6.

asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to give an update on the proposals for the creation of the strategic investment body.

(AQO 230/02)

Following the announcement of the reinvestment and reform initiative in May, we established a project board, on which all the parties in the Executive are represented, to advise us on the way forward on the development of the strategic investment board. During the summer the project board considered the detailed arrangements for the strategic investment board and how it should function.

At the Executive's meeting on 23 July, it was agreed that work should begin immediately to prepare the necessary legislation to establish the strategic investment board. The Strategic Investment and Regeneration of Sites Bill was introduced on 30 September and will have its Second Stage tomorrow. We hope to complete the Bill's passage through the Assembly and for it to receive Royal Assent by March 2003. There is confidence for you.

In the coming weeks the project board will undertake more detailed work to define how the board will carry out its functions and to identify the types of skills and expertise required to enable the board to operate successfully. It will also address other key issues, such as corporate governance and accountability.

I thank the Minister for his confidence. I hope that we will get it all done by the end of the week. I hope that we will have that situation. Will the Minister explain the role of the investment body in the likely public-private partnership (PPP) or private finance initiative (PFI) contracts?

The board will be there at a broad level to serve the Executive's strategic investment approach and centralise the expertise needed to manage the increased levels of capital investment that we are hoping to achieve using the reinvestment and reform initiative. It is hoped that by so doing we will reduce the amount of money that ends up being spent on consultants in our capital undertakings from one contract and project to another.

In providing that advice to the Executive, and in assisting the various Departments in their undertakings, the strategic investment board will be helping to form and advise on Executive views in relation to the use of PPPs where they are deemed to be appropriate as one part of that overall strategic investment portfolio. They are only one part of that, and it is to be a part that adds to the net investment that we are able to achieve, beyond what would be available to us under conventional procurement.

Given that we are having a review of public administration in an attempt to create a more efficient Government, why are the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister introducing a Bill that will create a strategic investment board at a cost of £3 million a year plus set-up costs, up to five development corporations costing between £750,000 and £900,000 a year, and a plethora of new civil servants to be added to the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister? Are they not satisfied with having more staff in their office than Bertie Ahern and Tony Blair have, and do they now also want to create an office with more staff than George Bush has?

The strategic investment board will be there to serve the investment programme of the Executive at large and to ensure that we will be able to improve and increase the capital expenditure that we are undertaking. We have to do that in dramatic ways.

Members will recall that they often criticise cases of underspend and delays involving capital projects. The idea of a strategic investment body is to cut through many of those problems by having expertise centralised and available in Government to support the work of the different Departments and the Executive, and also to reduce the undue reliance on outside consultants. Members often criticise the constant reliance of Departments on outside consultants and want us to do more in-house in a programmed way. That is exactly what the strategic investment body is about.

Consistency is a bit much to ask for, but Members may recall that some time ago all parties represented on the Committee for Finance and Personnel supported a report calling for a new central driver for capital expenditure. The type of case set out in the Committee for Finance and Personnel's very good report into public-private partnerships and private finance initiatives is exactly the one that we are answering with our proposals for this body.

TOP

7.

asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to make a statement on the Deputy First Minister's visit to the Sure Start project, Shankill Road, Belfast.

(AQO 261/02)

The Deputy First Minister visited the Shankill Sure Start project at the Alessie Centre on Belfast's Shankill Road on 17 September. That project operates from three early year family centres - the Alessie centre, the Hanna centre and the Martin centre, which are located in the greater Shankill area. Those centres provide high-quality settings for a range of activities covering play development, health and well-being, and parenting and education. The centres also host a range of drop-in facilities, parent and toddler groups, art and craft sections and one-to-one support services.

The Deputy First Minister was given a presentation on the work of the Shankill Sure Start project. He met with parents and users of the service and saw at first hand the impressive range of facilities, activities and services being delivered to children and families. Giving our children the best possible education, and encouraging people to learn and develop throughout their lives, has a fundamental place in the Programme for Government.

We recognise the longer-term benefits associated with early years education, and the Executive are providing additional support through the Sure Start programme, targeting children under four and their families in areas of need. Initiatives such as the Sure Start project on the Shankill Road help to promote a positive image of the area and demonstrate what can be achieved through communities and statutory agencies working together in partnership.

