Executive: Legislative Programme 2012-13
Ministerial Statements
William Hay (DUP)
Before I call George Robinson, I remind Members that the nature of the statement may tempt them to go into a long preamble before they come to their question. I assure Members that that will not be allowed this morning. Let us come to the question.
George Robinson (DUP)
I thank junior Minister Bell for his statement. Does he agree that good-quality legislation is essential if it is to be of practical use in the Assembly?
Jonathan Bell (DUP)
I fully agree. Those of us who are in contact with our business communities will know that, if we look at the European models, we see that there is a policy in many areas of one in and one out when it comes to introducing new legislation. We want good legislation that delivers real benefits for our people on the ground; we do not want legislation for legislation’s sake. We certainly do not want legislation that is made in haste and about which people will repent at their leisure.
Megan Fearon (Sinn F??in)
The Minister made reference to the Education Minister bringing forward legislation. I welcome that. Will the junior Minister give a timeline for that?
Jonathan Bell (DUP)
I welcome the new Member to the House. The Education Minister is finalising the details of a Bill to establish the Education and Skills Authority. Subject to Executive agreement, he hopes to introduce the Bill in the Assembly soon after the beginning of the new session in September.
Mike Nesbitt (UUP)
I welcome the Minister’s assurance that legislation will be introduced only when it has purpose and relevance to the electorate. Given that there was no change in government after the previous election — given that the DUP and Sinn Féin went into the election at the heart of government and came out at the heart of government — and a year has passed with little or no legislation, what does he say to the electorate who are now beginning to think that the DUP’s plan was simply to get power for power’s sake?
Jonathan Bell (DUP)
I understand the naivety of the Member as a new Member. I also understand that he first sought election as a Conservative member to slash the Northern Ireland Budget, and he bears responsibility for that. To be straight with the Member: the Bills on the Budget, the rates and the pensions have all received Royal Assent. In terms of marine, superannuation, historical institutional abuse, the Budget (No. 2) Bill, business improvement districts, criminal justice and charities, I do not know where the Member has been for the past year.
I welcome the statement, although it appears from the junior Minister’s words that OFMDFM is condemned. The statement referred to OFMDFM bringing forward legislative proposals around the dissolution of DEL. Does that mean that it will persist with the back-of-the-envelope approach to government restructuring for that one Department, or will DEL now be part of the broader discussions on the number of Departments and MLAs, etc? Given that the Minister said that —
Jonathan Bell (DUP)
I think that, somewhere along the line, there was a question about the dissolution of the Department for Employment and Learning. The Executive continue to consider the responses to the consultation that we carried out on the redistribution of the functions of the Department for Employment and Learning. The report of the Committee for Employment and Learning and the subsequent Assembly debate have also proved invaluable in that respect. The Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister will confirm its legislative intention in respect of the dissolution of the Department for Employment and Learning following the summer recess.
Anna Lo (Alliance)
I thank the Minister for his statement. I welcome the considerable number of legislative proposals from the Minister of the Environment. Will the junior Minister assure the House that the timetable for the planning Bill will not slip any further, so that it maximises the benefits that will be given to the Department before the transfer of power to local government?
Jonathan Bell (DUP)
Obviously, this is a collaborative process. There will be no intention on our part, particularly regarding the important Bill that she mentioned, not to ensure that the introduction of the legislation is done speedily and efficiently and so that there is a good response. As I said, a number of Bills were passed during the previous mandate. They were properly scrutinised, but we relied on the Committees, which worked hard and effectively. I remember sitting on Committees that worked extra days.So, subject to the goodwill of the House, we can really deliver. I think that that is what everybody in the Executive and the Assembly wants. We can deliver good results and good legislation for the people whom we serve.
Thomas Buchanan (DUP)
I thank the junior Minister for the statement to the House this morning. I note that the First Minister and deputy First Minister are to confirm their legislative intentions in respect of the dissolution of the Department for Employment and Learning. However, will the junior Minister advise us on whether a programme has been laid down for the dissolution of that Department?
Jonathan Bell (DUP)
At this point, we are considering the responses to the consultation that we carried out. We are very clear that, when you issue a paper for consultation and people spend a considerable amount of time and effort responding to it, you must give due diligence to the responses. The report from the Committee for Employment and Learning and the subsequent Assembly debate have also had an input. They have actually been invaluable to our considerations. As you noted, we will confirm our legislative intention in respect of the dissolution of DEL following the summer recess.
Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin)
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as an tuairisc seo. I thank the junior Minister for the report. Some people give a narrative that very little legislation is going through the Assembly, but this report nails that. I welcome the substantial body of work and ask those who are critical of it to look at their own record when they were in that position. Will the junior Minister give me an assurance regarding other pieces of legislation that are not included currently but that we may need? In the OFMDFM Committee, we are looking at the lack of race and disability legislation. Will he assure me that there is still space for us to include that?
