The Business Committee has agreed to allow up to two hours for this debate. The First Minister will propose the motion. All other Members will have five minutes in which to speak.

One amendment has been selected and published on the Marshalled List. The proposer of the amendment will have 10 minutes to propose and five minutes to make a winding-up speech.

I beg to move

That this Assembly takes note of the Legislative Programme for the 2007/08 session, as agreed by the Executive on 18 October, and conveyed in the letter of 19 October 2007 from the First Minister and deputy First Minister to the Speaker.

I want to preface my remarks with words of the strongest condemnation on the attacks at the weekend against certain Roman Catholic priests. Such attacks must be condemned. I hope that quick action will be taken to bring the people who perpetrated those attacks to justice, and that they will pay the price for breaking the law.

In Cookstown, two men broke in through a window at the parochial house on Convent Road, where two priests live. They ransacked downstairs, woke one of the curates, and threatened him with a knife before taking cash and a car. Another such incident occurred in the city of Belfast. I utterly condemn those attacks. The people of Northern Ireland must put those who are responsible in the corner. I am sure that my expression of worry, sadness and condemnation on the matter is supported by every Member of the House.

Some Members:

Hear, hear.

Mr Deputy Speaker, the motion that the deputy First Minister and I have laid before the House asks the Assembly to note the Executive’s legislative programme for the 2007-08 session. The House will be aware that we wrote to the Speaker on 19 October, immediately after the Executive had discussed and agreed their legislative programme. We did so in recognition of the House’s keen interest in, not to say impatience to receive, the details of its content.

The deputy First Minister and I believe, moreover, that it is important to afford Members an opportunity to consider and express their views on the overall content of the programme by tabling a take-note motion. This debate provides that opportunity. I am, however, conscious that the bulk of the Assembly’s work on the programme — the detailed scrutiny of each Bill by the Committees and the ultimate debates on the Floor of the House — is still to follow.

I am confident that Members will carry out their responsibility to scrutinise the legislation thoroughly and diligently at each stage in its passage in order to ensure that what comes out at the end of the process is fully relevant to the community’s needs. Of course, that is not the only legislation that will be considered by the Assembly. Since restoration, well over 100 statutory rules have been subject to scrutiny by Committees. We do not envisage any lessening of that activity.

Where it is to the Assembly’s advantage, provisions for which it is responsible are being included in certain Bills to be brought forward in another place. That will, of course, require the approval of the Assembly. Several legislative consent motions will be tabled in order to allow the House to make a final decision on such matters.

The legislative programme — or what some Members saw as the absence of one — has recently been debated in the Chamber. Members have had the opportunity to express their views on the need for the Executive to inform the Assembly of their legislative intentions for the current session.

Without wishing to pre-empt Members’ comments or to rehearse unduly the arguments of the previous debate, I echo what the junior Minister Mr Paisley Jnr said on that occasion about the production of a legislative programme. The Assembly and Executive were restored to bring back accountability and to make the work of the Government here more relevant. The Executive could not — and did not — take up office to adopt, without question, the policies and legislative proposals of their predecessors

Against the backdrop of finalising an agreed Programme for Government, Budget and investment strategy, we intend to bring to this process our own thoughts, strategies and policies, and to implement what the public needs and expects us to put in place. The legislative programme is an important part of that process. Undoubtedly, Members will have considered the content of the programme in the period since our letter to the Speaker. However, I place on record the Executive’s legislative intention to pass 18 Bills in the current session of the Assembly.

A priority of the draft Programme for Government is to deliver modern, high-quality and efficient public services, which demonstrate our commitment to world-class public services that meet the needs of the people of our Province. Therefore, an important part of the programme will be legislation to bring about significant change in the administrative structures of the public sector in Northern Ireland. The Assembly is already considering a Bill to reorganise the library services, and during this session, a Bill will also be introduced to reorganise education structures.

The junior Ministers will present a miscellaneous public authorities reform Bill to the Assembly on behalf of a number of Departments. The Minister of the Environment is conducting a review of previous decisions on the reorganisation of local government. The Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety is conducting a similar review of health and social services structures and, depending on the outcome, further legislation may be required in due course.

The Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development is reviewing the adequacy of existing legislation to tackle animal disease outbreaks. That task has been given added impetus by the recent outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease, bluetongue and avian flu in England. A number of gaps in current provision have been identified and, after consultation on a draft, a diseases of animals Bill will be introduced to rectify those deficiencies by enabling the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development to implement appropriate measures to prevent the introduction and spread of disease.

The Assembly is currently considering the detailed provisions of the Taxis Bill. The Minister of the Environment also intends to introduce legislation on goods vehicle operator licensing to ensure the safe and proper use of goods vehicles, fair competition in the industry and protection of the environment around operating centres. It will also enable more effective enforcement in order to contribute to the fight against organised crime.

The Minister of Finance and Personnel will, as usual, seek statutory approval for the 2007-08 Supplementary Estimates and a Vote on Account for 2008-09 in the Budget Bill in February, while approval of the Main Estimates for 2008-09 will be sought in a further Budget Bill in June.

In addition, following consultation on a draft, a presumption of death Bill will be introduced to allow for the registration of a death in circumstances where a missing person is presumed dead but the body has not been recovered. The issuing of a death certificate in such instances will help to tackle some of the difficulties that arise in such tragic circumstances, including administering the estate and claiming benefits and life insurance.

The Finance Minister will also introduce two further Bills to modernise building regulation procedures and to make arrangements for civil registration.

The Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill was introduced in the Assembly before the summer recess and the Children (Emergency Protection Orders) Bill was passed by the Assembly earlier today. In addition, the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety intends to introduce a short, technical public health amendment Bill to allow the Department to make regulations in connection with contamination and thus comply with World Health Organization international health regulations.

The Minister for Social Development has already introduced a Pensions Bill to improve the coverage, generosity and sustainability of the state pension and to introduce some simplification measures for private pensions. She will also bring forward a further three Bills.

A major charities Bill will overhaul the entire system of charities regulation in Northern Ireland and provide for the establishment of an independent charities commission and compulsory registration.

For people who contract a particular, invariably fatal, form of cancer usually caused by exposure to asbestos fibres, a Bill will provide for lump-sum payments to be made to them or their dependents within six weeks of making a claim. That will give sufferers some comfort in those tragic circumstances by ensuring that they can receive some compensation while they can still benefit from it, and, at the same time, that their families will be secure in the future.

Finally in relation to the Department for Social Development, a child maintenance Bill will reform the present child-support system by creating a simpler system that enables and encourages parents to make their own arrangements, but that delivers firmly and more effectively for parents who need help in arranging maintenance.

I hope that the House will accept this programme as evidence of the Executive’s intention to make a positive difference to the community. As I said at the beginning of my speech, Members will have the opportunity to undertake detailed scrutiny of the legislation in the appropriate Committee setting when each Bill is intro­duced. It may not, therefore, be either possible or appropriate for me to respond today on matters of detail that are still to be determined or that will be subject to change, and, in a number of cases, to the agreement of the Executive. Nevertheless, I will ensure that Members’ views on particular proposals are brought to the attention of the relevant Ministers of the Executive.

