Order.

My former Department - the Department of the Environment - has a responsible role to play in many ways. It must ensure that it fulfils European demands; otherwise infraction proceedings will be actioned. The Department must be given the resources to fulfil that important role.

Another of the Department's many important roles is road safety, in which I took a great interest when in the Department. We must all play a part in reducing the carnage on the roads. Some people appear to be overcome by madness when they get behind the wheel of a motor vehicle; there must be no leniency for careless drivers. The Department for Regional Development has a massive roads' problem to contend with, not least the vital need for a bypass in my home town of Enniskillen. The Minister must give the go-ahead for a bypass or Enniskillen will be choked with traffic. This projects Enniskillen as a successful growth area and the gateway to Northern Ireland from the west of Ireland. The Irvinestown Road/Chanterhill link with the Tempo Road is also a must to ease traffic at the east end of the town.

In conclusion, the test of our progress and that of the Programme for Government is not whether we add to the abundance of those who have so much, but whether we provide enough for those who have so little. Perhaps I have spoken too long, and I am thinking of Coughlin's law - "Don't talk unless you can improve the silence." I commend the intent of the Programme for Government.

I will make a few comments as Chairperson of the Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure, and, if I have time, I may make some comments of my own.

The Committee is pleased that, once again, the draft Programme for Government recognises the significant contribution that the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure can make to each of the Executive priorities. Although it is one of the smallest spending Departments, the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure is involved in supporting actions in each of those priorities. In "Growing as a Community", the Committee strongly supports the four actions proposed for the Department and will try to implement them through developing a cultural diversity policy framework and timetable; the implementation of the soccer strategy for the development of local football from grass roots to senior and international level; the development of an archives policy to ensure that our archival heritage is relevant and accessible to the widest possible audience; agreeing an implementation plan for the development of heritage at the Titanic Quarter; and the development of a strategy that will optimise the use of resources in the museums and heritage sector.

This is how the Committee will attempt to support the Department in delivering those priorities. However, these plans and strategies will ultimately require resources for their implementation. Although the soccer strategy implementation features in the draft Budget, the Committee hopes that future allocations will take account of the positive effect that the others can bring to tackling divisions in our society and to developing a greater understanding and respect for our culture, history and heritage. The Executive's priority "Working for a Healthier People" has obvious implications for the Department and for the Sports Council in promoting the benefits of sport and physical activity. In this regard, the Committee is particularly pleased to see the recognition that has been given in the draft document to next year's Special Olympics world summer games.

In "Investing in Education and Skills", the Committee notes that the sub-priorities continue to recognise the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure's broad partnership role in promoting a culture of tolerance, developing creative potential and providing lifelong learning opportunities. We welcome particularly the proposal to develop a learning strategy to draw together a diverse group of service providers with the aim of pooling resources and exchanging ideas in ways that will allow us to make the most of all our information and of our cultural, educational and sporting resources in promoting the concept of lifelong learning.

The Committee is also glad that the draft Programme for Government makes a commitment to the provision of three new electronic library facilities, which will allow our public service libraries to provide better access to electronic information services. The Committee is agreed that if the draft Programme for Government sets out a commitment to the development of electronic access to archives, libraries and museums, the draft Budget proposals must ensure that these valuable resources do not continue to suffer from the effects of pre-devolution cuts and years of underfunding.

It is interesting to note that the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure has no less than four actions under the Executive priority of "Securing a Competitive Economy". The Committee looks forward to the implementation of the interdepartmental action plan for the development of the creative industries sector under sub-priority 3.

The Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure also has an important role to play in increasing Northern Ireland's attractiveness to visitors. The Committee welcomes the recognition now given to the activities of the Northern Ireland Events Company by sub-priority 4. Members may have noted the report in yesterday's 'Irish Times' about the Republic's initiative in showcasing Ireland as a golfing destination. Last week's World Golf Championship at Mount Juliet was an unqualified success with regard to visitor numbers and worldwide television coverage. It is virtually certain that the event will return there in 2004. It is worth noting that Bord Fáilte contributed one million euros to the event on behalf of the Government's international sports tourism initiative. Northern Ireland has a long way to go in this area. The Committee is pleased to note that sub-priority 7 reflects the recommendations made in its report on inland fisheries with regard to the need to conserve our wild salmon stocks.

The Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure has also an important contribution to make to another priority, "Developing Relations - North/South, East/West and Internationally". The Committee hopes that the support indicated under sub-priority 7 for Imagine Belfast's bid for the European Capital of Culture 2008 will be reflected in future resource allocations.

The Committee looks forward to discussing the specifics of the draft Programme for Government with the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure over the coming weeks and hopes to be in a position to give its full support to the varied and important work that his Department carries out.

I want to make one or two personal comments. Members have drawn attention to the uncertainty that may arise over the Assembly's future. People have expressed concerns, and we can all recognise those. However, as Billy Hutchinson stated, if we do not continue to work, to chip away at the problems and map out the route for progress, we will be failing as public representatives. People should look at the broader picture. It is worth noting the low level of unemployment in Northern Ireland over the past four years - among the lowest ever in any generation. We should also consider the high number of business starts in Northern Ireland over the period. We should consider the confidence that the Assembly's existence has engendered in the community and the faith that the people have put in it.

We should not perpetually snipe, as some people have done for the past four years, without making a contribution. Having just reported as Chairperson of a Committee and knowing the work that people put into Committee attendance, it is laughable to hear someone who never contributes to any Committee work snipe at the work we are trying to do in the Programme for Government. Unfortunately, he is not here to hear me, but I would have put that point to him gladly. He never contributes to any constructive approach -

I ask the Member to draw his remarks to a close.

We must adopt a positive approach, and the Programme for Government provides the opportunity to do so.

I will speak first as Chairperson of the Committee for the Environment and then, as other Members have done, as a constituency representative.

In November and December 2001 I highlighted to Members an important paragraph in the 2001 Programme for Government entitled "Promoting sustainable living". I pointed out that that programme's priorities and sub-priorities fell seriously short in reflecting the Executive's commitment to promoting sustainable living. I detailed several recommendations from the Committee for the Environment in an attempt to rectify that. Unfortunately, as with last year's Programme for Government, the document before us today fails to reflect many of those.

In paragraph 2.23 there is clear acknowledgement of the many substantial challenges that continue to face the Executive and the Assembly across the three dimensions of sustainable development - economic, social and environmental. It goes on to say that those challenges require action to be taken across all areas.

In paragraph 3.51, under the heading "Promoting sustainable living", the challenge is restated. The programme concludes that the environmental impact of all key policies must be considered in an

Fine words, but yet again I cannot find the necessary commitment to action to deliver that.

Some commitments to protect, promote and develop our natural and built environment in a sustainable way are given in sub-priority 7 of chapter 7. However, the Committee's suggestions for a more ambitious approach to the integration of environmental themes into economic policy have been largely ignored.

The environment should no longer be viewed as a constraint on economic activity. Instead, it should represent opportunities to support and develop new economic and job-creation activities. For example, the reference to renewable energy in paragraph 7.13 could have been widened to take account of economic development opportunities for new technology research, development and production, and export opportunities. We shall await the establishment and publication of targets for increasing the proportion of electricity generated from renewable sources in Northern Ireland.

Most of the cross-cutting initiatives in chapter 3 bear little relation to the wider vision of sustainable development. For example, the reinvestment and reform initiative should be pursued with sustainable development as a guiding principle for enhancing resource productivity. The Committee for the Environment continues to take a keen interest in the development of effective waste management plans to underpin the waste management strategy for Northern Ireland. We feel that there should be more urgency on that.

Paragraph 7.53 refers to

That is repeated from last year's Programme for Government. There is clearly a need to establish more concrete commitments to, for example, explore the research and development needs arising from the Northern Ireland waste management strategy. Those are just a few examples.

Chapter 7, "Securing a competitive economy", should include many more commitments to actions to mainstream and articulate sustainable development. Members will note from paragraph 7.45 that we still await a sustainable development strategy for Northern Ireland. I trust that when it arrives it will, in practical terms, take forward action

On behalf of the Committee for the Environment, I ask the Ministers to respond to those points and revisit the draft Programme for Government to include concrete, practical commitments to genuine action on sustainable development.

I shall make a few constituency-related remarks, because the Programme for Government contains issues that affect the daily lives of all our constituents. The health programme is of particular concern in Mid Ulster, where we have the longest waiting lists. There is chaos in the Health Service and a lack of initiative on the part of the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety. Under the Minister's proposals, the Mid-Ulster Hospital faces the prospect of being downgraded to a glorified health centre. When we look at the equality agenda, we should notice the inequality between Magherafelt and areas such as Downpatrick.