Jonathan Bell (DUP)
We will take a constructive look at that. The matters that Caitríona Ruane refers to are under active consideration. Where it is possible to introduce legislation, we will look to do that. I appreciate the Member’s constructive view. Some Members seem to have missed the fact that the Executive have so far introduced 11 Bills. We, in OFMDFM, are not focusing on artificial targets for the number of Bills that can be introduced. It is about quality not quantity. I say again that we will not introduce legislation for the sake of it. We acknowledge the central role of the House and the Assembly, and what we are looking for is good governance.
I also say again to the whole House that Members who argue for a strong record of legislative achievement for the Assembly should bear in mind that progressing legislation is a shared responsibility between the Executive, the Assembly and its Committees. We hope to introduce legislation and progress it to its Final Stage with all due diligence and urgency. During the last mandate, 65 Executive Bills were introduced. All but one or two of those were passed by the Assembly, which left little or no remaining legislation in a state of preparation and needing quick introduction. To those who argue for quick introduction, I argue that the people of Northern Ireland want to see their legislation got right, not rushed.
Gregory Campbell (DUP)
I, too, welcome the statement, particularly a sentence that is not in bold or large capital letters but is important.
“Legislation should be proposed only when there is a need to legislate and only when the necessary preparation has been completed.”
Will the junior Minister give an assurance that that will continue to the case and that those who want to create jobs and business in Northern Ireland can do so unencumbered rather than facing more and more unnecessary legislation?
Jonathan Bell (DUP)
The Member for East Londonderry makes his point very well. Speak to the people on the ground, particularly the business community, and you will find that we need to be very careful that we do not add additional levels of red tape and bureaucracy, even though it might tick some box somewhere to show that we have introduced more Bills. We have already outperformed Scotland and Wales in the legislative process. I am happy to stand over that record.
The criticism of making legislation just for the sake of it or not producing enough legislation is far too narrowly drawn.
Ministers in the Executive continue to have a full and extensive range of engagement with other Ministers, officials, the Assembly and its Committees. As the Member said, policies need to be sound and workable before they are committed to legislation, and that legislation needs to be accurately drafted. The fact that Committees have invariably sought extensions for scrutiny stages seems to amply demonstrate that these are complex issues. Even the Committees acknowledge that and tell us that they cannot be rushed just for the sake of fulfilling a schedule.
For those who criticise for the sake of it, let me point out again that, since this mandate began and up to the close of business yesterday, we have introduced 11 Bills, made 86 oral statements, responded to 17 Statutory Committee motions and over 90 private Member’s motions, and held 34 Adjournment debates. We responded to questions at 154 Question Time sessions to Executive Ministers. We moved 10 legislative consent motions, and we responded to five questions for urgent oral answer. Where have you been?
Danny Kinahan (UUP)
I thank the Minister for his statement. I will focus on the word “performance”, which he used. It is not only legislation by which we are judged but whether we have taken any actions. Will the Minister look at legislation that gets this body better at turning strategies into actions? That is what is missing, and, otherwise, we will just have another statement such as this, which shows you to be the waffle king.
Jonathan Bell (DUP)
Well, let me engage, Mr Speaker, on that one. You will understand that I have been provoked. When we introduce legislation for the likes of small businesses and businesses that are struggling, you have to realise, Mr Kinahan, that those small businesses do not live in rich castles like you do. As I said before, there is a line from an old hymn: “The rich man in his castle,
The poor man at his gate,”
I did not believe that people lived in castles until Mr Kinahan came along with that status. You need to realise that, when we pass Budgets and look at rates and pensions, we are trying to deliver a real and tangible effect for people on the ground. That is what makes a difference, not silly comments made from turrets in ivory towers.
Thank you, Minister, for your statement. Where are the legislative plans in anticipation of the long-awaited devolved powers for varying corporation tax? Is there no longer an expectation that this concession will be delivered during the lifetime of this Assembly?
Jonathan Bell (DUP)
The work on corporation tax is, obviously, ongoing. We need to make a decision for all of our people. It involves complex work and negotiations with the Treasury. You know that we adopt the position of supporting the devolution of those powers, but the package has to be right. It has to support the people of Northern Ireland in delivering a better quality of life. Negotiations on that package with the ministerial working group are still ongoing. It is still a live issue, and the focus will be on ensuring that whatever deal can be arrived at will deliver something productive for the community and raise the standard and quality of life for our people. Those negotiations are still ongoing, and it is vastly premature to draw any conclusions on them.