The introduction of legislation is not an end in itself. It represents one, albeit important, stage between policy development and implementation. We are at the beginning of a process which, over the session, should, with the advice and support of the Assembly, result in important and beneficial changes for the people of Northern Ireland. I commend this programme to the House.

I beg to move the following amendment: At end insert

“; but expresses its regret that the Programme represents little new thinking or innovation on the part of the Executive, and that key matters requiring legislative action remain unaddressed.”

Although the motion is a take-note motion, its mood is somewhat self-congratulatory. That is why I take great pleasure in moving the amendment in my name and those of my colleagues on the opposition Benches.

This is the first of three key debates that we will have over the next week or so: the others will cover the draft Programme for Government and the draft Budget, but this is our first opportunity to see the limits of the Executive’s aims and ambitions. What we have been presented with is so modest that a harsh person — though not me — might describe it as pathetic.

In his statement, the First Minister said that:

“The Executive could not — and did not — take up office to adopt, without question, the policies and legislative proposals of their predecessors.”

However, there is virtually nothing in the legislative programme just outlined by the First Minister that is anything but what went before.

Let us have a quick look through the 18 Bills that make up the legislative programme. Issues such as libraries, education structures and reform of public authorities have been floating around in the review of public administration for several years. Legislation on diseases of animals could easily have been introduced under direct rule. Taxis were being discussed before the Assembly was suspended in autumn 2002, and road freight licensing legislation has been delayed for nearly as long. There have been two Budget Bills: well, we all know that nothing is more certain than taxes, and that those Bills will happen.

The Department of Finance and Personnel has produced three tidying-up Bills, dealing with presumption of death, building regulations and civil registration. The Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill is a modest undertaking. The Children (Emergency Protection Orders) Bill, which we have just passed, complies with obligations under human rights, and the Public Health (Amendment) Bill complies with the requirements of the World Health Organization.

The tidying-up of charities legislation, though welcome, has been floating around for ages and is long overdue. Legislation on pensions, mesothelioma and child maintenance are being introduced simply to achieve parity with the relevant law in Great Britain. Therefore, to suggest that their programme is one of significance and substance rather stretches the imagination, given what we have come to expect from the Executive.

The programme is a mixture of legislation to achieve parity with GB, matters in long gestation, routine business that could have been done at any time, and issues such as the Taxis Bill, which was first drafted as an Order in Council for consideration at Westminster. Almost the entire package could have been written by Shaun Woodward, or, even worse, by Peter Hain. We have been fed a line in the Chamber — the deputy First Minister has used it to me at least twice — that all that matters in relation to the concept of a shared future is the sight of an Executive governing together. Yet, not a single departmental Minister is present in the Chamber to discuss the legislative programme. The deputy First Minister and the two junior Ministers arrived during the First Minister’s speech: not one other Minister is interested in being here to take part in what is supposed to be one of three key debates. That shows the paucity of the proposals contained in the legislative programme.

There has to be more to devolution than is contained in the programme. There must be more to the concept of a shared future than the sight of the First Minister and the deputy First Minister doing their well-renowned “Chuckle Brothers” act. Anyone who was in the Chamber earlier today, never mind yesterday, having seen the way in which Back-Bench Members from their two parties sniped at each other, would conclude that they are a long way from coming together and building a shared future as parties.

The issue is now one of delivery, because devolution has to be about delivery. What have the Executive done since 8 May 2007? They have produced a list of legislation that could have been produced by Shaun Woodward. Of course, it is not about what they have done since 8 May. All four parties in the Executive had special advisers funded by Peter Hain since the side deals made alongside the St Andrews Agreement. What have they done with the time that their special advisers had to prepare a Programme for Government? What happened in those meetings of the Committee for the Programme for Government last autumn and winter, from which we were excluded, but in which four parties supposedly set down a Programme for Government? All they have done is recycle what Shaun Woodward or Peter Hain would have done anyway.

If Peter Hain ever looks back to his time in Northern Ireland, I wonder whether he speculates on whether he got any value for money for the expenditure that he incurred here.

At last week’s Question Time, the First Minister urged me to use my talents for the benefit of the Assembly. He described my talents as “vast”, but I am not sure whether he “does” irony. I am prepared to use my talents, such as they are, for the benefit of the Assembly, but not to pretend that the failing Executive are achieving anything under devolution, because they are not.

The Alliance Party will diligently scrutinise the legislative programme, as the First Minister has urged. However, much of what is being proposed is parity legislation and, therefore, will not be subject to normal Assembly scrutiny. The Alliance Party will take the responsibility of opposition rather more seriously than the Executive are taking their responsibilities.

If there is to be an Opposition in the Assembly, as is currently provided by the Alliance Party, it is incumbent on the Ulster Unionists and the SDLP to join us in providing a real, effective Opposition.

I thank my friend for his contribution. As always, he demonstrates the benefit of having over a quarter of a century’s experience in an Assembly.

The performance of the previous Executive was poor. However, Members are now receiving a list of Bills, as though a high number equates to quality or illustrates innovate thinking. Had a similar exercise been carried out during the previous mandate, adding up the number of Bills and comparing us with Scotland might have resulted in a dubious impression of what was happening. On one occasion, the Scottish Executive abolished feudal land tenure and we changed the name of the Department for Employment and Learning. I suspect that the current Executive’s ambitions are even lower.

The Assembly could, for example, examine some of the motions that have been passed in the Chamber, and perhaps Ministers could take note of those. Perhaps I should not mention the Agricultural Wages Board, lest I embarrass the deputy First Minister’s colleague. Outstanding issues include the registration of landlords and a legislative equivalent to the Football (Offences) Act 1991 — the Assembly could, at least, start the preparatory work on that. Several issues have been floated and widely supported in the Chamber, such as the appointment of a commissioner for older people and associated carers’ responsibilities, and nothing has been heard since.

I prefer to go back to some of my own party’s proposals: for example, what has happened to the single equality Bill that has been floating around? Is it too embarrassing for the Executive to introduce a Bill that has been floating around for years without any sign of legislation? What about a Bill to deal, not with the structures of education, but with essential reforms to the education of our children and young people? Those children are suffering as they wait to see what will happen, but there is nothing coming from the Executive about dealing with the aftermath of the 11-plus debacle. Those vital issues are being ignored, but they matter in the lives of ordinary children and their parents.

Alternatively, take a few examples from the field that I have concentrated on in both previous and current mandates. At the time of suspension in 2002, a private Member’s Bill on marine conservation had been prepared, but now nothing is happening. The Committee for the Environment had been giving detailed consideration to the Planning (Amendment) Bill and other issues, such as tree preservation orders. My new constituency colleague from South Antrim Dr McCrea and I had been dealing with the issues, but nothing has come back.

The Department of the Environment acknowledged that the legislation that it pushed through in the form of an Order in Council at Westminster, after the previous Assembly was suspended, did not adequately deal with areas of special scientific interest (ASSI). However, no action has been taken since on that — never mind the fundamental issue of an environmental protection agency, which the Assembly supported in principle just a few weeks ago.

