal where there are many very beautiful place names such as Meenaharnish, Effishabreda, Crockahenny, Meentahalla and Glentogher. Those names are important to the people who live there, and the area where my mother comes from - Middle Illies - is used all the time in correspondence. I wrote to my uncle recently and I addressed the letter to John Doherty, Middle Illies, Ballymagan, County Donegal.

TOP

3.

asked the Minister of Education what steps he intends to take to protect the jobs of teachers facing redundancy.

(AQO 1147/01)

The general uplift in recurrent spending in schools in 2002-03 is 4·9%, which in overall terms is more than enough to meet general pay and price increases. Decisions on redundancies are a matter for individual boards of governors, in the light of their individual school circumstances, especially changes in enrolment.

If, however, a board of governors considers it necessary to make a teacher redundant, it may wish to consider discussing the financial position of the school with its education and library board, which will consider what additional assistance it can give in the context of its local management of schools (LMS) arrangements. It must have regard to its responsibilities towards other schools in the area. I will continue to press for additional resources for our schools at every opportunity.

Is the Minister aware that the pupil to teacher ratios in the North Eastern Education and Library Board, which covers part of my constituency, are the worst of the five area boards? At a time when education resources must be directed at raising standards in the classroom, is the Minister satisfied that we are not losing valuable teaching expertise and experience through redundancies?

Redundancies can result from causes other than budget cuts and falling enrolments, such as organisational changes in a school and changes to the curriculum. However, individual circumstances may mean that some schools, especially those with falling enrolments, will have difficult decisions to make to ensure that they live within their budget.

Boards must continue to be proactive in ensuring that schools' spending plans are realistic and monitored closely to ensure that deficits do not accumulate and become increasingly difficult to recover.

With regard to the North Eastern Education and Library Board, the Department distributes funding for controlled and maintained schools through the education and library boards, and boards have full, delegated authority to allocate budgets to individual schools. Although boards are aware of the Department's policy on giving priority to schools' delegated budgets, some may find it necessary to award a lesser uplift to schools because of pressure on budgets held centrally for specific services. Schools are expected to contain expenditure within their available budget.

Will the Minister confirm that the North Eastern Education and Library Board is the most underfunded board in Northern Ireland, and that 100 teacher redundancies are pending? They are victims of that underfunding. Does he agree that that underfunding is gross discrimination against those teachers and the pupils served by that area, which is the largest Protestant area in Northern Ireland? Will he do something about it?

Here we go again, sectarianising the education debate. The budget available to fund core board services has been distributed fully on the basis of a methodology that reflects relative needs across the education and library boards. When funding is allocated to each education and library board, the Department stresses that boards should continue to give priority to school- delegated budgets, although it recognises that each board must set realistic figures for school-related central budgets, some of which, I understand, are suffering pressures in the North Eastern Education and Library Board area.

Is the Minister aware that the present funding arrangements for the North Eastern Education and Library Board disadvantages it to the point where there is the real possibility of 75 redundancies in the foreseeable future? Does the Minister agree that a simple explanation of the unfairness is the fact that the North Eastern Education and Library Board has 21% of the Province's pupils, but only 15% of the pupils who are entitled to free school meals? If he is aware of that underfunding, what measures does he propose to introduce to avoid those 75 redundancies being made?

I refer the Member to the answer that I have just given. I have explained that the budget available to fund core board services has been distributed fully on the basis of a methodology that reflects relative needs across the education and library boards. Those are issues that all education and library boards must deal with. There is no question of one board's being given preferential treatment over another. All boards must live with the established methodology, and the responsibility to deal with that lies with the boards.

I am aware that there have been discussions about this matter between Members and the North Eastern Education and Library Board. The Department monitors the situation constantly with regard to the difficulties experienced by education and library boards, and will continue to do that in co-operation with the boards.

TOP

4.

asked the Minister of Education what assessment he can make in relation to the consultation process of the Burns Report.

(AQO 1174/01)

Consultation is ongoing and will last until 28 June 2002. My Department is using a variety of methods to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to contribute to the debate. A detailed response booklet will be issued at the end of this month to schools, further education colleges, community groups and training organisations to facilitate consideration of the key issues and to help to structure responses.

In late May, my Department will issue a household response form to every household that will provide information about the review and it will seek the views of the public on the key issues. A household survey is planned to gather more in-depth views from the public. The Department is also considering how best to garner the views of young people. A summary analysis of the responses received will be published around the end of September.

I am engaged in a series of meetings involving the key players in our education system. I am keen to listen to suggestions, build consensus and stimulate discussion of the issues during the consultation period. I must emphasise that no decisions on future arrangements have been taken. I want to hear views on the Burns proposals, modifications to those proposals or alternative arrangements.

Does the Minister accept that his press releases condemning the use of the 11-plus and academic selection, which do not provide ideas on how children should be allocated to oversubscribed schools, do not help the debate on the review of post-primary education?

It is important that we focus on the task at hand. The weaknesses of the current arrangements are unacceptable and must be addressed. Save the Children, the Gallagher and Smith Report and Prof Gardiner have outlined those weaknesses. An on-the-record statement from the Committee for Education states that change is both necessary and appropriate.

There is a need for change, and it is widely accepted that the status quo is not an option. On several occasions, I have pointed out the need to address academic selection. The 11-plus has been widely debated, and, as a result of that debate, no one advocates its continuation. Anyone who wishes to make other suggestions about how we test children at the age of 10 or 11 must be aware that it is wrong to ask any Department of Education, or me as Minister of Education, to become involved in a process that would perpetuate the weaknesses that the 11-plus showed up.

