The Minister, as the authoriser of the new body's work programme, must demonstrate clearly that her Department will hold the body to account. That is important. I am pleased that the Bill will give powers to the authority to assess the quality of some unregulated services that are provided by trusts, such as fostering and adoption. The Committee wants service provision in those areas to be improved to ease pressure on the children's residential care sector. It is important that the statutory duty to deliver quality be applied equally to all services that are delivered by health and personal social services, whether they are provided by the statutory, voluntary or community sector.

The Bill does not set out a timetable for the regulation of services, which will undoubtedly depend on resources. The explanatory and financial memorandum indicates that the cost of running the new authority will lead to a net increase in expenditure of £2·8 million a year. Assumptions are made about the estimated income from the services to which regulation is extended. It is also pointed out that the level of fees has not been decided, and the minimum standards for the regulated services have not been developed. Extensive consultation on those matters is needed because they will directly impact on the minimum standards for healthcare providers such as nursing homes.

The Committee will focus its attention on the funding arrangements that the Department puts in place to support the Bill's provisions. Those arrangements must ensure that the worthy aims of the legislation translate into genuine action to promote the quality of health and social care services, and that those aims do not founder because the necessary resources have not been committed. That is important. We do not want to be in a position in which, although proper minimum standards are set, staff cannot deliver them as a result of resource constraints. The Health Committee recently heard from Northern Ireland Public Service Alliance (NIPSA) officials of the deep frustration of social workers who cannot meet the quality standards set in respect of their statutory duties towards children. Although that is the case across Northern Ireland, it is especially so in the Foyle area, as we were recently informed by social workers. I trust that any resourcing gaps that are identified by the systems put in place to establish clear standards will be immediately addressed.

The introduction of a Bill that provides a framework to improve the quality of healthcare by establishing consistent minimum standards as well as establish a system of clinical and social care governance and improve monitoring and inspection, must be welcomed. My Committee Colleagues and I look forward to exploring the provisions of the Bill in detail at Committee Stage.

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. In the previous debate, almost every Member touched on accountability and value for money in all Departments. I agree 100% with that, but it must happen across the board. That is why I was surprised at the attitude of some Members today to yesterday's debate on the Rape Crisis and Sexual Abuse Centre. With that in mind, I welcome the Bill and agree with the Minister that it introduces a radical agenda. It aims to develop overall standards in the Health Service and secures local accountability for the delivery of services. Moreover, it will improve the monitoring and regulation of those services.

Like the Minister and the Chairperson of the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety, I welcome the proposal to establish a single health and social services regulation and improvements authority. Trusts and boards will have a statutory obligation towards equality, and, during the Bill's Committee Stage, I intend to ask officials exactly how that will be introduced and whether there will be sanctions against the chief executives of trusts that fail to meet that obligation. The Bill's impact will be beneficial for clients, service users and Health Service personnel. It should end the postcode lottery that can exist with quality care and that Members have referred to time and time again. The Bill will have a positive effect on protecting the rights of vulnerable people, whether in children's homes or in homes for the elderly.

I also welcome the legislation and look forward to its Committee Stage.

Alliance supports the Bill to establish an authority to oversee the delivery of services by health and personal social services, as well as by our independent and voluntary private sectors. The Bill will go far towards achieving the goal of securing local accountability for the delivery of services and will improve their monitoring and regulation.

The Bill closes a variety of loopholes. Previously, some health and social services were exempt, for one reason or another, from proper regulation. For example, wholly private GP call-out services will be included in the regulatory framework as will private primary-care practices.

The House will not be surprised to hear of my particular interest in the section of the Bill that deals with personal care. I endorse the inclusion of residential care homes in the proposed regulatory scheme. I am pleased that the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety considered the 1999 report of the Royal Commission on Long Term Care for the Elderly.