What has happened to the vital issue of mental health, and the matters that flowed from the Bamford Review? Everyone pays lip service to those in the Chamber, but there is no sign that the Executive will act.

In 2001, the Assembly voted in favour of the principle of free personal care. However, a year later, the amendment proposed by my friend Kieran McCarthy was voted down. Suddenly, all the parties reinserted the issue into their manifestos, but where is it now? Nowhere. Outside the Chamber, people might use unparliamentary language such as “hypocrisy”, but, of course, I will not do so. However, many Members say one thing when it is convenient to do so and vote to the contrary when the chips are down in the Chamber.

We have a lowest-common-denominator Executive: nothing goes through unless it does not offend the sensibilities of the DUP or Sinn Féin. That is not a recipe for good Government. It is not a recipe for a shared future. It is not a recipe for devolution delivering.

It is a recipe for stasis. The amendment represents a challenge, not only to the two main parties on the Executive, which are signally failing, but to the parties that sit at this end of the House. Are those who aspire to be, or who masquerade as, the Opposition willing to listen to the nonsense that has come from the First Minister, and that will no doubt come from him again during his winding-up speech, or are they willing to show that they believe that the Assembly must be about real business and delivery?

The only way in which the Assembly can send a message to the Executive that they report to the Assembly and not vice versa is by voting in favour of the amend­ment. The alternative is to accept that nothing will happen unless it can be squeezed through, as the lowest common denominator, by the advisers to the First Minister and the deputy First Minister. However, that will achieve nothing for the people of Northern Ireland.

Some Members:

Hear, hear.

I welcome the Executive’s legislative programme for 2007-08. The Executive agreed the programme on 18 October 2007, and it was conveyed to the Speaker on the following day. It can be viewed as a progressive step to greater things, but it will take many years to measure its success.

The legislative programme is a fundamental and imperative document for the Assembly, and, as elected representatives, we should welcome it. After all, we have been elected to this body to legislate. Our duty to the electorate is to introduce, amend and implement legislation that will benefit Northern Ireland and its citizens. We must aspire to meet the challenging but achievable targets that are contained in the legislative programme. If such a programme is managed, steered and directed effectively, it will provide significant long-term benefits to the economy, to society and to businesses, for future generations.

The 18 Bills that the Executive have noted and recorded cover a wide range of economic, social and financial issues that all directly affect our nation and specifically tackle the issues facing Northern Ireland. We, as elected representatives, want to improve the lives of everyone in Northern Ireland. There is no doubt that the legislative programme is a step in the right direction.

The DUP has long advocated that Northern Ireland is best governed locally. Local politicians know the issues that affect homeowners and businesses in their constituencies. For too long, our Province was governed by people who had little or no interest in what was good for Northern Ireland’s citizens. Simply because something was good for someone living in London did not mean that it was good for someone living in Lurgan. The legislative programme has opened up what has traditionally been a closed process. It gives Members and the public foresight of the legislation that the Executive plan to introduce in this session.

There will be an opportunity to scrutinise Bills, many of which will secure real benefits and improve­ments across the board for the people of Northern Ireland. The proposed charities Bill will overhaul the entire system of charities’ regulation in Northern Ireland, particularly with the establishment of an independent charities commission. The Bill will ensure that Northern Ireland has a robust framework in place for local charities that are committed and dedicated to carrying out good work for some of the most disadvantaged in our communities.

The proposed education reform Bill is important, as it will restructure education bodies and their functions in line with the review of public administration. Such a Bill will afford us the opportunity to focus on local issues and to centre our attention on ensuring that our children and young people experience a locally designed and structured education system. Therefore, I urge the Minister of Education not to falter with that process but to mark it with a note of urgency.

The Budget Bill is also important. It is clear from the recent publication of the draft Budget that the primary focus is on economic growth. Is that not an indication of what is to come? Does that not raise the long-term commitment to building a better future for the people of Northern Ireland? As the Minister of Finance and Personnel, Peter Robinson, stated in the House on 25 October:

“For almost 10 years, we have seen very significant increases in public spending in Northern Ireland.” — [Official Report, Vol 24, No 10, p491, col 1].

Through the draft Budget, the Executive have set a course that will meet the Province’s needs through ensuring value for money. The draft Budget has laid the foundations for a better future for everyone in Northern Ireland.

That was demonstrated, and clarified, in the First Minister’s announcement that spending proposals will total almost £10 billion next year and will grow to nearly £11 billion by 2010-11. That is a far cry from the previous announcement of £6 billion. The figures reflect substantial growth in public spending over recent years and demonstrate the benefits of the legislative programme.

The programme contains 18 Bills that aim to meet the rising aspirations of people in Northern Ireland by providing new and better opportunities for all. However, I issue a note of caution: as Members are aware, it will be important to consider the proposed Bills in context and set them alongside other changes taking place. With that in mind, it must be noted that legislation alone will — without doubt — not suffice to meet the needs of the people of Northern Ireland. Instead, it is an imperative stage between policy development and implementation. It is time that the Assembly got down to business and embraced the legislative programme.

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Ba mhaith liom tacaíocht a thabhairt don rún seo. I support the motion.

Members will agree that the worst kind of legislation is not only drafted quickly but does not have the necessary backup to enforce it. Without a proper Budget and the knowledge of what spending is in place, it would be impossible to know what type of legislative programme the Assembly could afford and what resources it would have to support such legislation. Therefore, it is important that the Assembly produces proper and necessary legislation. It is also important that the Assembly reviews and amends certain legislation that was introduced during direct rule. Much of the legislation that was introduced under the old Executive must also be reviewed, particularly the Durkan tax — I mean the water tax — and the rates review.

Members recently expressed concern in the Chamber that the Assembly was not processing enough legislation. However, the same amount of legislation had been introduced —

Will the Member give way?

No; I have no time.

The same volume of legislation was introduced in the nine weeks of the present mandate as was introduced in the first eleven weeks of the Assembly that commenced in 1999. Further­more, there is no evidence of the Members who voiced those concerns tabling private Member’s Bills, or Bills that could be brought to the Floor through Committees. I sit on the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister, of which Mr Kennedy is the Chairperson and Naomi Long is the Deputy Chairperson. Until now, the business of that Committee has not included proposals to make or amend legislation and no ideas on how to do so have been suggested.

Sinn Féin supports the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister (OFMDFM) motion, which has the endorsement of all members of the Executive, on the understanding that it only represents the beginning, and seeks the listing of the single equality Bill in the future. Members must also table motions that propose changes to legislation or call for the introduction of new legislation that reinforces the Executive’s Programme for Government commitments — for example the motion that called for a single equality Bill.