Does the First Minister recognise the immense value of such visits, particularly to the staff and the children? Will he consider making a comparable visit to a disadvantaged community in a Nationalist area of Belfast?

I take both of the Member's points. It is one of the great pleasures for the Deputy First Minister and me, and, indeed, other Ministers, that we can go and visit people delivering services at the sharp end and see what is happening. It is good for us, it is good for them, and it is good for the service. It is one of the pleasures of this business and helps to compensate for other aspects that are not always such a pleasure.

In relation to the Member's specific proposal, there is a certain parallel that if the Deputy First Minister goes to the Shankill, people say that I should go somewhere else. I shall look at that proposal sympathetically.

TOP

8.

asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to outline the effect of devolution on the overall allocation of financial resources to health.

(AQO 274/02)

From the outset, the Executive and the Minister for Finance and Personnel have identified health as one of our main priorities and continue to treat it as such. Since devolution, the Executive have agreed substantial additional resources year-on-year for health and personal social services. During the period 2000-01 to 2003-04, the health budget will have increased by £1·1 billion to over £3 billion, representing growth approaching 60% over the period, and an average growth of 12·8% over that period.

The draft budget announced on 24 September offers £300 million more for health than would be provided through the simple application of the Barnett formula based on changes in English health expenditures. The draft Budget proposals further provide year-on-year increases of 4% and 7·7% in 2004-05 and 2005-06. Health funding for those two years will be further increased by allocations from Executive programme funds and the reinvestment and reform initiative.

Has there has been any assessment of the impact of this money on the National Health Service?

Has it visibly reduced waiting lists? I separate waiting lists for a first appointment from bottlenecks for surgery. Have the bottlenecks or secondary waiting lists for surgery been cleared? If not, why not?

The number of people awaiting treatment is a huge concern, and the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety has confirmed that there will be an expansion in hospital capacity over the next one to two years. The reinvestment and reform initiative has already financed additional capacity that will amount to 100 beds; it is intended to provide additional elective surgery and there are also plans to improve cardiac and cardiology surgery.

There must also be increased investment in community and intermediate care to help to avoid, where possible, hospital admission, to provide for earlier discharge, and to deal with the sort of bottlenecks to which the Member refers.

That brings to an end the time for questions to the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister.

On a point of order, Mr Speaker.

I do not normally take points of order during Question Time.

Mr Speaker, will you tell the House if the business for tomorrow has been changed? Will the Business Committee tell Members what it is going to do with the motion?

Order. The Member knows that I do not take points of order during questions to the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, but I have already indicated through the usual channels that I will take a question at the end of Question Time. I assume that Dr Paisley's question is one that may well be asked, but I will take it at the end of Question Time.

TOP

Regional Development

1.

asked the Minister for Regional Development what immediate proposals he has to increase the number of people using public transport.

(AQO 263/02)

Mr Speaker, I commend the Business Committee for the decision that you will announce later.

Is the Minister indicating that the point of order might not actually be a question of acquiring information from the Speaker?

You got your chance and you blew it, Mr Speaker. The consultation proposal, 'A New Start for Public Transport in Northern Ireland', which I issued on 17 September, would see the Northern Ireland Transport Holding Company and its Translink bus and rail subsidiaries amalgamated into a new, dynamic, publicly owned operating company, Transport Northern Ireland. It would also establish an independent public transport regulatory body. Significantly, I am also proposing the progressive injection of private sector finance and expertise into the public transport market insofar as it makes sound commercial sense and is acceptable to the wider community. I am convinced that these proposals would lead to improved public transport provision.

I also propose to issue shortly a consultation paper on extensions to the concessionary fare scheme. If the Assembly is prepared to allocate the resources to enable me to introduce such extensions, I am confident that they will increase public transport usage as well as benefiting less-well-off members of society.