Personal care is defined in the Bill as:

Such assistance can include help with bathing, toileting, dressing and eating for people who cannot perform those tasks for themselves. The Bill recognises the distinction between the services provided in residential care homes and in nursing homes, and that is incorporated in the Bill.

Furthermore, I welcome the fact that domiciliary care agencies are to be included in the proposed regulatory schemes. Domiciliary care agencies provide vital services for people in their homes. Given the significance of personal care that is recognised in the Bill, and the services provided by nursing homes, why can the House not vote at an early date to provide personal care on the same terms as nursing care?

Nevertheless, I welcome the Bill. That such a breadth of health and social services is being amalgamated in a singular, regulatory framework will help everyone involved to deliver the best possible care and practice.

For the Alliance Party and for me, the recognition of personal care only serves to underline its significance in our society. If the Bill is passed, I shall continue to campaign for free personal care in the new regulatory scheme. The Alliance Party fully supports the Bill.

I thank Members for their attention to the detail of the Bill and their warm welcome to its provisions. Several Members who spoke referred to the added value that will result from the establishment of the new authority, which will provide an independent check of the quality of the services delivered by the health and personal social services (HPSS) and the independent sector.

The new authority will provide service users with greater safeguards on the services that they receive; reduce inequalities and improve equity by ensuring that services are delivered consistently across the North to meet the same minimum standards, regardless of where people live and whether services are delivered by the HPSS or the independent sector; and ensure that systems are in place to address poor performance. Therefore, it will also help to reduce the clinical negligence bill, which is an important factor for Members.

The new authority will mean that, for the first time, the quality of services provided by HPSS will be independently monitored against agreed minimum quality standards. To ensure that effective clinical and social care governance arrangements are in place, the new authority will regulate more of the services delivered to children and vulnerable adults, including some that are provided by HPSS.

Providers will not be able to register those services that are to be regulated unless they meet minimum standards, and failure to register will mean that providers may not legally continue to provide those services. The new authority will also review the quality of, and access to, services across the North.

Between 1991 and 2001, £55 million was paid in compensation for clinical negligence. It is to be hoped that the work of the new authority will reduce that amount. Its work will also ensure that people have the assurance of minimum standards against which all services will be judged.

Several Members referred to the Regulations. I agree that further work will arise, and I look forward to hearing the points that Colleagues raise during Committee Stage. It is to be hoped that I shall be able to provide further assurance then. Once the Bill's principal Regulations have been drafted, we shall consult on them before they are laid before the House.

I hope that I have dealt with Members' main points. As I said, I shall try to deal in writing with any points that I have not covered. I shall ask officials to look at the record, and I look forward to working with the Committee on the Bill.

TOP

Regional Chamber of the Congress of Regional
and Local Authorities of Europe: MLA Appointment

Mr Ford:

I beg to move

The Congress of Regional and Local Authorities of Europe is one of those bodies that rejoices in having an unpronounceable acronym. It was established in 1994 by the Council of Europe - not by the European Union. As a result, it represents 41 countries, which range from Portugal to the Russian Federation and from Cyprus to Iceland. It is significantly larger than the European Union, with which the Assembly deals more often.

Two chambers represent regional and local authorities. There are 291 full members, 18 of whom come from the UK. Of those 18, one Member of the Scottish Parliament, one Member of the National Assembly for Wales, and one Member of our Assembly sit in the chamber of regions.

The congress advises the Committee of Ministers and the parliamentary assembly at the Council of Europe, and provides a forum in which the experience of members of local and regional authorities across the continent is pooled. In doing so, it organises conferences and prepares reports on local democracy, especially that which is developing in central and eastern Europe. The congress also monitors the European Charter of Local Self-Government, to which the UK signed up in 1998. The Assembly has some catching up to do in terms of the powers and responsibilities of local government.

I have already said that one MLA sits as a full member in the chamber of regions. Cllr Jim Dillon of Lisburn City Council represents district councillors from Northern Ireland in the chamber of local authorities.