Chris Lyttle (Alliance)
A key priority for our society must be to improve our education system and to build a shared society. A single education and skills authority would go a long way towards a more integrated approach to the delivery of education and skills, and would deliver significant savings as a result. The original target for an ESA Bill was 2009, and, indeed, on Tuesday 26 June, the Education Minister said that it is the worst-kept secret in politics that the education and skills authority is in trouble. Indeed, he brought an ESA Bill to the Executive on 7 March. He has said that it is up to the Executive make their mind up on ESA, so what is the junior Minister’s mind on ESA?
Jonathan Bell (DUP)
I cannot speak for the Ministers of individual Departments. We hope that the Minister of Education will introduce it soon after the beginning of the new session in September. As you know, in our Programme for Government, which both Alliance Ministers supported, the commitment was not for 2009; the commitment under our Programme for Government in this mandate was to have it operational by 2013. I understand that the Minister of Education is finalising the details of the Bill to establish the new Education and Skills Authority.
Lord Morrow (DUP)
I thank the junior Minister for his very lengthy, informative, detailed and comprehensive speech this morning, in which he outlined, in considerable detail, all the achievements of the Assembly over the past 12 months and further. I know that one or two are sceptical about that, but I am not among them.
With regard to the Tobacco Retailer Sanctions Bill, the Minister said that:
“sanctions against retailers who regularly break the law on the underage sales of tobacco products which will contribute to our commitment to promoting the health and well being of our young people.”
Does he accept that more than retailers break the law on the sale of tobacco? Will the Bill, in conjunction, perhaps, with another Department, tackle the awful problem of the importation of illegal tobacco substances?
Jonathan Bell (DUP)
The Member raises an important point. I will ask the Minister responsible — Edwin Poots — to liaise with the Minister of Justice. There will also be a role for the Policing Board in all those matters. The aim of the Tobacco Retailer Sanctions Bill is to strengthen the sanctions against retailers who regularly break the law through underage sales of tobacco products. Retailers who wish to sell tobacco products will be required to register with the local district council. Persistent flouting of underage sales legislation will result in the withdrawal of the retailer’s right to sell tobacco for up to one year. It is also proposed to use the Bill to introduce a fixed penalty notice scheme for retailers who are caught selling tobacco to underage children. We want to see the police enforce the legislation rigorously not only with regard to the official retailers, but malign and dangerous influences who sell tobacco or any other substance. It is in all our interests, particularly our young people, to get the best health and life opportunities.
I welcome Lord Morrow’s comments about the legislation in this and the previous mandate. I reiterate to Members that, if we compare the 65 Bills that the Executive introduced in the previous mandate with the 45 Executive Bills introduced to the Scottish Parliament and the 17 Government proposed measures for the National Assembly for Wales, we are significantly ahead in legislation. In the recent announcement of the UK Government’s legislative programme, in addition to the normal financial measures, there are plans to introduce 15 new Bills in the new Westminster session. We already have a track record of being ahead of the game and of producing legislation where necessary. We have outperformed Scotland and Wales in the amount of legislation, and I have given the facts to confirm that. However, legislation should be introduced in the House only if it is proper, accurately drafted and has had the detailed scrutiny to produce the best legislation for the House. We should not introduce legislation that would hinder or hamper economic progress in raising the quality and the standard of the lives of the people we serve.
Roy Beggs (UUP)
The junior Minister said that there should be a clear need before introducing legislation and that new legislation should not be rushed. I have a question about missing legislation. Lead, copper and even manhole covers are being stolen from our churches, schools, homes and roadways. The Minister of the Environment has indicated that that is beyond his remit. Why has no legislation been proposed to improve the audit trail for those dealing in stolen metal?
Jonathan Bell (DUP)
I will happily take those proposals directly to the Minister responsible. Churches that I am associated with have had copper stolen from their roof. My understanding is that theft is dealt with in criminal legislation. We want to see enforcement of the criminal law against those who would steal. You suggested an audit trail. I will bring that to the Minister of Justice for consideration.
Phil Flanagan (Sinn Féin)
Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I thank the Junior Minister for his extensive statement and his responses to questions so far. I see from the statement that the Minister of the Environment intends to bring forward quite a number of pieces of legislation. What is the junior Minister’s assessment of the need for a climate change Bill, which many campaigners across Ireland have been calling for in recent times?
Jonathan Bell (DUP)
That is not currently in the legislative programme. To go back to my old Christian background: it is my view that we should be good stewards of the earth. We will take a serious look at any proposed legislation. Our task as junior Ministers is to refer specific items of business to the Minister responsible. We do that across the House, where new information is brought to us. It is interesting legislation, but it is better addressed by the Minister of the Environment, who is responsible. You have raised the potential need for a climate change Bill. I will draw that to Minister Attwood’s attention and ask him to consider replying directly to you on the matter.