OFMDFM must ensure that the Executive’s legislative programme is built on hope and opportunity. Without doubt, good governance cannot be measured by the number of laws that are made, and the Assembly should not implement legislation willy-nilly that direct rule Ministers had planned. As the First Minister said, the Executive have brought forward their thoughts, strategies, policies, and post-consultation outcomes. Implementation should reflect what people need. For some who work in the system, the preferred option might have been to simply extend the current patterns and follow the policies of direct rule Ministers. Thankfully, those days are over and done with. The introduction of a legislative programme is not an end in itself, but instead represents one — albeit important — stage between policy development and implementation.

Legislation that is based on inadequate policy development and consideration is bad legislation and will lead to problems when it is implemented. It is therefore right that Ministers are fully satisfied about the purpose, effect and intention of legislation before they bring it to the Chamber. Sinn Féin fully endorses that process.

As an MLA who represents Derry — and in the context of the Stand up for Derry campaign — I want to see a future roll-out of policy that will tackle regional disparities. I want to see the creation of more jobs; the building of more social and affordable housing; and investment in health, education and infrastructure in the North’s second-largest city — Derry. That is what the Budget and the investment strategy must do to support the Programme for Government commitments and the basis on which legislation should be built. We have a Programme for Government that affords us many opportunities in the time ahead, which legislation can make realisable. People in my city were heartened by the First Minister’s comments last week that the investment strategy would tackle regional disparities. We are sure that the evolving legislative programme will reflect that — and much more. Go raibh míle maith agat.

I thank Dr Paisley, the First Minister, and the deputy First Minister for responding to the successful private Member’s motion, in my name, that demanded that a legislative programme be laid before the House before the Halloween recess — merely one week after the debate took place. I will not labour the point, but until that Ulster Unionist Party motion was passed, we had been waiting almost six months for some action. The phrase “better late than never” springs to mind.

Will the Member give way?

No; my time is limited. The legislative programme laid before the House covers animal health, road freight, building regulations, the Budget, Main Estimates, Supplementary Estimates, the presumption of death, civil registration, children’s emergency protection Orders, contamination legislation and a range of other measures. That is in addition to the three Bills that were recently introduced on health, taxis and libraries. The legislative programme was presented to the public in a fanfare as an unprecedented rush of legislation with 18 new Bills coming before the Assembly. That kaleidoscope of scattered measures addressed a range of issues that had already been flagged up by the respective Departments. Therefore, the legislative programme might be properly described as a major housekeeping exercise by the Executive, and it appeared to be a legislative programme designed by a committee — which, of course, it was.

Suffice it to say that there does not appear to be any central organising principle around which the legislation is structured. It is not so much driven by ideas as by the desire to put something — anything — before the House. Perhaps that is an inevitable outcome of our enforced coalition Government: there is no coherence to the legislative programme that they produce. Nevertheless, it is an outcome, and we must be grateful for that. Although it does not appear to have any central ideas, there are, at least, some useful measures in it that will improve the way in which Northern Ireland is governed and will progress the process of improved administration in the Province.

The Programme for Government is conservative in nature. It is supposed to be structured around five major objectives: first, to grow a dynamic and innovative economy; and secondly, to invest and build our infrastructure. Those related objectives are said to be at the heart of the Programme for Government, and no one in the House would take issue with those objectives. Rather, Members will want to support them and work tirelessly and earnestly with the Executive for their promotion and realisation. However, nowhere in the Programme for Government is there any legislation related to those objectives, and that is why so many commentators have described the Programme for Government as an aspirational document rather than a concrete legislative programme.

The lack of a wider range of specific business measures may, in part, be a testimony to the Executive’s failure to obtain a peace dividend from the notoriously tight-fisted former Chancellor of the Exchequer — now the Prime Minister.

Industrial rates have been held at 30%, which is good. That helps hold down the capital costs of running a business, and I compliment the Minister of Finance and Personnel on that decision. I will be looking for more business-friendly decisions in the months and years to come. The Executive have been described as business friendly, but in the future we will need to see less hype and more indicative measures to allow them to claim that distinction.

In other spheres the Programme for Government is a little disappointing and underwhelming. The Executive’s declared objective of promoting tolerance, inclusion, health and well-being is somewhat lacking in the programme. The Pensions Bill and public health amend­ment Bill are parity measures, as are others. I wonder how many of the Bills that are presented to us as an exciting departure from the torpor of direct rule were, in fact, born in the womb of the Civil Service machine.

The legislative framework that has been outlined by the First Minister, Dr Paisley, neglected to mention the single equality Bill and the EU gender directive. It is interesting to note that at the meeting of the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister last week we were informed that this House’s failure to introduce the legislation in line with the EU directive has financial implications for the whole of the UK. This Assembly, more than any other legislature, seems to have difficulty with equality legislation and, in particular, that which provides equality across genders and all sexual orientations. That is a great shame on the Executive, and one has to wonder at the silence of the First Minister on that particular subject in his statement to the House.

In the last couple of weeks, the Minister of Finance and Personnel, Mr Robinson, has talked about how much of his Budget and the Programme for Government was made in Northern Ireland, and yet, as previous Members outlined, there is very little before us today that has been made in Northern Ireland. I challenge the First Minister, in his reply to the House, to outline which of the 18 Bills are peculiar to Northern Ireland. Which are the brainchild of the Executive and not actually the legislative framework that the direct rule Administration had indicated for the coming year?

The First Minister also said that the programme was particular to the people of Northern Ireland. How much consultation has taken place? How many of the promises — made by Sinn Féin and the DUP in particular in their manifestos — to deliver for the people of Northern Ireland have been transformed into legislation? I see very little evidence of that.

One striking omission, about which there has already been a lot of consultation, and which is the cause of many neighbourhood disputes, is legislation to deal with the issue of hedges and tall trees. It should be simple to address that matter, which causes great angst in communities, but it has not been outlined in today’s statement. Where is it? There appears to be no intention to deliver on that.

Martina Anderson the Member for Foyle is a great political revisionist. Not only are we to believe that the last 30 or 40 years of violence did not happen, we are also to believe that Sinn Féin did not play an active role in the previous Executive; did not set before this House a Programme for Government; and did not have anything to do with the past, politically or otherwise.

I was interested to hear the Member say that the previous Executive was made up of all the parties. Does she not realise that her party is in the Executive also, and that the SDLP, therefore, has countersigned the legislative programme? When the Member is berating everyone else, she must remember that she is also berating her own colleague.

I thank the Member for his inter­vention. However, unlike many Members of the House, I do not suffer from short-term memory loss or amnesia. I am very much aware that Margaret Ritchie plays a full, active and leading role in the Executive and that she made one of the most courageous decisions — if not the most courageous decision — that the House has ever seen.

Unsupported by the others.

Indeed, Members — unsupported by many others.

That is very interesting, and Ms Anderson may well note that the Strategic Investment Board (SIB) — which was the brainchild of the SDLP, assisted by the Ulster Unionist Party, and voted against by both Sinn Féin and the DUP — has now taken the lead role in economic delivery and investment, not only in the Belfast area but right across the North.