I have pleasure in proposing Mr Seán Neeson as the Assembly's nominee to sit in the chamber of regions. He has had a keen interest in European matters, which dates at least from when he was elected to the previous Assembly in 1982. Before devolution, he regularly attended meetings of the EU Committee of the Regions as a representative of Northern Ireland. He has the ability to represent the range of opinions that are in the Assembly.

I am grateful to David Trimble and Mark Durkan for supporting the concept that this nomination should go to a member of a party that is not in the Executive. I am unsure whether they acted in their capacities as the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, or merely as party leaders, but I welcome the support of the Ulster Unionist Party and the SDLP. As well as taking party considerations into account, Mr Trimble and Mr Durkan also readily agreed to my suggestion that Mr Neeson would be an excellent choice personally.

I frequently criticise the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, which is my function as an Opposition Member. However, it is appropriate that I should generously praise the Ulster Unionist Party and the SDLP for their support.

Is the Member apologising to them?

No. I am happy to accept anybody's support when they show some grace, but that is not always forthcoming.

As for the amendment, it is for Members to choose how they view the two candidates. It is certainly not my position to criticise Edwin Poots. However, I was slightly surprised when I read the amendment, specifically because Mr Poots was described as

I accept that that Committee has a remit to shadow OFMDFM in all aspects of its work, including European matters, but that remit overwhelmingly refers to European Union matters, not wider European issues.

That is rubbish.

Mr Paisley clearly wants to talk about waste, but we shall wait to hear what he says later on.

It should not be assumed that the Chairperson of the Committee of the Centre should be automatically proposed as the Assembly's nominee on a matter that concerns the Council of Europe, as opposed to the European Union.

Mr Poots is a member of the same city council as Mr Dillon, who sits as a representative of local authorities, and whom I mentioned earlier. Although the relationship between Mr Poots and Mr Dillon appears to be fractious, they both belong to the Unionist family. To provide a more balanced representation for Northern Ireland, and taking into account Mr Neeson's personal qualities, it is appropriate that he should represent the Assembly in the congress. I have pleasure in proposing Mr Neeson as the Assembly's nominee.

You were a Unionist for a while too, David.

Not for long.

I beg to move the following amendment: In line 1, delete "Seán Neeson MLA" and insert

Edwin Poots had hoped to be in the Chamber for today's debate, but he is chairing the subcommittee of the Committee of the Centre's EU inquiry. He will endeavour to join us at some point during the debate. In chairing that subcommittee, Mr Poots has the confidence of the House. It is nonsense to say that neither the House nor the Committee of the Centre has any interest in a widening Europe, and I shall put that argument to rest. The European Union is widening and it is essential that Northern Ireland, as part of a member state of the European Union, play its role and contribute to that debate.

I agree with Mr Ford's analysis of the history of the Congress of Regional and Local Authorities of Europe. However, it would be wrong to accept that the Committee of the Centre has no interest in a widening Europe. It does have an interest in that important issue, and the Assembly must continue to play its role.

My party leader has received the largest share of the European election vote in Northern Ireland not once, not twice, but on five occasions. In 1999, 192,762 people put the DUP and its leader first in the European election, because they recognised that the DUP's voice was essential to represent Northern Ireland authentically in Europe.

My party's voice must also be heard in the appointment of the Assembly's nominee to the regional chamber of the Congress of Regional and Local Authorities of Europe, and it would be wrong to set it aside in this matter. The DUP was kept off the Committee of the Regions, on which the Alliance Party had a member. The Northern Ireland representation on that committee was woeful and disappointing, and the voice of Northern Ireland was not properly heard. It is our hope that that situation will not be repeated in such an important body as this.

Both the SDLP and the UUP already have representation in the regional chamber of the Congress of Regional and Local Authorities of Europe through council. Given the support that my party enjoys on European issues in the Province, it must be represented. It would be wrong to put a party into that body that would be boxing above its weight.