In the area of education, the draft Programme for Government says that it will focus on

That is fine verbiage, but what does it mean? I have invited many Members to see for themselves the situation in Magherafelt. The maintained sector is sitting in new multi-million pound premises, from one end of the town to the other. But in the same town, the controlled sector is sitting in conditions akin to shanty towns. In his own constituency, the Minister of Education has deliberately discriminated against the community that wants to educate its children in the controlled sector. There is no end to the amount of money that can be spent on the maintained and integrated sectors. The controlled sector has been left in abysmal conditions. The statement that we will give

is rubbish; it is without action.

There is discrimination in allocation. There are schools that could not even open their windows in the summer term. Now that they can get them open, there is so much draught that they cannot get them closed again.

The Member must bring his remarks to a close.

Many of those issues must be addressed. This draft Programme for Government will not bring action; it will limp on from crisis to crisis. It is about time that we allowed the electorate to speak.

Go raibh míle maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. It is bizarre to be discussing a draft Programme for Government when we are in yet another political crisis. That is evident when so few Members are present for the debate.

I wish to speak in particular on the objectives for employment and learning in the document. Levels of adult literacy and numeracy are still diabolical. Targets are scandalous, and real resources must be directed towards that issue. The Department for Employment and Learning's Objective 1 states that it wishes

Although economic development is an honourable aspiration, the difficulties for people who do not have adequate reading and writing skills, and who therefore suffer social exclusion, are far worse. If we are intent on targeting social need, we must address the issues of low educational attainment, low self-esteem and poor self-confidence. The inability of a parent to help a child with basic homework is like an open sore - it is a continuous source of pain and discomfort.

Student finance affects low-income families. Young people from areas with generational long-term unemployment cannot afford third-level education. Either they are unable to get access to higher and further education, or they leave college with huge debts. All Members know students who are working 30 or 40 hours a week to put themselves through college. At a time when their education is supposed to be most important, some young people are doing a full week's work. More university places for young people are required. Many young people are moving out of the Six Counties to get university places because there is a serious dearth of places here.

The unemployment differential has been well documented, but it continues to be brushed under the carpet when a Catholic is more likely to be unemployed than a Protestant in areas such as Strabane, west Belfast and Derry. In my constituency, Fermanagh and South Tyrone, many people have to travel long distances to work, and many are employed in border counties such as Leitrim and Cavan because there is not enough work in their own area. I am disappointed that the Executive did not make the unemployment differential one of their priorities.

Like others who have spoken, Sinn Féin members are concerned about health, education, housing, fuel poverty, the environment, the suffering of the agriculture and rural community and its many and varied needs, jobs, investment and infrastructure. Everything that each Minister has worked on to benefit everyone in the Six Counties and on the island is now at risk.

For the first time in my life we have direct accountability and local people addressing local problems through the North/South Ministerial Council, the implementation bodies and work being done by such bodies as Waterways Ireland, InterTradeIreland, the Special EU Programmes Body, the North/South Language Body and the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission: but we are on the brink of throwing it away. Sam Foster said how he enjoyed the North/South element of his ministerial duties, so why is his party leader intent on destroying that part of the Good Friday Agreement? He talked about the Health Minister's intention to put a new hospital in Enniskillen. Does Mr Foster not realise that a direct rule minister could close down every hospital outside Belfast and Derry and that there would be nothing he, I or anybody else could do about that? Does he believe that our constituents would be better off in another political vacuum? Our people need Members to work towards a better future for them, not to hanker after the past.

Like many other Members, I cannot understand how the First Minister can reconcile his actions with the needs of the people. Does he think that the achievements of the past few years should be poured down the drain? Does he think that the changes to policing, criminal justice and demilitarisation, although inadequate, are going to be reversed? Does he think that the equality agenda, the human rights agenda and the all-Ireland agenda, all of which Unionists have tried to dilute, destroy and delay, will not still be here when we get back to this point?

Does the First Minister think that by trying to re-write the Good Friday Agreement he will achieve what all Unionist politicians seem to want - a return to second-class citizenship for Nationalists and Unionist supremacy? If he thinks that, he is a more blinkered and intellectually challenged man than Sinn Féin took him for. David Trimble cannot and will not stop us achieving equal rights and the end of discrimination on this island. He, along with the rest of the begrudgers and naysayers, is on a direct route to political obscurity, and the sooner that the Unionist community can produce a leader who can lead, the better for all of us.