The debate must be an informed one, and measures such as the video and household response forms contribute to people's knowledge. We must ensure that those who do not benefit from the current system can make their views known. Educational issues must be considered above party political perspectives. I stress again that no decisions have been made on the Burns proposals or on any other issues. I have invited comments on the Burns proposals as they stand, and variations and modifications to the Burns proposals or alternative arrangements.

In respect of the other issues that the Member raised, the Department of Education is open to ideas and suggestions on issues such as the criteria for transfer from primary schools to post-primary schools. Burns made proposals on those issues, but we are not restricted to that analysis. Our minds are open about all of that. I am satisfied that the consultation has been properly handled, and I refute claims of bias. I issued press statements recently that reflected the views expressed to me in a series of meetings. I am undertaking, with keen interest, to listen to those views and to help to stimulate and inform the debate.

What is the Minister's reaction to the resignation of the chairperson of the Governing Bodies Association (GBA), and to the chairperson's statement in a morning newspaper today that he resigned because Catholic bishops were unduly influenced by the educational establishment's politically correct views? The Minister has sought today - and in the consultation that has been sent out - to mislead the public by talking about schools that fail in Northern Ireland. Inspectors have not identified any of these failed schools. The Minister says that schools have failed youngsters, but in a reply to a Member less than a month ago, he stated that fewer people in Northern Ireland left school with no qualifications in the past six years than in England, Scotland or Wales.

I will not make any response to the resignation of the chairperson of the GBA. That is a matter between the chairperson of the GBA and the Catholic bishops. The Member must recognise that there are many myths in this area, one of which claims that we have a world-class education system that is the best in these islands. However, almost a quarter of our adult workforce is at the lowest level of literacy. Scotland has as many pupils achieving five and more GCSEs at grades A to C, and it has more young people entering higher education. England has more pupils achieving five GCSE passes at grades A to G.

A second myth is that academic selection provides a ladder to success for working class and disadvantaged children. However, currently only 8% of pupils in grammar schools are from low-income families, and in the Shankill less than 2% of pupils gained a grammar school place.

Who is speaking on behalf of those children?

Order.

Given some DUP Members' silence on the issue, perhaps I am a better bet for the children of the Shankill Road than some of its representatives. [Interruption].

Order.

Disadvantaged pupils are only half as likely to achieve five good GCSEs as other children.

The third myth is that a grammar school education is needed to get into university and to get a good job. Around half of the students at the University of Ulster, and many at Queen's University, did not take the traditional A-level route. That is food for thought.

Does the Minister share my concern about the amount of available legislative time left to the Assembly? Will he prepare a timescale for dealing with any legislative consequences that arise from the Burns Report, so that the legislation will not conveniently, or inconveniently, run into the sand?

It is vital that the consultation period runs its course. That consultation will close on 28 June, and my Department will then spend time - not too long I hope - analysing the results. Regardless of the opinions expressed by the DUP today, I recognise that I have the important job of building a consensus on the matter. It is my passionate wish to build that consensus with the more positive and constructive Assembly parties, of which there are many: the Ulster Unionist Party, the SDLP, Sinn Féin, the Women's Coalition, the Alliance Party and the PUP. Those parties have a keen interest in children's education. As the Minister of Education, my next responsibility will be to present my ideas and proposals on how we should move forward. When a consensus is achieved, the Executive can decide how to proceed legislatively.

TOP

5.

asked the Minister of Education what steps he has taken to involve his Colleague, the Minister for Employment and Learning, in discussions with further education colleges and institutes to assist schools in upgrading their delivery of engineering and technology subjects in the light of the new GCSE examination in engineering.

(AQO 1156/01)

The delivery of the new vocational GCSE in engineering does not depend on intervention by the further education sector. However, one cannot doubt the positive impact of teaching vocational subjects in schools, which can be brought to bear by drawing on the experience of the further education institutions, for which my Colleague the Minister for Employment and Learning is responsible.

Does the Minister agree that the wasteful duplication of resources within and between Departments must be rooted out? Will he take affirmative action based upon specialist investigations, and issue circulars to schools instructing them actively to seek partnerships with local further education colleges for the better delivery of engineering and technology at GCSE level, rather than giving limp, unspecified encouragement to schools and colleges to work together?

The relationship between further education colleges and schools on the issue is based on supply and demand. Schools may use their delegated budgets to buy in the necessary expertise to ensure that special subjects such as engineering are taught effectively.

TOP

6.

asked the Minister of Education to detail the steps that he is taking to ensure that the educational experience and attainment of children from north Belfast does not suffer from the ongoing and recurring sectarian conflict in the area.

(AQO 1176/01)

The schools in north Belfast have been operating under the most exceptional circumstances since last June and the onset of the protests at Holy Cross Girls' Primary School. It is a tribute to the commitment and professionalism of teaching staff there that their pupils continue to have a normal education in such difficult circumstances. Members will know from my announcements on 17 December 2001 and 27 March 2002 of the extent to which the Executive and my Department have responded to the needs of the worst affected schools in north Belfast. To date, a total of almost £3 million has been allocated for specific measures to deal with the problems identified by the schools.

On many occasions, I have said that a priority for my Department is to ensure that all children have access to high-quality education provision in a safe and secure learning environment. To achieve that goal, a long-term solution to the problems in the area must be found. My Department therefore plays an active role in the interdepartmental liaison group for north Belfast and provides information and advice to the North Belfast Community Action Project. I met that group this morning. Mainstream programmes that target social disadvantage and underachievement will continue to be a priority in the main education programme.

Will the Minister agree, and will he reiterate, that our schools should be left in peace to get on with the job of the education of children, bearing in mind that the Minister has put in as much money and effort as possible? That effort and money should not be necessary - that was given in special circumstances. The core of the matter is that schools should be neutral and free from sectarian attack.

TOP

<< Prev / Next >>