I do not want to participate in a slanging match or a history lesson about the Alliance Party's stand on European issues. However, in the European election in 1999, the people of Northern Ireland gave the Alliance Party 2% of the vote, because its voice was not authentic on European issues and was unrepresentative. Mr Neeson was the candidate who received that 2% vote. We would be doing the House a disservice if we ignored what the people of this country said only a few years ago on that issue.

Our nominee, Mr Edwin Poots, has been a local councillor for the past six years. He has distinguished himself as the Chairperson of the Committee of the Centre, an appointment that was supported by the House. He led the Committee in its most recent European report, which demonstrated an in-depth knowledge of European matters in the context of the European community and on the issue of a broadening Europe. It is essential that the person appointed has such experience and knowledge, and, as I said, he has led that Committee on European matters. That report received the endorsement of the House, and it follows that the person best placed to take on this role is the Chairperson of the Committee of the Centre, which has a brief to consider European issues.

Edwin Poots is young, and it would send out the right message to appoint a young person, irrespective of party background, to represent a young and dynamic Ulster. It would be wrong to overlook that important point, because Northern Ireland has one of the youngest populations in Europe. Too many people would dismiss that, but it is one of our strong points.

It gives me pleasure to support the amendment. I hope that Members will consider the political and non-political arguments and will appoint the candidate who is capable, has the required knowledge and expertise, and has had the Assembly's support when dealing with European issues. If that happens, this body will be able to genuinely represent people's wishes and concerns.

I spoke to the SDLP and Ulster Unionist Party Whips, and it was made clear that neither of the nominees had the official support of those parties. It seems that something was said to Mr Ford to indicate that Mr Neeson would be regarded as the unofficial nominee of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister. That is what was imparted this morning. The Whips said that the parties would not be voting on this, but they should vote, and they should vote for our amendment.

Members should not be left with the impression that Mr Neeson is the official nominee of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister. If he is, Members may wish to consider whether they want to support someone who may be in the pockets of the First and Deputy First Ministers because of that. That would not send out the right signal. Mr Poots, however, has the support of the Assembly because he has been Chairperson of the Committee with responsibility for European issues.

When I was listening to David Ford's eulogy, in which he spoke of the UUP's and SDLP's support for his nominee, I was minded to warn him of the exhibition that he made of himself when he became the back end of a horse for a day and produced the sort of political material that, in equine terms, the back end of a horse might produce. He was then totally shafted, because, having received some sort of a promise of a review, he got absolutely nothing. He displayed a degree of political judgement that would make one wonder.

David Ford's candidate was formerly the leader of the Alliance Party, and, curiously enough, was succeeded by Mr Ford, who is now attempting to hand out some sort of consolation prize. Mr Neeson, who we are about to suggest should represent us, displayed even more monumental political misjudgement than his new leader when he decided that the Alliance Party would withdraw its candidates from contesting certain constituencies, including North Down. I make no apologies, not so much for pointing out what happened to Bob McCartney, but for pointing out the dire consequences of that decision for Mr Neeson, whose position was rapidly usurped by his current benefactor.

Now we are required to support Mr Neeson. However, what support has he received from his own party? It failed to put him forward as a parliamentary candidate, despite his being party leader, and subsequently it gave him the bullet when it came to his continued occupancy of the august position of leader of a party that -

He still has a party.

He may have a party, but it seems to dissolve itself when elections approach. Mr Paisley Jnr has mentioned the debacle of his European representation in rather kinder terms than I would employ.

Let us look at who the Assembly is intending to send forth as its representative - a person who has not distinguished himself in his own party, who has been dismissed or discharged as being suitable for the party leadership, and who has not enjoyed the support of the rank and file of the people who voted in the European election. He is now being offered some sort of consolation prize as the party representative. If the Assembly wants to send forth as its plenipotentiary in these matters such an exhibit of political success, so be it. However, before it does so, Members should take stock of just what this candidate has offered in the past and what he now has to offer in what may be the autumn of his political career.

