Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Tá mé buíoch den Uasal Paisley as an cheist thábhachtach seo a ardú. Aontaím ó chroí lena bhfuil ráite faoi obair luachmhar mhisniúil na dtrodaithe dóiteáin - cuireann siad a mbeatha i mbaol ar son na sochaí, agus caithfear seo a aithint mar is cuí.

Caithfidh mé seo a shoiléiriú ar dtús: déantar idirbheartaíocht ar arduithe pá do phearsanra na Seirbhíse Dóiteáin i gcomhar idir Ceardchumann na mBriogáidí Dóiteáin agus na fostóirí a dhéanann ionadaíocht thar ceann na mbriogáidí anseo agus sa Bhreatain Mhór. Ní bhíonn baint dhíreach agamsa ná ag mo Roinn leo.

Is chun leasa cách go gcomhaontaíonn fostóirí agus Ceardchumann na mBriogáidí Dóiteáin socrú cothrom ar an éileamh pá. Tá sé tábhachtach chomh maith, áfach, go mbíonn aon ardú pá d'fhoireann na Seirbhíse Dóiteáin réasúnta, tharla an brú ar chaiteachas poiblí, agus go socraítear é i gcomhthéacs an nuachóirithe agus an fheabhsúcháin.

Creideann Ceardchumann na mBriogáidí Dóiteáin go bhfuil méadú de 40% inchosanta, agus tá na fostóirí den tuairim gur féidir dámhachtainí suntasacha pá a nascadh le sochair shoiléire bhreise don phobal, agus gur chóir an nascadh sin a dhéanamh. Mar shampla, thaispeáin tuairiscí clár oibre nuachóirithe na bhfostóirí a ba mhaith leo é a bheith nasctha le hardú pá. Ar na rudaí a ba mhaith leo iad a bheith nasctha lena leithéid de ardú tá: tuilleadh béime ar shábháilteacht pobail agus ar laghdú riosca á tabhairt chun cinn i gcomhpháirtíocht leis an phobal agus fórsaí saothair dea-fheistithe, oilte fuinniúla a léiríonn a gcomhdhéanamh an éagsúlacht.

I thank Mr Paisley Jnr for bringing this important issue to the Floor of the House. I will begin by saying that I agree wholeheartedly with all that has been said about the valuable and courageous work of the firefighters. Every day they put their lives on the line for society, and this contribution must be recognised appropriately.

Members gave many clear indications and examples of the type of work that firefighters carry out: one talked of their role in attending road traffic accidents. My parents were killed in a road traffic accident in the South some years ago, and my family paid tribute to the local fire brigade that attended the scene. I was aware then, and I am today, of the harrowing scene that must have met them when they went to do their job.

At the outset I need to make it clear that pay rises for Fire Service personnel are negotiated jointly between the Fire Brigades Union and employers representing brigades here and in GB.

Neither my Department nor I have been involved directly. That stated, it is in everyone's interests for the employers and the Fire Brigades Union to agree a fair settlement to the pay claim. However, it is also important that any pay rise for Fire Service staff is affordable given the current pressures on public spending and is set in the context of modernisation and improvement.

The Fire Brigades Union feels that a 40% pay increase is justified, and the employers have taken the view that significant pay awards can, and should, be linked to clear additional benefits for the public. For example, reports have outlined the employers' modernising agenda that they would wish to see linked to wage increases, including an increased emphasis on community safety and risk reduction taken forward in partnership with communities and well equipped, skilful and highly motivated workforces whose compositions reflect diversity. Such aims could be furthered through greater flexibility in terms and conditions and through a pay structure that rewards Fire Service personnel on the basis of the specific additional skills, experience and competences that they have. I note here Mrs Iris Robinson's views on the issue.

Appropriate pay can, and must, be one of the outcomes of a negotiation process that looks at the full range of issues affecting the Fire Service here and the services in GB. While the issue is not solely one of pay, Members must be clear about the implications of the 40% pay claim as it stands. While it is impossible to be definitive about the impact of such a claim in advance of the settlement, it is likely that it would lead to an increase in annual public expenditure of approximately £14 million, with an immediate increase in pension liabilities of £40 million in the first year. Were such a claim to be settled, it must be understood that the additional cost would have to be found from within the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety's budget. I do not need to remind Members of the many competing claims for available resources, so I hope that whatever Members resolve today will be reflected, if necessary, in their contributions to the upcoming Budget debate.

John Kelly and Monica McWilliams raised the issue of public sector pay comparisons. The salary of an 18-year-old trainee school leaver who joins as a firefighter here begins at around £18,500 and goes up to £21,000 during the four years of training. When a firefighter becomes qualified, his salary rises to approximately £22,800 a year. Direct comparisons are always difficult. For example, a nurse after earning a degree starts on an annual salary of £15,500 to £17,000. A teacher, who also requires a degree prior to entry, receives £17,600.