Jonathan Bell (DUP)
Again, as your question on minority languages legislation deals with specific legislation that is outside the programme, I will refer it to the Minister for a response.
Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice)
Fourteen months in office before they produce a tentative legislative programme. I begin to see now why this Executive will need every one of the 161 staff in their press offices to spin this as achievement.
I want to comment on the total absence of any substantive measure to deal with the bloated nature and size of government. Is it the case that even the one step taken, around DEL, has now stalled? Just six weeks ago, in an answer to a question, the Minister’s Department said that legislation would be introduced by July. Now, we do not even have a commitment to legislation; we have some form of words to say that Ministers will confirm their legislative intentions. Is there still an intention to abolish DEL, and, if so, when? Has that intention been to the Executive?
Finally, I reassure the Minister that his Department is in no danger of falling in to rushed legislation. So far, it has been nil on quantity and nil on quality.
Jonathan Bell (DUP)
I was always taught that a good forensic lawyer examined the detail, of which we had nil in that question. Let us look at the detail. The Member refers to Bills as “nil”. The Budget (No. 2) Bill is not nil. It has received —
Jonathan Bell (DUP)
The Rates (Amendment) Bill was passed and got Royal Assent. That is not nil. There were Bills on pensions; the Budget; marine; superannuation —
Jonathan Bell (DUP)
— historical institutional abuse; business improvement districts; criminal justice; and charities. We also have an Executive that are outperforming Scotland and Wales. Yet the honourable Member for North Antrim says, “nil”.
Did he mishear what we said in response to the consultation we carried out on the redistribution of the functions of the Department for Employment and Learning? We will listen to, review and consider those consultations. The Member may listen to nobody else but himself, but I assure him that the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister will listen to the responses of teachers, lecturers and all the allied professions, because they have professional expertise and something to contribute. Therefore, we will consider the responses, because they have been invaluable to what we are going to do. We have set down the legislative intention for the dissolution of the Department for Employment and Learning following the summer recess. I think that the honourable Member could learn from the fact that the good Lord gave us two ears and only one mouth for a particular reason.
Michael Copeland (UUP)
I fully appreciate that it is difficult for the Minister for Social Development, in the light of the four lines referring to him in the statement, to give an accurate reflection of his Department’s proposals, legislative or otherwise. I was slightly scundered — if I can use that word — that there were 42 words on pavement cafes and eight on welfare reform. I understand that welfare reform is something over which we do not have a great deal of control, but, whether we like it or not, it will impact very seriously on people here. Can the junior Minister give us some indication as to whether any communications are taking place, particularly between the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and the Executive, or the Minister for Social Development, regarding progress on the matter? How sure are we that we can reform welfare within a time frame that will avoid infraction or sanction charges, which are apparently somewhere between £30 million and £50 million a year, which is not inconsequential.
Jonathan Bell (DUP)
The Member raises a very important point on welfare reform. I assure him categorically that it is the subject of complex, ongoing negotiations with DWP and Lord Freud, who has responsibility for the devolved regions. Subject to the goodwill of the House, we are confident that we can meet the commitments, but that is dependent on everybody in the Chamber. As I have said before, the principle of parity is clear. I personally think that it is important that the benefits that we get in Belfast are the same as those that people in Bristol get and that we have integrity in the administration of benefits.
The purpose of the Bill is to simplify the benefits system to improve work incentives and reform the welfare and benefits systems to provide support and incentive for people to move from benefit into work. The Minister, Nelson McCausland, has been working to develop those proposals, while recognising the commitment that I have outlined to have parity with the GB system, taking into account the particular needs that we have in Northern Ireland. Welfare reform is an important issue, and the proposals have been overseen by a dedicated Executive subcommittee. The proposals for the Bill are now under active and detailed consideration.
Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin)
Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle, Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a ráiteas ar maidin. I thank the Minister for his statement and for his answers to the questions to date.
I seek clarification on the ESA Bill. Is it not the case that the Minister of Education has signed off on it, and he is now awaiting Executive approval to bring it before the Assembly?
Jonathan Bell (DUP)
The information that I have received from the Minister of Education is that he is finalising the details of the Bill to establish the new Education and Skills Authority, and, subject to the Executive’s agreement, he hopes to be able to introduce the Bill in the Assembly soon after the beginning of the new session in September. That meets our Programme for Government commitment, which we all agreed on, to have the legislation available by 2013.
William Hay (DUP)
That concludes questions to the junior Minister on his statement. I ask the House to take its ease as we move to the next business.
(Mr speaker is in charge of proceedings of the House of Commons in..." class="glossary">Deputy Speaker [Mr Beggs] in the Chair)