I support the motion and Mr Neeson's appointment. Mr Neeson is a decent, honourable man with a pro-European attitude. He would do the Assembly proud as its representative in Europe. Are we seriously to believe Mr McCartney and those from the DUP who suggest that we should send an anti-European to Europe to represent our interests? The DUP leader went there to destroy Europe. We want someone who can represent us in a more positive manner. Seán Neeson is the person for the job, and I will support him.

Is Mr O'Connor suggesting that the majority in the House is pro-Europe?

I suggest that the majority in the House would be happy to accept all the money, jobs and benefits that come from Europe.

I suspect that all the useful things that need to be said have already been said. However, some of Mr Ford's remarks require comment.

It is ironic that the Alliance Party has made a nomination, bearing in mind some of the comments of my Colleague Ian Paisley Jnr. It must be remembered that when Mr Neeson - who, by definition, is a decent individual - submitted himself to the electorate, he was able to achieve only around 2% of the popular vote. I am sure that he has reflected on that, and I am surprised that he has let his name go forward in the light of his performance in the European election.

For 20 years or more, my party has consistently topped the poll in European elections. Would it not be right and proper for that to be reflected in the Assembly's nomination?

Mr Ford said that it would be verging on a tragedy if two Unionists, namely, the one -

It was not I.

Mr Ford inferred it. He said that Mr Jim Dillon from Lisburn City Council was one of the nominees, and that there would be another nominee from that council. Mr Poots would not be nominated as a member of Lisburn City Council; he would be going forward as the nominee of the Assembly. Mr Ford found it - [Interruption].

Does the Member not think that it would be more appropriate if the nominee were pro-European rather than anti-European? Or, perhaps I am wrong in that it is not from an anti-European stance that the DUP is making its nomination.

I hear what the Member says. However, she is an intelligent lady and she has been watching the results. She knows who has topped the poll consistently. The leader of my party has taken a stance on Europe, and we should not try to walk past what the people say. Ms Morrice may want to do that in the Women's Coalition, and that may be why it secured such a mammoth vote. However, what Ms Morrice is trying to say goes past me; I do not accept her point. It would be a total irony if Mr Poots were not the nominee of the Assembly.

Mr Neeson is a member of a party that is decreasing by the day, and, as Mr McCartney said, under his leadership it decreased even more - and that was because of him. It is imperative that Mr Poots be the nominee. After all, Mr Ford became a Unionist when it was politically expedient to do so, and I am sure that Mr Neeson will be pro- or anti-Europe whenever it is politically expedient to be so.

I call Mr Kieran McCarthy to make his winding-up speech.

Wrong name, Mr Deputy Speaker.

I call Mr David Ford.

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.

It does not take too long to respond to the positive comments in this debate, and I thank Danny O'Connor for making nearly all of them. It is bizarre that all the examples cited by DUP Members about Europe dealt with the European Parliament, which was precisely the point that I made earlier. This motion relates to the Council of Europe and not to the European Union.

When the DUP had a party member on the Committee of the Regions in the European Union, he managed to attend about one meeting in four. We could all indulge in petty sniping.

Will the Member give way?

No. I sat and listened to the Member's rubbish earlier - [Interruption].

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. When a matter of factual inaccuracy is stated, even in a winding-up speech, the Member should, in all conscience, give way so that the accurate position can be given on the Floor of the Assembly.

It is entirely up to the Member whether he will give way.

I will bow to the former Minister's advice.

The Member should be aware that the DUP's nominee at that time was an alternate member who was never entitled to go to any of those meetings. When the person from the Benches over there who was supposed to attend meetings did not go, he did not inform the DUP's nominee of his right to go, so he was not entitled to do so. That should never be allowed to happen again.