Firefighters' pay must recognise the fact that they put their lives on the line. Similarly, paramedics often find themselves in the most difficult and dangerous of circumstances, as demonstrated by recent attacks. After at least three years' training, a fully qualified paramedic here receives an annual salary of £19,000. Simplistic comparisons are often not appropriate, and this in no way undervalues the dangerous and important work of the Fire Service. I again remind Members that neither my Department nor I have been involved directly in the pay negotiations.

Sam Foster, David Ervine, Iris Robinson and others raised the attacks on firefighters. I want to take this opportunity to state again that these attacks on firefighters are completely unacceptable. The Fire Brigade has a working group, which includes members of the Fire Brigades Union, who are progressing their proposals through the authority's appliances and equipment and health and safety committees.

In addition, my Department, together with the Fire Authority, the Ambulance Service and youth engagement organisations, has worked up proposals for funding a community outreach initiative. I will continue to press for funding for this important initiative, and I hope that all Members will join with me in doing everything that we can together to ensure that our firefighters and other public sector workers are allowed to go about their extremely valuable work without such attacks as we have seen recently.

I hope that the pay dispute can be resolved amicably during the current negotiations. It is important that we recognise the risk to life and property that would result from industrial action. I urge employers and the union to explore every avenue to avoid industrial action, and I appeal to firefighters to stay at the conference table to try to resolve their issues through discussion.

I call Mr Hamilton to make a winding-up speech on amendment 3.

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like you to put to the Speaker a statement made in this debate by the Sinn Féin Member for Mid Ulster in which he used the word "traduce" in accusing Members of carrying out a criminal act, traducing people for their own financial benefits. I looked up the meaning of the word in the Library; it led to the beheading of Lady Jane Grey. It is a serious word, and it was used today about Members of my party. I request that when Hansard is printed you place the statement before the Speaker so that we can have a ruling.

Thank you for that point of order. I will look carefully at Hansard and refer the matter to the Speaker.

I thank the Minister for her contribution. Although her Department does not have overall control of this matter, I welcome her desire that the matter be resolved during the current negotiations and that it should not end in strike action. That is the view of the whole House.

Many Members contributed to the debate, and that precludes me, in the five minutes allotted, from refering to what everyone said. If I leave any Member out, it is not intentional, and it is not because I do not think his comments worthy.

I welcome the comments of Dr Hendron, the Chairperson of the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety, who referred to the courage of the Fire Service over the years and the experience and problems that arose when he was MP for West Belfast. The House will welcome his commitment that the Committee will continue to monitor the situation carefully.

Mr Boyd highlighted how the degree of professionalism required in the Fire Service has changed since the last pay award, and Iris Robinson expanded on that point in her worthwhile contribution. Sam Foster questioned the mindset of those who attack firemen, and Paul Berry drew a parallel between the esteem in which firemen are held in the United States and the treatment of the Fire Brigade by some people here. I welcome the support of Ivan Davis, who referred to the number of firefighters who lost their lives or were injured during the troubles.

Unfortunately, Alban Maginness has left the Chamber; I was struck by his welcome of the degree of consensus in the Chamber on the issue. He also drew attention to the penny-pinching attitude of the Government and compared the cost of the firemens' claim to the money that could be spent in a war against Iraq.

This amendment makes the substantive motion more specific and more helpful to the firefighters in their struggle for fairer and better pay and conditions. That is Members' ultimate objective. There is widespread public support for the firefighters and for what is seen as a deserving and long overdue pay review. Our amendment correctly reflects the majority of people's thinking. It is not simply a call for a specific amount of pay; it addresses the underlying problem of the absence of a proper pay structure for ordinary firefighters, whose only hope of a real pay increase is to join the management ranks.

New pay scales should be introduced that recognise not only long service, but the expertise and skill of ordinary firefighters. That would create a proper pay and career structure, anchored not only in management, but in real firefighting skills - because firefighting is a skilled job. With guidance from the Fire Brigades Union's representatives, those skills should be identified and recognised in the pay scales, which should be more diverse and more skills-related. That is the intelligent way to sort this problem in the long term. I commend the amendment to the House.

It seems that everyone supports the firefighters but nobody wants them to get £30,000. It seems that we want to give them quite a bit, but not as much as £30,000. Several important issues have been raised, which are equally valid in their own way. John Kelly's suggestion, mirrored by Ivan Davis, of a unified approach by the Assembly warrants significant thought. It is important that, even if we squabble at times before reaching the same decision, that approach is valuable and sends out the right message.

Alban Maginness struck me by identifying that the same Prime Minister who worries about what a pay rise for the Fire Service will do to the economy flew out to meet Perky. Pinky and Perky have together decided to bomb Iraq. Just as a Fire Service strike hits, Iraq is likely to be attacked. That will be interesting.

We must be mindful of the support that we give today when the spin doctors begin to operate in the event of a strike by the firefighters. What are we going to do? Are we going to defend ourselves and say to our constituents that it is perfectly right for the Fire Service to be on strike, or are we going to listen to those who will say that they are putting everyone at grave risk?