TOP

Order. I am beginning to wonder what the connection is between the Member's remarks and the draft Programme for Government. I ask the Member to keep to the subject.

The context is clear. The House is debating the draft Programme for Government, which will not be worth the paper it is written on if David Trimble achieves his objective of bringing down the Good Friday Agreement and the Assembly. The targets for achievement that the Executive are setting through the draft Programme for Government will be wiped out if David Trimble gets his way. Go raibh mile maith agat.

I welcome the debate on the draft Programme for Government. The guiding principle "making a difference" was the primary objective set three years ago, and that is still the challenge as the Executive seek to make devolved Government more relevant and beneficial to our communities. The people across our region want to see social and economic progress arising from the political structures working effectively here. Northern Ireland has a large public sector, which plays a major role in our regional economy. In fact, we have the largest public sector dependency of any region on these islands. The challenge for the Assembly, therefore, is to improve the economic performance of our regional economy to lessen our public sector dependency. However, our regional economy can only become more competitive and enjoy better growth and economic output if our public infrastructure for road and rail transport, water and sewerage provision, and energy supply can meet the needs of modern industry, businesses and households.

The accumulated public investment deficit in infrastructure is accepted generally to be a major bottleneck in restraining development across the rural sub-regions beyond the Belfast metropolitan area. The reinvestment and reform initiative pioneered by the Deputy First Minister, and announced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in May, provides an opportunity to tackle the big capital investment needs in roads, water and sewerage. That is good news, and it is hoped that it can be developed into real investment. The business community, particularly the small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), need continued support to make the region more economically sustainable in the future. Invest Northern Ireland must think beyond selective financial assistance packages to be more effective, innovative and helpful to would-be SME promoters.

The business community, including the manufacturing and tourism industries, need confidence in a stable, political environment to invest and grow, to create employment and contribute to the economic growth in our region. Unfortunately, recent political events, including the recoil of the Ulster Unionist Party from work in the North/South Ministerial Council, and the street violence of the past year, have caused great concern and anxiety in our business community. The Assembly and the other political institutions, including the North/South bodies, must work to maximum effect to build a better regional economy and society here.

The Programme for Government addresses some important elements at this juncture in the life of the Assembly. The Executive commitment to invest in transport and in a water and sewerage infrastructure over the next 10 years is welcome, and it is necessary to promote development across the region. I welcome the targeting of resources to help reshape our agriculture industry through the emerging vision for the future objectives. The farming industry needs help and commitment from Government to restructure and become more competitive and market driven. There is positive emphasis on tackling wider access to education and training so that young students or adults will have better opportunities to develop themselves with improved skills or qualifications to enhance their employment prospects. Efforts to increase investment in the student support package are desirable and progressive, as is the targeting of financial support to those students who are most in need.

Hospital provision is a major concern for many communities, particularly in my constituency of West Tyrone. Devolution must mean that all citizens in Northern Ireland have equal access to hospital-based medical and acute services. The issue of hospital provision and the current hospital acute services review is of particular concern to the people of Tyrone and Omagh - a population of almost 25,000. The people of my constituency want devolution to work. They do not want a devolved Health Minister to deliver a bombshell by leaving West Tyrone without a decent hospital. I earnestly hope that "Making a Difference" does not result in my constituency ending up without a viable and sustainable hospital in the future.

As Chairperson of the Education Committee, I am grateful for the opportunity to participate in this important debate. First, I would like to deal with the statements that have been made on political matters, in the speeches of Mr John Kelly and Ms Gildernew of Sinn Féin.

I reject wholeheartedly the criticisms levelled at David Trimble and the Ulster Unionist Party. I remind those Members that the institutions are in a state of confusion because -

Order.

I have had occasion to remind Members to return to the subject matter of the debate. It is only right that I should ask the Member not to refer to issues that are outside the specific subject matter of the Programme for Government.

I respect your authority, Madam Deputy Speaker. However, you allowed considerable licence to representatives from Sinn Féin to criticise severely the Ulster Unionist Party and the First Minister. It is grossly unfair that you are not prepared to allow those criticisms to be countered.

We are in this situation because of the clear failure of the Republican movement, in particular, to honour its obligations under the Belfast Agreement, while events take place in Colombia and Castlereagh and in the interface areas of Belfast. That is why the Ulster Unionist Council -

Order.