As for capital investment, Translink has 23 new trains on order, has completed work on the Bangor line relay, and will commence work on the Belfast to Whitehead relay this year. Translink is also continuing to upgrade its ageing bus fleet. With the assistance of 50% grant aid from the Department for Regional Development, Translink is expected to spend £5·4 million this year and £11·4 million next year buying about 130 new low-floor buses. These developments should make rail and bus travel more attractive.

Looking further ahead, the 10-year regional transportation strategy includes many measures to encourage greater use of public transport such as refurbishment of stations, improved passenger information systems, more park-and-ride facilities, more quality bus corridors, more town bus services and a rapid transit system for Belfast. However, the outcome for public transport will ultimately be determined in the budgetary process, and I trust that I can call for Mr Byrne's support in this regard.

Does the Minister agree that the number of journeys travelled on public transport declined last year by 2%, and that, therefore, a proactive approach must be taken by Northern Ireland Railways, Ulsterbus and Citybus to make public transport more attractive? Does he accept that the Department for Regional Development has a public responsibility to ensure the increasing use of public transport, including rural areas beyond the Belfast metropolitan area?

In spite of the statistics showing significantly increased use of public transport by senior citizens as a result of the free fares scheme, unfortunately there has been a 2% downturn in the number of passenger journeys on public transport. That is a disturbing trend, and it encouraged me to introduce the consultation document 'A New Start for Public Transport in Northern Ireland'.

Evidence elsewhere in the world shows that where private sector finance and expertise has been introduced into public transport, it has reversed that decline. It has also shown that where public transport is the responsibility of the public sector, the figures decline. That is one factor that we can use to turn the figures around and ensure greater usage.

The Member will know, coming from west Tyrone and also from his background on the Committee for Regional Development, that unless we can raise the standards of the product that we offer to the public, we will not encourage more members of the public to use public transport - hence the injection of Assembly funds into railways and new buses. That kind of good service with regular, dependable, comfortable buses and trains is more likely to encourage people to use public transport than anything else.

TOP

2.

asked the Minister for Regional Development what formula is used to assess the need for pedestrian crossings.

(AQO 241/02)

Roads Service receives many requests for the provision of controlled pedestrian crossings, whether pelican or zebra. Requests are assessed using a formula based on national guidelines to ensure a consistent and equitable approach. Consideration is given to sites if

where P is the number of pedestrians crossing the road per hour, and V is the number of vehicles per hour.

The purpose of the formula is to assess the degree of conflict between pedestrians wishing to cross a road and the number of vehicles using it. The formula acts as an initial sift. If the threshold is exceeded, the site is considered in more detail, and other factors are taken into account when making the decision. Those factors include vehicle speed, road geometry, accident history and proximity to shops, schools, community centres, hospitals, and so on.

This is an important matter and, therefore, I have asked the Roads Service officials to review the formula and the other factors taken into account to ensure that pedestrian crossings are provided where they will be of most benefit. In undertaking the review, my officials will consult the Committee for Regional Development.

I was going to take down the formula, but I got lost. I will get it in Hansard tomorrow.

The Minister will be aware of the demands from elderly people and parents of young children for crossings to ensure safe passage across busy main streets. In the circumstances, can the Minister promote a reduced formula, which would provide crossings and, thus, reduce the risk of injury or fatality?

I have asked my officials to report to me after the review. The existing formula - complex though it is - can be tweaked to allow more crossings. It simply involves changing the factor 0·5 in the formula. Nonetheless, there are requirements if we are to be able to fund additional pedestrian crossings. That is another factor that depends on budgetary issues.

What about saving a life?

Sometimes it does not save lives. That depends on the circumstances in the area. The more pedestrian crossings there are, the less regard cars pay to them, and especially to zebra crossings. Many factors must be taken into account. I am happy to allow my officials to speak to the Member, if he wants to submit views to the review. The Department will consult with the Committee for Regional Development to hear its views on the formula and any changes to it.

Will the Minister confirm that he intends to change the criteria along the lines that he discussed with elected representatives and community groups at a meeting in Ards and bring them into line with the needs of the people of Northern Ireland? When does he envisage consultation starting and finishing, so that the communities of Ballywalter, Greyabbey, Kircubbin, Millisle, Ballygowan and Comber can benefit from it?