Paul Berry made the point that the most recent industrial action to be taken by the Fire Service was in 1978. These are not unreasonable, overly militant people. They ask to be taken seriously; however, when they were in negotiation with management, the Government, through the back door, stymied the possibility of a relationship being formed that would result in a decent sum of money for the Fire Service. That is a terrible circumstance, and signals, for all those in negotiations with managers, the point at which the Government might interfere.

As legislators, Members must consider that. Will the Assembly be tarred by the same brush? Our Ministers will soon be beseeched by various sectors of society for pay increases. What will the Assembly do then? Will it operate the same process as Tony Blair? That is one of the many factors in the debate that Members have not thought about.

This direct political involvement in a pay negotiation smacks of the miners' dispute with Margaret Thatcher. It smacks of scrubbing the long-established circumstances in which management and trade unions could build relationships and create partnerships in the negotiations. That is being jeopardised by the British Government. Members must be mindful of that and take it on board. As the British Government screw down people's wages, the Assembly will be expected to do the same. Given that our Ministers will have opinions on many areas of the wage sector, it is something that the Assembly must pay attention to.

It seems that there is some wisdom in the PUP's withdrawing its amendment. However, I caution with this thought - the amendment tabled in my name could avert a strike if it were listened to. The amendment tabled by the Ulster Unionists could also avert a strike, but the motion and the other amendment could not. Members should think about the inimitable words of Eileen Bell, who said that the Government will probably not listen anyway. That means that there may be strike action by the firefighters.

Last thought - when the media is hounding and vilifying the Fire Service, let us all remember who supported it in this debate.

Mr Ervine, will you clarify whether amendment No 1 is moved or not moved?

The amendment is not moved.

By leave of the Assembly, amendment No 1 is not moved.

I thank Members for their comments. An obvious recurring theme has been that the job of a firefighter is unlike any other job in the country. Over the past thirty years they have had a job unlike those in any other fire service in the United Kingdom or the rest of the world.

If we are all saying that - and we seem to be - we should be asking ourselves whether firefighters are getting an adequate wage to reflect the risks that they take every day to ensure the survival of Members, their families and the people they represent. They are not. The Assembly has not agreed the wage that the firefighters should be paid, but Members have said that there should be flexibility in the wage negotiations. We should not be tied to £25,000 or £30,000. There should be flexibility to go upwards as well as downwards. There must be flexibility in the system to ensure that the firefighters get a maximum wage for the duties and the work that they do. That is why it is important that Members are on the same wavelength.

The Fire Service is one of the three backbone services in the Province. It contributes to the operation of a modern and progressive country, and that should be recognised. Members should be examining a wage that reflects that. Even after a 42-hour week, full-time firefighters are earning £100 less per week than the country's average earnings. That must be reflected on and changed. The Assembly must ensure that firefighters get the wage that they are looking for. They have not had a wage increase since 1978.

Strike action has been mentioned. We cannot walk away from that.

The motion is not only for the benefit of the firefighters; it is for their families as well. Some firefighters are on a wage that depends on their families receiving working families' tax credit. That applies to many firefighters, and it cannot be ignored. On the bar of equality, retained firefighters deserve a realistic wage - not in a couple of years when the Government decide to bring it in as an election gimmick to win votes, but now, when they need it.

The Prime Minister and John Prescott announced that there would be a review of salaries, but as the firefighters stated, they do not need a review - they need a pay rise. They do not need a review to tell them that they need more money, and that they need it immediately. We need that commitment to the firefighters. We need to see the money coming in rather than what we are seeing - the Government playing for time. There is a very real gap between firefighters' pay scales and pay scales in the private sector. As under a previous Labour Government, the Fire Brigade, nurses and police feel that their only option is industrial action.

All the Members who have spoken today mentioned the need for the wage increase. My Colleague for Strangford, Iris Robinson MP, mentioned it, as did Tom Hamilton, Ivan Davis and Alban Maginness. David Ervine spoke very clearly about the need for a wage increase, and industrial action is something that the firefighters really have to consider.

The demonstration in Belfast was attended by firefighters from across the United Kingdom. One statement that stood out in that rally was

If the firefighters needed a headline, I believe that is it. Members should try their best to ensure that they get a reasonable reward for a reasonable request. Let us not turn away from them in this time of need.

The jobs of the men and women of the Fire Service have changed greatly, and they are still the number one emergency service in many cases. As the firefighters have stated, they have stuck to an annual pay formula, which was agreed 25 years ago, and since then they have not asked for a pay increase. As the firefighters have not complained and have got on with the job in hand, they deserve the Assembly's support for their loyalty and their determination to keep the Fire Service going under the obvious manpower and funding shortages that have dogged them since the 1980s. We must support their action, and we must think about them.

How would Members feel if after 30 years of service, injury, dedication and laying their lives on the line they were taking home pay of £280 per week - think of that when you vote! I urge Members to support the motion. I know they will support it, and I believe that the Minister and her Department will fight hard for the firefighters.

Question, That amendment No 3 be made, put and agreed to.

Adjourned at 5.43 pm.