I gave the Member an opportunity to continue and he has suggested that the Chair was too lax and allowed Members to go beyond the scope of the debate. I have reminded him already that he is going beyond the scope of the debate also.

I will speak as Chairperson of the Education Committee. The Committee endorses the draft Programme for Government's recognition of the importance of investing in education and skills.

I welcome the draft Budget announced today, which endorses the commitments outlined in the programme. The Education Committee will wish to scrutinise the programme in detail and ensure that appropriate and challenging targets are set and that adequate funding is allocated to those key priorities.

I am pleased that investment in schools capital building is a priority. In his statement to the House yesterday, the First Minister highlighted that tackling the infrastructure deficit is not only about bricks and mortar; it is about the standard of education that our schools provide. I agree wholeheartedly with his comments.

The Education Committee appreciates the programme's recognition that the earliest years of learning are the most important. It has stressed consistently that investment in early-years learning is an investment in the future, which will result in long-term savings and reduced need for investment in expensive remedial measures. The Committee welcomes the commitment to begin implementing a new primary school curriculum, which will include a new approach to early-years education. My Committee is carrying out an inquiry into early-years learning, and its report to the Assembly will help to inform Members about the matter.

Special education must be a priority. Therefore, I am disappointed that the target date for the introduction of a special educational needs Bill for Northern Ireland has been revised. The Bill will not be introduced until some time in 2003 or 2004. That matter has been unresolved for too long, and it must be considered urgently.

The Committee's written response to the Executive Position Report stated that it expected to see targets for advancing the review of post-primary education and the inquiry into teachers' pay and conditions of service. I read the draft programme quickly, and it did not seem to address those priorities. These obvious gaps must be addressed in the final document.

I should like now to turn to numeracy and literacy, about which the members of the Committee remain anxious. Yesterday, Mr Durkan highlighted the Executive's commitment to taking action to ensure that our young people leave school with the highest possible standards of literacy and numeracy. Why has the promised launch of a revised literacy and numeracy strategy in schools by September 2002 been put back until September 2003? Why have the targets for numeracy and literacy for 11-year-olds and 14-year-olds in the Department of Education's draft public service agreement been lowered and the timescale for their achievement extended for two years, from 2004 until 2006?

The targets for achieving level 4 or beyond at Key Stage 2 assessment in English have been changed from 77% to 75%, and in maths from 80% to 77%. Both targets are now to be achieved by 2006 rather than 2004 and, unfortunately, there are other examples. Last year I pointed out that the numeracy and literacy targets had twice been revised downwards. The explanation I received was that information had shown that the targets would not be reached, and that they had, therefore, been revised to make them more realistic. I wonder what the explanation will be this time. I am sorry that the Minister of Education is not in his place. The lowering of targets does not fit with the commitment to tackling the problem that the Executive has outlined, and the Committee for Education will wish to examine the matter very carefully indeed.

There are some other issues that the Committee will wish to look at in more detail, but I should like to conclude by welcoming the recognition in the draft Programme for Government that education contributes to sustainable development. Like you, Madam Deputy Speaker, I took part in a youth parliament debate in the Senate Chamber at which I heard some very articulate students put forward compelling and persuasive arguments on the issue. I trust that political parties other than the Ulster Unionist Party will honour their obligations under the agreement, to ensure that this Programme for Government is implemented by the Administration.

Madam Deputy Speaker, I shall not test you as others have in relation to the scope of the debate, but I approach the question as a convinced devolutionist who believes that it is always better for those taking the decisions to be answerable to the people for whom they do so. Everyone knows my opposition to the current type of devolution, and we are always glad when new converts come round to our way of thinking. It seems that the closer we get to the election, the more converts we have to our cause. That is as far as I shall stretch you on that subject, Madam Deputy Speaker.

I say that I come as a devolutionist. When I moved into the Department, I saw what was effectively a shambles. The infrastructure deficit was enormous, and it was clear that there was a major backlog. I do not take it easily when people say that it is a failure of devolution. What then was the failure of direct rule before it? Many of the problems that we are having to address have been the problems of direct rule. When I moved into the Department, it was clear that there was no strategy to develop the important issues. Everything was moving on an ad-hoc basis, with a piecemeal approach to policies.

The first thing that we had to do, right across the board, was to set up strategies in every area of responsibility: the regional transportation strategy; the regional development strategy; the water strategy that is currently out for consultation. We have revised the harbours legislation and made progress with the railways. We did not deal only with the strategic guidance that the Department now has to see it into the future; we have started to cost the proposals necessary to take Northern Ireland forward. We went further, also looking to identify where the funds might come from.