Legislation to create an independent environmental protection agency was debated in the House, and many Members, including those in the DUP, signed up for it. However, the legislative programme does not mention that agency. In the meantime, however, our wonderful landscape, countryside, boglands, and areas of special scientific interest are being used as dumping grounds, not only by industries across the North, but by those from further afield. It is a great shame that the Environment and Heritage Service (EHS) has so far failed to protect our countryside and that the Executive have failed to establish an agency that will ensure the protection of the environment.

I concur with David Ford about a shared future. My party deeply regrets that the Executive do not endorse the shared future strategy and that there is nothing in the draft Programme for Government that facilitates building on reconciliation and community relations. Indeed, the draft Programme for Government contains a retraction on funding for community relations projects.

I agree with Mr Ford: the draft Programme for Government is a great disappointment, and it will do very little for Northern Ireland.

I welcome the debate on the legislative programme, and I congratulate the First Minister and deputy First Minister and the Executive for producing such a broad-ranging and applicable agenda. It is the task of Members of the Assembly to ensure that, as public representatives, we deliver legislation that is for the betterment of Northern Ireland. It is important that we make a difference to individual lives and show that devolution is working and that it is worthwhile.

Some in the Chamber have sought, on numerous occasions, to undermine the Assembly and the Executive and to erode public confidence in this body. Several of those Members are sitting in the Chamber today. Indeed, the honourable Member for South Antrim Mr Ford has just given us a good example of such behaviour. However, I hope that today will remind Members — including those who describe themselves as being in opposition — that all good things come to those who wait.

I believe that the legislative programme, which contains objectives for improving the lives of our constituents and for improving Northern Ireland economically, can be achieved. Time constraints and the fact that other Members wish to speak mean that although I will not discuss each Bill individually, I will comment on a couple of items that are included in the programme.

The Pensions Bill will mean that there is real improve­ment of the coverage, generosity and sustainability of the state pension. It will also mean that the provision of private pensions will be simplified. That will make a difference to the most vulnerable in our society, who see every pound as a prisoner. Indeed, they will gratefully receive those pounds.

Last week, a constituent of mine mentioned the importance of the proposed charities Bill. He said that the regulation of charities was of particular interest to him in his role as a pastor who is involved in both Church and charitable work. He was absolutely delighted to hear that the proposed charities Bill was included in the legislative programme. That is an example of devolution delivering and being responsive to the needs of local people and circumstances.

As has already been mentioned, the Budget is a very important aspect of the legislative programme, in that it provides the resources from which everything else flows. I congratulate my colleague the Minister of Finance and Personnel for the excellent work that he has done so far. Despite the growls and grunts of some, the way in which experts across the board have received the Budget shows the Finance Minister in a positive light both here in the Province and further afield.

In conclusion, this legislative programme is only the first that will come before this House. We have a long road to tread in order to bring Northern Ireland up to the standard to which we aspire. This is a very welcome first step, and I believe that it will be a very good start for all the people of Northern Ireland. I commend and support the motion proposed by the First Minister.

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Tacaím leis an rún seo fosta.

For some time, there has been a lot of expectation that legislation would be brought forward. I assume that Danny Kennedy was speaking as a Member, rather than as Chairperson of the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister, when he mentioned the motion that he put forward. We are very grateful, because it was obviously the boost that we all needed.

It was a winner.

Fair play to you, Danny.

At times, there has been a lot of impatience, and that has been reflected on occasions when people have genuinely raised concerns about the lack of legislation coming forward. I am glad that the issue is being debated today. There is an eagerness and a desire for the Assembly to take responsibility for creating and passing legislation.

Even though the Assembly has only been going for six months, 18 pieces of legislation — and, as the First Minister said, over 100 statutory rules — have been introduced. I was not here before, and as one of the new kids on the block I am very grateful to David, Danny and Dolores for reminding me of the successes that they brought —

Order. Yesterday, the Speaker made it quite clear that Members should be referred to by their surname, the prefix “Mr”, or their constituency. Please use that terminology.

Tá brón orm, a LeasCheann Comhairle. David Ford, Danny Kennedy and Dolores Kelly reminded us all of the legislation and business of the previous Executive, and I am very grateful for that. However, that was then; this is now. We need to take responsibility to ensure that within the draft Programme for Government — and it is a draft — we have priorities that will deliver, as the First Minister outlined, high-quality and efficient services to a world-class standard. I do not think that anyone would disagree with that. We need to reorganise services and have a review of public administration, which will affect how local government has been organised and how our health and social services are structured, to mention two examples that have already been debated in the House.

The Department of Agriculture and Rural Develop­ment (DARD) is reviewing legislation to tackle the disease outbreaks that have been witnessed in England. We need to ensure that our agriculture industry is protected as far as possible and that we have robust legislation on the way forward. What is the problem with that?

We need to make a difference in people’s lives. That is paramount, and it should be our central principle when making legislation. This is not just about making legislation for the sake of it. Unless we can produce policies and legislation that have an impact on people for the better, then the cynics in this House, of whom there are many, will be right in thinking that this is just a tick-box exercise — a way of filling time or padding things out. We need to ensure that we are not reusing a script left to us by our direct rule predecessors. We each have a responsibility to come forward with policies, legislation and procedures.

I look forward to the devolution of policing and justice, which is currently under discussion in the Assembly and Executive Review Committee. I look forward to the day when we see legislation for the Irish language Act and the single equality Bill. I want to take this opportunity to say that I was disappointed when the Irish language Act was treated so shoddily by the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure.

Having legislation is not the end of the process; it is the beginning. The greatest challenge for us will be in how we process that legislation and how we promote equality and human rights through its implementation.

If we look at the draft Programme for Government and at how we can proceed with the outworkings of the legislation that will stem from it, we will see that that will present a challenge for us all. The legislation will present a challenge for the scrutiny role of the Committees, through which we can look for a better future that is based on equality and objective need, rather than on the rhetoric of a shared future. Go raibh maith agat.

No teo lang ago a’ cum iver a’ saein whut saed ….. if ther is a’ wae tae dae ocht better….. fin it this we ken is whut is bein tried oot in this semblie.

I recently came across a quotation that said:

“If there is a way to do it better — find it.”

Every Member in the Assembly is attempting to do that. We know that Northern Ireland can be run in a better way than it was in the past, and we are working towards finding a new way to deal with things. It is with that reasoning that the First Minister and deputy First Minister have introduced a legislative programme that attempts to put in place a better way of doing things.

We have not been given a clean slate that is without difficulties with which to work. Our turbulent past and often indifferent direct rule Administrations mean that we have many problems that we must sort through. Inherited issues and innate differences have made Northern Ireland’s path a sometimes twisting and turning one. However, in the words of Winston Churchill:

“The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.”

We can therefore see who the optimistic Members are in the Chamber today and who are the pessimists.

We have been given an opportunity to overcome the obstacles and to make Northern Ireland a place where our children do not experience the same problems in life that we had to deal with in the past. That is why a legislative programme has been drawn up that will begin to address the issues with which we must deal. The schedule for that programme incorporates the priorities that the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister has high­lighted should be the first port of call.