The review is under way. I asked officials to carry it out, so, naturally, I assume that they have begun it. It would be unhelpful for me to make any assumptions about its outcome before I have heard what the Committee for Regional Development has to say or what the review establishes.

During the meeting in Ards, I was made aware of several factors, which can be just as important in judging the dangers as the numbers of pedestrians or vehicles. The Department wants to see if the formula can reflect more accurately the danger to people crossing a road, as opposed to the number of pedestrians or vehicles on it.

The Minister has answered my query in part. To take the issue of traffic calming beyond pedestrian crossings, I understand that he is looking objectively at the figures and formulae that seem to cause Mr McCarthy so much concern. I urge him to ensure that the review takes a more subjective approach to traffic-calming measures, because it can be difficult for rural communities to meet the indicative figures that the formulas require.

Leaving aside pedestrian crossings, traffic-calming measures are determined by a scoring system, which is based on several factors. I am concerned about moving away from objective criteria. If a Minister determines his own subjective criteria, people will question his decisions, and he will have no defence unless he operates according to objective criteria. For that reason I would far prefer to use objective criteria that adequately respond to the dangers that exist in an area rather than subjectively decide, according to the mood of the moment, the most appropriate point to have pedestrian crossings or traffic-calming measures.

TOP

3.

asked the Minister for Regional Development to give the proposed timescale for the construction of the new railway station at Lisburn.

(AQO 270/02)

Translink has plans for a new bus station at Lisburn in its corporate plan for 2002-03 to 2004-05, and it has already commissioned an economic appraisal on its construction, which is due to be completed by the end of the year. If the option to construct a new bus station is accepted by the board of the Northern Ireland Transport Holding Company and by my Department, the next step will be to put the proposal out to tender. The project can commence when that process is completed, and it is hoped that work will begin before the end of this financial year.

Will there be adequate provision for disabled access to the new station? Currently, people in a wheelchair and parents with prams have to cross the lines to reach the other side of Lisburn's railway station.

I am happy to confirm that, when I last spoke to Translink about disabled access, it made it very clear that it considered that a priority, not merely for stations which it is constructing but for rolling stock. When we have more details of the proposal, I shall be happy to sit down with the Member and the group with which she is associated to examine the proposal and see if she considers it as adequate as Translink no doubt would.

Can the Minister confirm that there are problems with the site proposed by Translink and that meetings have taken place between it and the local council? Are we set on the site which Translink currently wants, or is there a possibility of identifying other sites which may be closer to the railway station and more conducive to traffic flows in Lisburn city centre?

I am not aware of any problem with the site. I know that Lisburn City Council would prefer it to be somewhere else. However, the site identified by Translink is one to which it has legal access, and which is, therefore, its obvious choice. It is an operational matter that the council will no doubt wish to take up with Translink directly. However, a station in the middle of Lisburn can be a help to the city centre and should not be considered a nuisance by anyone.

TOP

4.

asked the Minister for Regional Development if he has taken steps with his Colleague, the Minister of the Environment, to have a storm drainage impact stage inserted into the planning process for new housing development.

(AQO 268/02)

The development planning process is a matter for the Department of the Environment. I am advised that, as part of that process, the Department of the Environment consults with the Rivers Agency of the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development about potential sites for housing and other developments. The Rivers Agency assesses the potential for flooding in the area and whether preventative measures regarding improvements to infrastructure would be required if the site were zoned for development.

There is also consultation with the Water Service, the Roads Service and, where necessary, the Rivers Agency, on planning applications for specific housing developments to ensure that they have adequate facilities for the discharge of storm water and that it will not create or exacerbate flooding problems in the area. The Water Service advises the Planning Service on the availability of water and sewerage services and any difficulties envisaged relating to the capacity of the existing public sewerage infrastructure and the proposed timing of new or improved infrastructure to absorb new development.

I am also advised that some planning applications for housing developments require the submission of an environmental statement under the Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 1999. Such environmental statements must take account of any significant environmental effects likely from the proposed development and include a description of the measures envisaged to prevent, reduce and, if possible, offset any significant adverse effect on the environment.