I accept that I failed to use the word "alternates", and I apologise for that. It was certainly my understanding at that time that, rather than Mr Paisley's pointing the finger in this direction, the DUP member was an alternate to an Ulster Unionist, and the Alliance member was an alternate to an SDLP member. Mr Neeson, as the Alliance alternate, attended at least as many meetings as either of the full members. I cannot understand why other members did not speak to their alternates on those occasions.

The debate started off with some moderately sensible comments but degenerated into petty sniping from the Benches on my left. I applaud Seán Neeson's courage in stating the case for Europe, and, when he has had the opportunity, in playing a practical part at European level, principally in European Union institutions. He has shown that he can stand up for what is right for Northern Ireland, and he deserves the confidence of the Assembly to represent us.

Question put, That the amendment be made.

The Assembly divided: Ayes 22; Noes 28.

The Assembly divided: Ayes 28; Noes 21.

TOP

Credit Card Abuse

I beg to move

I tabled this motion because, as Chairperson of the Audit Committee and a member of the Public Accounts Committee, I am concerned that the practice of issuing credit cards in the public sector is becoming a threat to the normal financial controls that must operate when taxpayers' money is being spent. The threat to financial controls leading to misuse and abuse of credit cards is at two levels. First, there is evidence, which I shall deal with later, that credit cards are being used to subvert accountability to the Assembly for the spending of public money. That is happening because credit cards can be used to circumvent the provision of financial details in invoices and receipts, which are normally used to verify the integrity of transactions.

Secondly, it is also clear that the credit cards are particularly open to abuse in the area of travel and hospitality expenses, which are notoriously difficult to control, even in the best of systems. When there is extensive use of credit cards, there is a correspondingly significant increase in the risk of impropriety. It is important for the Assembly to highlight that problem at as early a stage as possible and to challenge Departments to provide us with assurances that they will tackle it vigorously before more harm is done to the public's perception of financial integrity in the public sector.

To gain some idea of the usage of such cards, I have submitted written questions to all Departments and the Assembly to seek details of the number of cards issued and the expenditure incurred on them during 2001-02. Some very interesting statistics emerged from my enquiries, many of which raised more questions than answers. For example, throughout the public sector, 201 credit cards have been issued, with expenditure of more than £1·5 million having been incurred on them. In other words, approximately £7,500 was spent on each card. The Department of Agriculture and Rural Development has incurred the most on its cards - almost one third of the total credit card expenditure. In contrast, some of the larger Departments have no expenditure and have not even issued any credit cards.

One surprising finding of the exercise was that the Assembly had issued more cards than any other body. In 2001-02, it had 45 cards in use, which was more than all the main Departments put together. It has also spent vastly more on credit cards than any other Department, excluding the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development - some £230,000. I highlight that because, as everyone in the House will agree, we must be absolutely sure that, when we exercise our scrutiny role over the Civil Service Departments, our own practices and procedures must be beyond reproach and fully transparent. I recognise that, if properly controlled, there are benefits from the use of credit cards. That is worth repeating. Credit cards can have benefits, if they are properly controlled.

The Government Purchasing Agency operates a card system for Departments that is intended to reduce the cost of purchasing transactions. That is eminently sensible, as the scheme is firmly underpinned with careful guidance on how and when the cards can be used, and I fully support that. It is not my intention to try to turn the clock back and stop the use of credit cards; my concern is that they must be properly controlled. Credit cards are open to abuse, therefore the operation of those controls must be subject to careful safeguards and checks. At present, the problem does not receive sufficient priority from some Departments.

Let us review the evidence to date. The first time the abuse of credit cards came to my attention was during the Public Accounts Committee's review of the Fire Authority. During the evidence session, the Committee heard that a Fire Authority official had used the departmental credit card to cover travel costs incurred by a member of his family - he used the card for personal purposes. To compound the error, the official subsequently forgot to pay the amount due, until it was drawn to his attention. That incident drew my attention to the potential pitfalls of using credit cards.