It is not hard to see that the many problems and difficulties that the people of the Province go through daily are wide and varying. It has been hard to prioritise one worthy issue over another. However, I believe that that has been done, and I believe that those priorities are wide ranging and fair. When the Committee was formed, its mission statement comprised five main aims: growing a dynamic, innovative society; building a peaceful, just and stable society; investing to rebuild our infrastructure; delivering modern, high-quality and effective public services; and protecting and enhancing the environment and natural resources. As well as those aims, other priorities were listed, and I am sure that other Members will speak about a few of those.

Anti-poverty strategies have been high on the list of priorities, and it is not difficult to see why. Although people from the Province are famous for their generosity to good causes, we are far from living in a Utopia that has no poverty on its doorsteps. In my constituency, such a Utopian state is, unfortunately, a far cry from reality. A list of the so-called hot spots of child poverty was brought recently to our Committee. I was dismayed to find that Ards and Strangford had the sixth-highest level of child deprivation, with 30% of children there being classified as deprived. Although I was dismayed, I must admit that I was not entirely shocked.

The Assembly discussed child poverty not so long ago. That debate brought to people’s attention the fact that children other than those in Third World nations suffer too. In our previous debate on the matter, the First Minister and deputy First Minister committed to making a priority the eradication of child poverty within the next 12 years. I have asked that targets be set along the way in order that we can ensure that we can get a good hold of the position.

I am sure that no Member would argue against setting the eradication of child poverty as a top priority for the Assembly. I have heard it said that the mark of any society is the manner in which it treats its vulnerable, who, in this case, are our children. People in Northern Ireland are noted for having large hearts, and those must be shown first and foremost to our own people, supported by the idea that charity begins at home.

That idea forms the basis of another priority: the elderly people who live in the Province. Indeed, another Member spoke about that matter earlier. Since 2004, energy prices have risen by some 80%, but average incomes have risen by 6% and benefits by 2%. It is clear that the figures do not add up. That means that elderly people must choose between either keeping warm or having food in their stomachs. I am relieved that the First Minister and deputy First Minister have made a commitment to change the awful fact that 1,360 older people in Northern Ireland die each year as a result of cold weather.

I have also recently stated that the way in which widows and orphans and those who have been injured in the Troubles are treated does not do justice to the sacrifice that those people and their families made. It is therefore a right and notable priority to ensure the fair treatment and fair representation of the victims and survivors of the Troubles.

I could touch upon many issues and highlight the facts that make it imperative that they be treated as priorities, yet time does not permit me to do so. I will leave that to other Members and close with another reminder. We are not where we want to be, not where we are going to be, but thankfully we are not where we used to be. We will get there, and we will make a difference in Northern Ireland.

I commend to the House the statement from the First Minister and deputy First Minister.

I want to put on record my thanks to the First Minister and deputy First Minister for setting out the legislative programme for the 2007-08 session.

The people of Northern Ireland have waited patiently for legislation to flow from an accountable and responsive local Executive. However, I must qualify that by saying that I want to see useful legislation coming forward, and not, as has happened in the past, legislation that is not for the benefit of the people of Northern Ireland. We have seen far too much legislation flow into some areas, particularly one of which I have some knowledge — agriculture. Quite a lot of the legislation brought forward by direct rule Ministers was detrimental to that industry.

I question, however, whether the legislative programme set out before the Assembly today will deliver the strategic objectives that the First Minister and the deputy First Minister set out in the draft Programme for Government. The Bills that have the potential to be ambitious are outlined in such a vague manner — although I appreciate that all the detail cannot be included at this stage — that I fear that agreement on the content of many of those Bills has not yet been reached.

In the draft Programme for Government, the Executive set out five clear priorities concerning their desire to grow a dynamic and innovative economy. Setting aside the Budget, there appears to be no legislation that deals specifically with any of the key goals outlined for that priority. It is not a legislative programme that will help deliver a more flexible workforce, create higher-value-added jobs or inspire young people either to remain in, or to return to, Northern Ireland.

On the goal of improving the infrastructure, there is no specific legislation in the programme that seeks to facilitate the achievement of that necessary priority. While the Programme for Government and the investment strategy speak grandly of a renewed infrastructure for Northern Ireland, there is little evidence of any legislative commitment associated with that. Questions surely must be asked about the importance given to the infrastructure by the legislative programme.

With regard to the goal of protecting and enhancing the environment and natural resources, I welcome the Executive’s amendment to the buildings regulations, which will allow the Department of Finance and Personnel to promote sustainable development and the further enhancement and protection of the environment. However, the current environmental protection system helps only to bring small, minor, discrepancies to the fore and completely misses the big environmental destruction that takes place in the Province.

On the issue of delivering modern, high-quality and efficient services, I welcome — at least to some degree — the Executive’s civil registration Bill, as well as the public authorities reform Bill and the education reform Bill, although I still hold reservations about what the exact content of those Bills will be.

I bring to the Assembly’s attention the fact that the Pensions Bill is a matter of parity with the UK. The Children (Emergency Protection Orders) Bill merely brings us into line with the Human Rights Act 1998. The amendments to the public health legislation will merely bring us into line with the World Health Organization’s regulations. I reiterate: the programme is lacking in meaningful legislation that will improve the lives of the people of Northern Ireland. It resembles in places the piecemeal legislation that we had come to expect in the direct rule programme.

The last priority in the draft Programme for Government that I wish to address is the Executive’s desire to promote tolerance, inclusion, health and well-being. There is not one piece of legislation in the programme that comes remotely close to addressing the issue of tolerance and inclusion. Where was the tolerance at last night’s DPP meeting in south Belfast when it had to be abandoned?

Where was the tolerance at many of our parades during the summer? Where has the tolerance been for many people at the recent shootings of two police officers in the Province and the murder of Paul Quinn? It appears that the two dominant parties in the Assembly are incapable of working together on this issue, and the Programme for Government reflects that. The only way to achieve success in Northern Ireland is for the Executive to be truly committed to a shared Northern Ireland rather than being merely competing spheres of influence.

The Business Committee has arranged to meet immediately upon the lunchtime suspension. I propose, therefore, by leave of the Assembly, to suspend the sitting until 2.00 pm.

The sitting was suspended at 12.30 pm.

On resuming (Mr Deputy Speaker [Mr Dallat] in the Chair) —

I thank the First Minister and the deputy First Minister for presenting this legislative programme to the Assembly. I apologise to them and to the Deputy Speaker for my absence at the beginning of the debate; I had to attend a funeral this morning.

I wish both Ministers well during their terms of office. The SDLP has long sought partnership between this community’s two traditions, and we welcome the establishment of an Executive. It is important to support such an Executive, which the SDLP hopes will, at last, provide stability and develop partnership to greater heights. The SDLP also supports the Assembly. These institutions are the only sane way forward for all the people of Northern Ireland. However, the SDLP reserves the right to criticise the Executive for proposing policies or legislation that we find to be wrong, misdirected or inappropriate, or with which we disagree.

The SDLP welcomes the legislative programme as a basis on which the Executive can build and progressively move to a better society for all our people. It would be churlish and negative not to consider the programme as a step in the right direction, putting an end to direct rule from London, which did no service for anyone in this community. We are now masters in our own house and region. That is a constructive development.