Those arrangements ensure that the potential impact of storm-water discharges arising from proposed housing or other developments is properly considered at the stage of the development plan or development control in the existing planning process.

I thank the Minister for his very brief answer. What other significant steps does he plan to take to improve the storm-drainage requirements in the vicinity of new housing and commercial developments - and, indeed, those already in existence for at least the past 10 years - with specific reference to the prevention of flooding incidents such as those which have occurred or are likely to occur in parts of Newtownabbey and Carrickfergus?

The instances to which the Member refers resulted from significantly higher rainfall than had been experienced for a considerable time. The Assembly will always have a judgement to make regarding the level at which storm drainage facilities should be available.

If the Assembly wants to raise standards, it will have to cough up and give the Department the funding with which to do that. However, the existing planning mechanism gives the Planning Service, the Water Service and the Rivers Agency sufficient ability to consider the storm drainage implications of any planning application. The planning process does not require a new stage. It already includes consideration of that element of planning.

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Can the Minister give details of his views on the provision of physical measures, such as mini-roundabouts, which are aimed at reducing the speed of visitors going into, and leaving, housing developments?

I can confirm that the speed of traffic will have no impact on storm drainage.

Mr Attwood is not in his place, so I call Mr Sean Neeson.

TOP

6.

asked the Minister for Regional Development, pursuant to AQO 40/02, why his Department has refused to compensate people in East Antrim whose properties were damaged by the severe floods in June 2002.

(AQO 254/02)

Entitlement to compensation from the Department is not automatic. For a claim to be successful, it must be shown that the Department failed to carry out its statutory duty or was negligent in some other way. Every claim is, therefore, thoroughly investigated. If no evidence of negligence by the Department is found, the claim is turned down.

Following the serious flooding that occurred on the evening of Friday 21 June 2002, the Department received 346 claims for compensation. However, the Department's investigation revealed that the flooding was caused by the exceptional thunderstorms and heavy downpour that occurred that night. Those extreme weather conditions were localised. Flooding in the worst-affected areas - parts of Newtownabbey and Carrickfergus - was exacerbated by water that ran off higher ground. Therefore, in the absence of any other significant factors, the Department believes that it has a defence in law against the claims. In those circumstances, they must be turned down.

As with all claims, the Department's decision can be challenged through the independent legal process. Claims like those, where the value is under £2,000, fall within the jurisdiction of the Small Claims Court. However, before any claimants consider that step, I believe that it would be helpful if I had the benefit of an independent opinion from senior counsel on the correctness or otherwise of the Department's position. I have, therefore, asked my officials to arrange that, and the independent opinion is expected soon. A copy of senior counsel's opinion will be lodged in the Assembly Library.

Many of my constituents received letters from the Department for Regional Development stating that the flooding was an act of God. However, many of the areas that were worst affected by the flooding in June 2002 have been affected regularly - places such as Chichester Square and the lower Woodburn Road. Taylors Avenue in Carrickfergus was flooded and devastated for the third time in a year. Flooding regularly occurs on the Shore Road at Whiteabbey. Many of the residents who are affected by that simply cannot afford house insurance. Many of them have great difficulty getting house insurance because of the regularity of the flooding. Is it not time that the Minister, his Department and the Rivers Agency accepted their responsibility towards my constituents in East Antrim?

The rights of the Member's constituents are no different to those of other Members' constituents elsewhere in the Province. The same criteria must apply to all. If the Member is suggesting that the Department should fork out money irrespective of the circumstances or whether there was any negligence on its part, that would be absurd. The Assembly simply could not afford to do that. Therefore, negligence on the part of the Department must be clearly shown before any compensation is paid.

I am happy to consider circumstances where there is a case for negligence. However, I honestly believe that I will not have to consider such a case, because the Department's compensation agency attentively considers any details that suggest that the Department would be unable to sustain a refusal of a claim in court. We are, therefore, keen to ensure that a payment is made where there is a case. With so many cases involved, rather than simply follow the basis of the Department's initial consideration, I determined that I would have the case considered by independent senior counsel to examine the Department's legal position.