The next time that I came across misuse of credit cards was during the Public Accounts Committee's review of the Northern Ireland Tourist Board. Once more, there was evidence that an official in New York was using a card for personal purposes. However, I shall not bore Members with the details, as the Committee will report on the matter later in the session.

The latest case of credit card misuse is in the "Into the West" project. The Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment is carrying out a review of the matter and will produce a report soon. However, such are the alleged abuses in the scheme that they have already reached the newspaper columns. I shall not comment any further on those cases because the allegations have yet to be formally reported. The Public Accounts Committee will undoubtedly consider any such report.

However, common themes emerge from each of the cases to which I have referred: the use of credit cards for personal purchases; poor controls in the monitoring of credit card expenditure; and poor backing papers in support of payments.

One of the strengths of the Northern Ireland system is that the average man in the street has confidence in the integrity of public administration - I cannot emphasise that enough. That confidence must not be taken for granted. It is a fragile plant that could wither in the face of repeated failures of financial control and impropriety. Therefore I call on the Minister of Finance and Personnel to give the problem the highest priority before it does more extensive damage to the credibility of our beloved institutions. I would not be surprised to be told by the Minister that a great deal of work is already under way.

I call the Deputy Chairperson of the Committee for Finance and Personnel, Mr Conor Murphy.

I welcome today's debate. It is interesting that we are back to debating financial probity and accountability as, earlier today, the Audit and Accountability Bill was given its Second Stage. It appears that Members are back on track with such matters, as measures to ensure that financial probity, accountability and transparency were described as technical distractions yesterday, when we wanted money thrown at projects without any such safeguards.

I support Mr Dallat's motion, and I echo his sentiments that credit cards when used in the right circumstances can be beneficial. The Public Accounts Committee has already raised the issue, and its concerns are well documented.

During the Public Accounts Committee's evidence session with the Northern Ireland Tourist Board on 30 May, the Chairperson stated:

Although I was not a member of the Committee at that time, I share those concerns. However, the problem is not unique to us. The trend towards increased use of credit cards is happening everywhere. There have been cases in Britain, which have been dealt with by the Public Accounts Committee at Westminster, in which credit card misuse has featured.

What is interesting about those cases, and cases that have been dealt with locally, is that credit card misuse is almost always associated with other major problems of impropriety - lack of financial control or poor standards of administration. It is generally a symptom of more serious administrative malaise, which is why it is always important that it be fully investigated and vigorously tackled.

The Public Accounts Committee has asked the Comptroller and Auditor General to be especially vigilant in examining credit card expenditure in his audits of all public bodies in the North. I am glad to report that he has undertaken to do that, which is reassuring. However, it is not enough, as audit - by its very nature - is retrospective. That is why the real burden of dealing with the issue falls on those who have responsibility for financial control in the day-to-day operations of Departments and their subsidiary bodies. That applies especially to the Department of Finance and Personnel, which, I am sure, shares the Public Accounts Committee's concerns.

In the course of its work, the Public Accounts Committee requested the Department of Finance and Personnel to issue further guidance on the control of credit cards. I would like to hear an announcement from the Minister that adequately addresses the Committee's concerns.

TOP

I apologise to the Member for calling him as Deputy Chairperson of the Committee for Finance and Personnel, when it is the Public Accounts Committee of which he has recently become Deputy Chairperson.

Like Mr Murphy, I commend Mr Dallat for tabling the motion. It comes at a particularly opportune time, as reports are being prepared that highlight what can only be referred to as "dubious practices". As elected representatives, Members have a duty to taxpayers. At Budget time, Members vote to allocate taxpayers' money to various Departments, to be spent on legitimate purposes agreed by the Assembly. It is, therefore, incumbent on Members to ensure that taxpayers' money is properly accounted for in all cases.