However, the legislative programme is a bit like the curate’s egg — good in parts. It does not display much imagination and is a disparate collection of 18 proposed Bills that are, in the main, rather dull and prosaic. In effect, the programme is a disappointing collection of proposed legislation. Nonetheless, it is a basis on which to move forward.

Of course, there are some good parts — for example, the proposed charities Bill and Pensions Bill. Perhaps it is no coincidence that the best of the legislation will come from the Minister for Social Development and her Department.

The biggest criticism of this programme is not about what is in it, but what is not in it. For example, there is nothing in relation to the Irish language. Where is the Irish language Act that was agreed to at St Andrews? Why is that legislation not included in the legislative programme, and why is there nothing about a single equality Bill or a shared future? The Executive’s legislative programme does not address the cancer that has strangled our community and caused it to go through such horrors.

That is an enormous defect in the Programme for Government and the legislative package.

The Scottish Executive have put great emphasis on tackling sectarianism. Why are the First Minister and deputy First Minister not putting similar emphasis on that? Why are they not bringing forward legislation to deal with that evil in our midst? I look forward to a situation in which that can be remedied and to this time next year, when we will have a richer, deeper and much more imaginative programme of legislation.

Is a collection of Bills called an anthology?

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I apologise for not being in the Chamber for the start of the debate; I was attending an Assembly and Executive Review Committee meeting. Since entering the Chamber, I have listened to the discussion intently. A legislative programme is a good first step. The Assembly has been in power for six months. In the eyes of many, it was not going to work; but it is working.

Some Members have set themselves up as the official Opposition or the unofficial Opposition, and then there are those who are not sure whether they are in opposition or in Government but who will make the decision someday. Despite those problems, the Assembly has moved forward. Despite the great difficulties that have existed and will continue to exist, Sinn Féin and the DUP have proven that they are prepared to move forward.

Therefore, in that context, we have the roll out of legislation. We also have the draft Budget and the draft Programme for Government, which are out for consult­ation by Members and the wider community, and from which will flow other legislation as necessary. As has been repeated in the House today, legislation for its own sake would be a mistake. However, the greatest boost that we have given to society so far is an Executive that are up and running and working together.

When I read the Alliance Party’s amendment, I thought, OK. It states:

‘; but expresses its regret that the Programme represents little new thinking or innovation on the part of the Executive, and that key matters requiring legislative action remain unaddressed.’

I looked for the rest of the amendment. I apologise to Mr Ford for missing his speech, but I must assume that he outlined a lengthy list of legislation that he believes should be brought forward, because it is certainly not in the amendment. The amendment should have included the words, “such as”, or, “as well as”, or, “including such legislation as…”, but it does not.

I wondered whether the Alliance Party intended to bring a raft of legislation through the scrutiny Committees, but it seems that it does not. Opposition is a fine place to be. It can be a comfortable place at times, and it can be a difficult place. However, opposition is about being constructive: it is about offering alternatives.

In previous mandates, in the corner of the Chamber now occupied by the Alliance Party, Mr Bob McCartney used to sit —

He sat over there.

In my day, he sat just behind you. His avowed role was to tear down the Executive. The more I listen to the Alliance Party, the more I am convinced that its role is to tear down the Executive. I cannot understand why a party that talks about a shared future and collective responsibility and uses other such fine phrases should want to tear down an Executive that was elected by the people for the people, and which is working for the people. Perhaps that will be explained to me in the later deliberations.

Read Hansard.

I have read the Hansard report, and that is why I am making this speech.

The motion is worth reading. However, I am still unclear as to whether the Ulster Unionist Party and the SDLP support the amendment.

Nevertheless, the SDLP and the UUP have three Ministers in the Executive. I look for the legislative format that those three Ministers are bringing forward. If they wish, they could bring forward a raft of measures prior to the Budget and the Programme for Government, but I see none. There is the opposition within and the opposition without, to which they refer.

Mr Elliott talked about “tolerance and inclusion.” Every time I hear the Ulster Unionist Party talking about tolerance and inclusion, I almost have to pinch myself to make sure that it is serious. That party ran the state alone for 50 years, and it did not do so on the basis of tolerance and inclusion. Its reaction to the Irish language — both inside and outside the Chamber — is neither tolerant nor inclusive.

However, the Ulster Unionist Party’s two Ministers could propose legislation. Mr Elliott said that this is not a legislative programme, and that it offers little or no environmental protection.

The Member’s time is up.

I support the motion.

The question that a lot of people in Northern Ireland will be asking today is why they bothered with devolution. Devolution was supposed to be about local people taking control of their own futures and innovating on policy. However, the legislative programme that has been put forward by the Executive today offers anything but that.

There was great hope in our society for change; however, at some stage, that hope has to be turned into delivery. The manifestos of the various parties prior to the Assembly election were all worthy documents, and were full of great proposals regarding the issues that they would address once they were in power. We have seen little of that today.

The legislative programme outlines a mere 18 Bills. Those Bills are about parity, and about bringing Northern Ireland into line with the rest of the United Kingdom. Frankly, we could have simply tagged on to those Bills through legislative consent motions. The Bills are about internal housekeeping and bringing matters into line because of human rights implications. Furthermore, there is carry-over legislation from direct rule — measures that direct rulers were going to take in any case. The ball had already started rolling on a raft of proposals that are only now coming to fruition. Where is the new thinking? Where are the fingerprints of the four parties in the Executive on this legislative programme? They are not there.

Mr O'Dowd asked what else could be done. I am not sure what he has been doing for the past six months, or whether he has listened to any of the debates that have taken place in this Chamber, during which people have set out what needs to be done in this society.

Issues that have been discussed include legislation on a shared future and a single equality Bill, which is something very close to the heart of Sinn Féin. Neither of those is anywhere to be seen. Other issues discussed were the Football (Offences) Act 1991; mental-health issues and implementing the Bamford Review; free personal care for the elderly; a marine Bill; and the establishment of an environmental protection agency. Those are only seven issues; the list goes on and on.

The Alliance Party has its own vision of society. We have knowledge of the proposals that this Assembly must adopt to move this society forward. I am afraid that the parties in the Executive lack that vision.

Stephen Moutray appeared to be taking his turn as the DUP Back-Bencher to praise the First Minister without asking any difficult questions.

Martina Anderson contributed to the debate. It is important to welcome Sinn Féin to, essentially, adminis­tering British rule in Ireland, because that is what the legislative programme is all about. [Interruption.] She talked about people having hope for the future. I wonder if the people in Derry can survive on hope, rather than actual delivery.

Danny Kennedy referred to his private Members’ motion and how impressed he was that the Executive responded to that motion so quickly by producing a legislative programme. He answered his own question: it took one week to write.

Dolores Kelly of the SDLP referred to the single equality Bill. That is a crucial matter that the Assembly must take forward. It has been around for a number of years, and it has been discussed by the Assembly. The failure of the Executive to bring that issue forward illustrates their inability to agree on the fundamental issues that face our society.