Having gone through that exercise, I agree with much of the comment in the Chamber on the massive need for infrastructure investment in Northern Ireland. I am pleased that the draft Programme for Government acknowledges that need. Paragraph 3.7 states:

However, in his opening statement, the Deputy First Minister said that the draft Budget, which was also proposed today, supported the Programme for Government. I regret that the Budget announced by the Minister of Finance and Personnel fails to address our infrastructure needs. Roads and transport are one of the Executive's top three priorities, yet the meagre increase of 1·2% in the Department's budget for the next financial year falls short of what is required to reverse the underinvestment of the direct rule years. That below-inflation increase will damage the long-term competitiveness of the Province. When all other funding sources are taken into account, the increase of 4·3% falls well below the Department's average. It also falls short of the draft Programme for Government's requirement to upgrade our infrastructure.

The hope of money from the reinvestment and reform initiative in future will be cold comfort for desperately needed infrastructure across the Province. The plan of "jam tomorrow" fails to meet the urgent requirement of today's crumbling infrastructure, and it simply stores up problems for the future.

The already overmanned Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister received a 19% increase for one year in the draft Budget. If one adds the money that is not on mainstream funding, it amounts to an increase of over 50% over three years - the largest of any Government Department. That is for a Department that, in my view, shows no visible product. It is difficult not to come to the conclusion that the Executive's priorities are no longer health, education and transport, but bureaucracy, bureaucracy and more bureaucracy.

The draft Budget and the draft Programme for Government do not match. They fail to make a difference in Northern Ireland; they expose those who say one thing and do another. As they stand, the three-year spending plans fail Northern Ireland and will not withstand the outcome of an Assembly election. When Members make their decisions on the Programme for Government and on the Budget, they must remember that the Budget that they will be voting for is incapable of delivering the Programme for Government, for which they will also be voting. Members will have to live with the consequences of failing to invest in infrastructure while extending Government bureaucracy.

How can the Executive propose the draft Programme for Government while there are those in the Ulster Unionist Party who are opposed to change? After all, one half aims at bringing down the Assembly. Where are the strategic objectives to achieve equality, partnership, sustainability and prosperity when there are those in the Executive whose objectives are based on exclusion? David Trimble contradicts himself so much that it is about time he stopped dancing about and got down - [Interruption].

Order.

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Will you make a ruling on the subject matter of the Member's speech?

Thank you for reminding me, Mr Kennedy. I was about to ask you, Mr Murphy, to restrict yourself to the Programme for Government, which is today's debate.

Unfortunately, Madam Deputy Speaker, this is all part and parcel of the draft Programme for Government. If David Trimble gets his way, the Programme for Government will go out the window. It is gone, judging by what the Unionists did at the weekend.

Is there any point in debating the Programme for Government, if the First Minister is prepared to end it in January?

How can the Assembly square its commitment to ensuring the transfer of power from Westminster to our political institutions, which will make a real and positive difference to economic and social life, with the concerted campaign by Unionists to frustrate and delay change?

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Why do you give the Member undue licence?

Thank you, Mr Kennedy, for reminding me of my duty. Thank you, Mr Murphy, for making the clear connection between the weekend's events and the Programme for Government. However, Members' comments must relate to the Programme for Government. I appreciate that many Members mentioned the weekend's events during the debate; however, I have corrected Sinn Féin Members and those from the Ulster Unionist Benches who dwelt on the subject. Mr Murphy, please limit your comments to the Programme for Government, regardless of whether it will be around for much longer.

There is no going back to Unionist rule; Sinn Féin will not stand for that.

When will the allocation to the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure be finalised, and on what baselines will the targets be set? Will there be a target to increase activity in the creative sector? No imaginative response has been made to the need for increased support of the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure.

I welcome the shift of resources to focus on areas of greatest need and the development of a creative approach to government that puts people's needs at the core. There must be a partnership approach to government - between social partners, the community and local government.

In targeting social need, the Assembly must deal with poverty, from which some people continue to suffer. Poverty could be tackled effectively by providing proper housing in which children could have the best start in life and where they could grow up to be healthy. If the Executive live up to their commitments in the Good Friday Agreement, our reward will be a peaceful, fair and inclusive community for children to grow up in. Go raibh míle maith agat.