Earlier today, the Assembly agreed the Second Stage of the Audit and Accountability Bill, which will help to open up more accounts to the scrutiny of the Comptroller and Auditor General, enable him to better follow taxpayers' money, and demonstrate transparency and accountability. This debate highlights the potential abuse of credit cards. Today, therefore, the Assembly is sending out a strong message that abuse of taxpayers' money will not be tolerated. Indeed, zero tolerance will be the benchmark.

Credit cards are, undoubtedly, a convenient and less painful way of spending money - even one's own money. However, a piece of plastic can make some people feel like millionaires. They can be tempted to dispense largesse as if there is no tomorrow, with the foolish belief that the end of the month is merely a mirage.

As guardians of the public purse, the Assembly must make certain that meaningful controls are in place to ensure, as far as possible, that abuse or careless expenditure cannot take place. It is equally important, should careless or inappropriate expenditure take place, to take strong action against any transgression. Those who have credit cards issued to them by Departments, or by the Assembly, need to remember that it is not their money. They should therefore think at least twice before using such a card. They must be in no doubt that they will be held accountable for its use and, certainly, for any abuse.

Regrettably, my experience on the Public Accounts Committee has shown me that, at times, a distinct lack of control seems to exist in the minds not only of those who have use of a card, but, more alarmingly, in the minds of those who have a financial control function. At times, they appear to have been remiss in exercising control and authority. A crazy situation arose in the Public Accounts Committee where attempts were made to convince the Committee that expenditure on a certain credit card was totally justified even though thousands of pounds worth of receipts were missing.

A credit card can fuel a bad attitude towards taxpayers' money, and we need to change that. We must put the brakes on and rein in the big spenders by ensuring that proper controls are in place. A duty of care exists not only on those who have a credit card, but on those who issue them. They too are accountable, and they must realise that.

Credit cards can be and, at times, are a temptation. Those entrusted with them should learn the lesson from the Lord's Prayer:

They should be assured that they will never be delivered from having to account for their expenditure.

I regret that the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment is not in the Chamber. Yesterday, I asked a pretty innocuous question about credit card use for hospitality in New York. I want to make it abundantly clear to all Members that the reason so many questions have been asked of the Northern Ireland Tourist Board (NITB) is, unequivocally, the reluctance of the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment to answer fully questions posed by the Public Accounts Committee.

There is a lesson therein. When an accounting officer appears before the Public Accounts Committee, he has a duty to answer questions clearly and unequivocally, and to get directly to the point. There must be no attempt to avoid the issue, because that leads to many questions. That is why many questions have been asked about credit cards, and of the NITB in particular.

Mr McClarty raised the cost of such questions. The cost of those questions pales into total and absolute insignificance when compared to the damage the public's confidence suffers when they realise that Departments have failed to exercise control over how taxpayers' money is spent.

Let us examine some of the Public Accounts Committee's reports. The 'Report on Internal Fraud in the Local Enterprise Development Unit' uncovered £200,000 of fraud. The 'Report on the Brucellosis Outbreak' at the Agricultural Research Institute found that more than £1 million had been wasted. A report on the community regeneration schemes has found some £8 million of loans. In the 'Report on The Rural Development Programme', the sum of money was some £50 million. The common thread that runs through those situations was a lack of control. The motion is about trying to impress "control" as the watchword and about emphasising that there is no moving away from the need to follow clear guidance and controls.

I welcome the Minister's comment yesterday that credit cards

The core issue, as the Minister said, is to ensure that the people who use credit cards are accountable.

Given that the Tourist Board did not even know that its New York manager was using the card and that the Minister's Department did not know whether instructions to stop using it had been issued or whether there had merely been discussion on the matter, I fail to understand how Sir Reg Empey can be satisfied that proper procedures were in place and that the manager was accountable. Control, control, control will lead to accountability. As elected representatives, we should settle for nothing less. I know and trust that the Minister will treat the issue with the importance that it deserves, and will introduce the necessary controls on the use of credit cards and the spending of public money.

TOP

<< Prev / Next >>