The legislative programme is essentially that of the lowest common denominator. Only policies on which both the DUP and Sinn Féin can sign off are included in it. On difficult issues, on which agreement cannot be found, nothing will happen and no action will be taken. The same situation is likely to occur when it comes to policy for post-primary education, on which we still await the Minister of Education’s proposals.

Jimmy Spratt referred to attempts to erode public confidence in the Executive — I fail to see how the legislative programme will inspire public confidence. Carál Ní Chuilín talked about our only having been here for six months. The Brown Government in the UK have been in office only since June. Their legislative programme contains more than 20 Bills — substantive legislation — yet ours contains a mere 18. In case Members still think that we have been here only since May, I remind the Executive parties that they have been funded by the Northern Ireland Office. Special advisers were funded, from as early as January 2007 — if not earlier — specifically for the purpose of devising a Programme for Government so that the Executive could hit the ground running. However, we have had nothing but fudge and delay. Crucial issues have been neglected. As a result, the legislative programme requires serious reflection and revisiting. I urge support for the amendment.

This has been a most interesting, and most amusing, debate. I am glad that Members are in good spirits. They seem to be very happy. Some have been talking doom, but they talked it with great glee and joy. If they were sincere in what they were putting forth, they would not have done so in such a joyful way.

Out, beyond the Assembly, down among the men and women of Northern Ireland, there are people who are happy that we are moving in the right direction. Those people should be encouraged. No matter what scorn is poured on our efforts, and no matter what is done to wreck the solid foundations on which we hope to build, those people should take heart and not look on what we have heard today as a true reflection of what the Assembly is about.

Men and women Members of the Assembly want to see it work, and they believe that they have a responsibility to each individual voter. To those Members who made so many wild assertions, I suggest that, if they have such a wonderful legislative programme, they share it with us. If they have all those goodies in their little cupboard, will they not open it? After all, it is coming up to Christmas. Have some Christmas spirit — encourage us to look into the cupboard, take something out and partake of it. However, they will not do that. They stand there, guarding their cupboard and not letting us see what is in it. Surely if they had all these suggestions, they would reveal them. However, they will get the opportunity to do that. This debate is not for dotting i’s and crossing t’s; rather, it is a debate that allows us to take a general look at what is before us.

Let us see what contribution is made in Committee by those Members who have such wisdom. Pearls of wisdom — according to their own definition — were dropping from their tongues and their false teeth. Let us hear some definite contributions to the debate on what should be done to help us to move in the right direction.

I remind the Alliance Party, as I do those other parties that criticise, that it is part of the Assembly. It cannot escape the responsibility that has been placed on it.

I know that some of them got here with a not very large number of votes, but they still have a responsibility, so let us hear what they have to say.

A Member:

It is in the Hansard report.

I am afraid that despite my having very good glasses, made by the most expert person in east Belfast, and despite my having carefully read the contributions made by certain Members, there is nothing to see. It is darkness and the shadow of death. [Laughter.]

However, there is such a thing as resurrection; there may be a resurrection in the Chamber, and Members may start to surprise us. I am told that Northern Ireland has stood a lot of surprises in the past, and on occasions I have been surprised as I sit at this Bench and listen to what is said.

I have been shocked.

I am glad that you were shocked for once, because you needed to be shocked. [Laughter.] If the one achievement of my political life is that I have shocked Danny Kennedy, then that is something to write down. I hope that I shall soon receive another honour as the victor in the race.

We must face up to the matters that are on the list. I welcome the fact that the SDLP will take all the glory for what will happen when we come to the important part about people who need help. My Department has had meetings with all the Churches, and we have talked to them about the issues that they are concerned about. The Bill that we have before us is better than any Bill in England, Scotland or Wales, and the Churches are satisfied. We must be doing well to have satisfied all the Churches in this country. That result came about through good, concise, controversial talking among us. Every man produced his goods and laid them on the table, and we made good progress. When the Bill comes before the House, even our enemies will have to admit that progress has been made. Similar progress could be made on all the Bills if we put our minds and energies to it.

I welcome the fact that we will go into Committee and that we will examine and improve the proposals, and add new proposals if necessary, and that the Bills that we will have in this House will be as a result of the consensus of the views that win out in the arguments as we have the debate — a debate that everyone should welcome.

I trust that at the end of this period of entering into the statute book the legislation that has been decided in this way, the House will be opening a door that will open wider, and the opening of a road that is straight and narrow in one sense, but broad in another. That is what we should look forward to, and so I say to those who are dismal, “Cheer up”. The best has yet to come, and the cupboard of the Alliance Party will be open to all this Christmas. Get to it quickly and see all the goodies, and then thank them for stealing the menu from us.

Question put, That the Amendment be made.

The Assembly divided: Ayes 32; Noes 55.

AYES

Mr Attwood, Mr Beggs, Mr D Bradley, Mrs M Bradley, Mr P J Bradley, Mr Burns, Rev Dr Robert Coulter, Mr Cree, Mr Durkan, Mr Elliott, Dr Farry, Mr Ford, Mr Gallagher, Mrs Hanna, Mrs D Kelly, Mr Kennedy, Ms Lo, Mrs Long, Mr Lunn, Mr A Maginness, Mr McCallister, Mr McCarthy, Mr B McCrea, Dr McDonnell, Mr McFarland, Mr McNarry, Mr Neeson, Mr O’Loan, Mr P Ramsey, Mr K Robinson, Mr Savage, Mr B Wilson.

Tellers for the Ayes: Mr Lunn and Mr McCarthy.

NOES

Ms Anderson, Mr Boylan, Mr Brady, Mr Bresland, Mr Buchanan, Mr Butler, Mr T Clarke, Mr W Clarke, Mr Craig, Mr Dodds, Mr Doherty, Mr Donaldson, Mr Easton, Mrs Foster, Ms Gildernew, Mr Hamilton, Mr Hilditch, Mr Irwin, Mr G Kelly, Mr P Maskey, Mr F McCann, Ms J McCann, Mr McCartney, Mr McCausland, Mr I McCrea, Dr W McCrea, Mr McElduff, Mrs McGill, Mr M McGuinness, Mr McHugh, Miss McIlveen, Mr McLaughlin, Mr McQuillan, Mr Molloy, Lord Morrow, Mr Moutray, Mr Murphy, Mr Newton, Ms Ní Chuilín, Mr O'Dowd, Mr Paisley Jnr, Rev Dr Ian Paisley, Mr Poots, Ms S Ramsey, Mr G Robinson, Mrs I Robinson, Mr Ross, Ms Ruane, Mr Shannon, Mr Simpson, Mr Spratt, Mr Storey, Mr Weir, Mr Wells, Mr S Wilson.

Tellers for the Noes: Mr W Clarke and Mr Shannon.

Question accordingly negatived.

Main Question put and agreed to.

Resolved:

That this Assembly takes note of the Legislative Programme for the 2007/08 session, as agreed by the Executive on 18 October, and conveyed in the letter of 19 October 2007 from the First Minister and deputy First Minister to the Speaker.