Some three years ago, the first Programme for Government was presented to the House. The passage of time has demonstrated clearly that the first programme was mainly aspirational: how many of its 256 priorities have been delivered? Because of its nature, I believed that the lives of the people of Northern Ireland would be changed only after several years. Unfortunately, I have been proved correct in that respect. Real differences will only happen further down the road.

Unfortunately, the full opportunities that were, and are, afforded by devolution and the deliverance of the full potential of the Good Friday Agreement have been missed because of the failure to bring about real change. The aspirational approach and the attempts to cover too many areas in a specific period have resulted in the butter being spread too thinly, with little benefit for the people of Northern Ireland.

Many reviews have been carried out - reviews into rating, accommodation, the Civil Service, public administration and procurement. Waste issues, usage of assets et cetera are now being considered, and that is all good. However, there has been a slippage of some eight months in the accommodation review and of about five months in the rating review. It is impossible to put a figure on the public administration review slippage because we do not yet know when it will yield results. As a consequence, the people of Northern Ireland question what has happened over the past three years and suggest that those years may well have been wasted.

I, my constituents, and those who support the Good Friday Agreement and devolution, welcome some of the achievements to date. We welcome the commitments, but we want them to be delivered on. We welcome free travel for the elderly, the start on the cancer centre, and the £100 a week towards the cost of nursing care. However, more should have been done in the past three years to improve efficiency, and thus provide the additional resources needed to make a real difference to the lives of the people of Northern Ireland. Three years on, what has been achieved? Our population is still in relatively poor health. Our death rates are higher than other regions in the United Kingdom. Our waiting lists are the longest in Europe; in particular, our waiting lists for inpatient treatment are longer than in any other region in the United Kingdom. That is an indictment of the Executive and those charged with making improvements.

The quality of the drinking water in Northern Ireland is still the lowest in the United Kingdom. Clean drinking water is one of life's necessities. Our sewerage system is crumbling and decrepit - in short, it stinks. The upshot is problems for the economy.

Most Members will have received letters from the Construction Employers Federation. I have received several letters from large construction firms in my constituency that are concerned about the delay created by the planning moratorium. Previous Programmes for Government contained a promise that the Minister of the Environment would reduce planning backlogs, and that they would be cleared by the end of 2002. A cynic would ask whether one way to get rid of planning backlogs is to introduce a moratorium and to stop granting planning permission. Meetings with the Construction Employers Federation et cetera have taken place, but I understand that decisions were supposed to have been made by the middle of this month. However, that has not been the case. Those who support devolution and who want progress and action can accuse the Executive of procrastinating and of not knowing whether they are coming or going. I use the opportunity presented by this debate to suggest that the Ministers involved solve the problem together so that, once again, construction and the economy can flow.

I have been critical of the Executive. The Executive are not being, and cannot be, blamed for all our faults and weaknesses. However, three years on, I insist that people have the right to ask what real changes have been made. People at least have the right to start seeing the light at the end of a very long tunnel.

I referred to the various reviews taking place, which are suffering a degree of slippage. Even in those reviews, opportunities to gain best benefit for Northern Ireland are lost. For example, we are currently involved in the rating review. There have been meetings and consultations throughout Northern Ireland on the necessary changes. For some reason or other, however, the Executive have failed abysmally to persuade Her Majesty's Government to permit the Assembly to have tax-varying powers. I am absolutely convinced - and a weight of evidence from the general public is building up - that a change from the iniquitous regional rate to a fair and equitable system of local income tax, based on the ability to pay, could raise the necessary resources and revenue much less painfully and much more efficiently. That could cut out some of the bureaucracy in the layer upon layer of reliefs in the rating system. It would be easier to collect and could produce the goods, but, for some reason, it appears that the Executive have set their face against a progressive tax and continue to insist on, and opt for, a variation of the -

I ask the Member to draw his remarks to a close. The time limit was eight minutes, and I have given a little leeway. You may conclude your remarks.

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. How time flies when one is in good company.

The conclusion lasts five minutes.

Order.

You have a few seconds, Mr Close.

I shall omit my comments on the necessity to get public administration right. That has been covered by other Members. One of the big challenges we face is contained in paragraphs 3.2 and 3.3 of our vision for the future in the Programme for Government, and I must pose just one question to the Executive. What exactly -

Order. The eight minutes are well and truly up and beyond that.

TOP

<< Prev / Next >>