I have also asked the Department to instruct senior counsel to provide a clear guideline on the circumstances in which it is right and legally required for the Department to make compensation payments. I propose to put a copy of that guideline in the Assembly Library. It will be useful for Members to recognise circumstances that, according to the law as it stands, will give entitlement to compensation and those that are unlikely to. It does not remove anybody's right to take legal action, but it will give some indication of the circumstances in which a case is likely to be successful.

I can well understand, for I have seen it too many times in my own constituency, the anguish suffered as a result of flooding. However, every flood is not the result of negligence by the Department for Regional Development or the Water Service. We must recognise that if the Assembly were simply to pay every claimant who submitted an application, it would have a very considerable bill to pay, and money would have to be taken from other heads of expenditure.

Will the Minister acknowledge that, in refusing all compensation claims, his Department appears to be telling my constituents that it is not at fault and that its agencies never contribute to flooding? Could blocked drains and culverts have contributed to flooding? Will he acknowledge that, where the Roads Service has had to carry out remedial work to repair faulty culverts, that agency's blocked structures will have contributed to the flooding of some of my constituents' properties?

If blocked drains are the result of negligence by the Department, the Member's constituents will have a valid claim. However, if, for instance, the Water Service staff clear blockage in a drain on a Thursday, it is blocked on a Friday and flooding occurs, nobody could say that the Department was negligent. Staff cannot stand for 24 hours of every day at every drain throughout the country. That would not be negligence in those circumstances. Therefore, it is necessary to show that the Department has been negligent in how it has dealt with drains and other matters of its responsibility.

TOP

7.

asked the Minister for Regional Development to make a statement on the current situation regarding the Belfast to Bangor road (A2).

(AQO 252/02)

The A2 Belfast to Bangor road is one of the arterial routes into Belfast. It has a two-way traffic flow of almost 40,000 vehicles a day and is of high strategic importance. Safety along the route is of particular concern, and in recent years the Roads Service has implemented several measures directed at improving road safety.

This summer, the Roads Service carried out two important schemes specifically directed at improving the safety and structural condition of the road. One scheme involved resurfacing the section of the road between Whinney Hill and Ballygrainey Road and included a junction improvement at Whinney Hill, localised widening at Cultra Avenue and central hatching between Whinney Hill and Ballygrainey Road. The other scheme involved amendments to the layout and provision of traffic signals at the junction of the A2 Rathgael Road/Old Belfast Road, which has the worst history of accidents on the A2. In addition, work to replace a safety barrier at a tight bend near Seahill continues.

The benefits arising from those improvements are already apparent to all users of the road. I assure the Member that the Roads Service will continue to monitor the road with a view to introducing, where appropriate and practical, further measures to address any safety problems that can be remedied by engineering.

I thank the Minister for his comprehensive answer. I congratulate the Roads Service on the improvements to that busy road, especially at Rathgael and Seahill. However, I ask the Minister to ask his Department to take note of the dangers of entering and exiting side roads to the expanding residential development along that road.

We are happy to monitor that road regularly and to look at any increase in the number of cars using it, the velocity of traffic or any change in drivers' behaviour - those are among the Roads Service's normal duties. Often the first reaction of Members, other elected representatives and others to a road accident is to blame the road. I must put on record that staggering statistics are available that show that in all but 2% of road accidents the fault lies not with the road but with the driver.

TOP

8.

asked the Minister for Regional Development in relation to correspondence received by his Department concerning a sewage pumping station in The Coaches, Croft Road, Holywood, to outline measures he has taken, and proposes to take, to address the issues raised.

(AQO 245/02)

The Water Service will adopt sewerage infrastructure constructed by private developers provided the infrastructure meets the specific requirements set out by Water Service under article 17 of the Water and Sewerage Services (Northern Ireland) Order 1973. The sewage pumping station at The Coaches, Croft Road, Holywood was constructed by Hagan Homes, which developed The Coaches' housing site. The Water Service was advised that the pumping station has not been adopted due to legal difficulties that relate to the transfer of the land on which the pumping station is located. The Water Service has been in contact with Hagan Homes and its legal advisers on many occasions about the issue, but, regrettably, despite those approaches, it has not yet been possible to bring the matter to a conclusion.

TOP

The Environment

Question No 2, which stands in the name of Mr Mick Murphy, has been transferred to the Department for Regional Development and will receive a written answer.

TOP

1.

asked the Minister of the Environment how many Planning Service enforcement officers he plans to employ for the Belfast area; and to make a statement.

(AQO 238/02)

The Minister of the Environment (Mr Nesbitt): Three planning officers are devoted to enforcement duties in the Belfast divisional planning office. They comprise one higher professional and technology officer, and two professional and technology officers. Those officers have dedicated administrative support. In addition, a proportion of senior management time in the division is devoted to enforcement work. I have moved to strengthen the management of the development control and enforcement sections in the Belfast division and other divisions, and that should have a positive impact on the Belfast division's ability to deal with enforcement casework.

As the Member is aware, a Bill is before the Assembly to streamline and considerably strengthen my Department's enforcement powers. The aims of the Planning (Amendment) Bill are to make it simpler and easier for the Department's enforcement officers to take enforcement action against those who flout planning law, to make available to the Department tough new enforcement powers and to make stiffer penalties available to the courts. I plan to review enforcement staffing levels in Belfast and other planning offices after the Bill becomes law.

I remind the Minister and the House that the answer that he has given to me is exactly the same as the one he gave to me on 30 April 2002, which was that three full-time enforcement officers were employed and that he would move to strengthen the management of the development control and enforcement sections in the Belfast division. That was his answer on the 30 April, and it is still his answer in the first week of October. I visited the office recently and know that there is only one enforcement officer, who is dealing with 777 cases. Two officers are on leave. What does the Minister mean when he says that he has

My constituents would be in despair to think that five months later the answer remains the same. There are not three officers in place - there is only one.

I empathise entirely with what the Member said about the lack of enforcement officers. There is a total of 21 officers throughout Northern Ireland - four of the divisional planning offices have three officers each, and three of the offices have three officers each. Many thousands of enforcement cases are brought each year; I am aware of the problem. However, there is a certain thing called money, which is needed so that we can have more enforcement officers in place. It is hoped that that money may come through in the Budget process.

One issue that must be addressed in the Budget process is the planning process itself. I hasten to add that a strengthened Planning (Amendment) Bill is in the offing, with new enforcement powers, increased fines and penalties for non-compliance. I hope that, collectively, those provisions will act as a deterrent to the lack of will to abide by the law. In that context, when the Bill is passed, the necessity for additional staff will be reviewed.

I welcome the Minister's response, at least in relation to the provision of new enforcement officers, if not the intention to deliver them. Will he confirm that, although there is a need for more officers in Belfast, the same need exists in other areas, for example in the Ards borough? Moreover, does he agree that, with the Department's reluctance to employ extra enforcement officers, many enforcement actions are on hold? Does he not feel that action should be taken to clear those up? Some of them have been on hold for 12 to 24 months.

I agree that there are other areas in Northern Ireland besides Belfast. I referred to all of the areas in Northern Ireland where officers were placed. There is no reluctance on the part of the Department of the Environment - and certainly not on my part - to ensure that the law is enforced. I repeat: I want to see planning decisions taken efficiently and effectively for those within the law, and I want those outside the law to be dealt with as efficiently and effectively.

Regarding planning enforcement in south Belfast, could the Minister inform the House as to the current position regarding the building of some apartments, together with a lift shaft, in the principal's house at Union Theological College, which break a historic skyline?

Union Theological College is a very important listed building. At the "Look up to Belfast" seminar last week, we saw that other places in the world try to maintain their listed buildings by utilising them, improving them internally and ensuring that they are in good stead for usage. That is what has happened to Union Theological College. It has been retained in ownership and continues to be used as it was previously used. I recognise that the skyline has been broken asymmetrically. However, the building fulfils what could be called "international standards" for its type in that nothing can be removed from what was put in place originally.

Section 19 of the Disability and Discrimination Act 1995 requires us to make buildings available to the disabled. Having said that, when I received the written question I examined the process by which this decision was reached by the Environment and Heritage Service very closely.

TOP

<< Prev / Next >>