1. Mr Tennyson asked the Minister of Finance whether she intends to bring rating policy proposals that will support hospitality businesses to the Executive. (AQO 1243/22-27)

Sixty-five per cent of the hospitality sector as a whole is already in receipt of support via the small business rate relief scheme. While calls for ever-increasing rate support are prominent, the Member will appreciate that similarly vocal views on how that additional support should be funded are harder to solicit. As the Member will know, England is phasing out that measure, and the reduction in retail, hospitality and leisure rate relief from 75% to 40% means that the cost of support is lower in 2025-26. The Executive have therefore received a reduction of £58·2 million in 2025-26 in relation to business rates.

Every pound that we, as an Executive, spend on rate relief means reduced revenue for vital public services or higher rates bills for homes and businesses. There needs to be a clear economic rationale for additional support. The rating system is our sole devolved tax lever and is there to generate income for the Executive and councils. The Member will be aware of the wider funding challenges being faced across Executive Departments. However, I plan to meet representatives of the sector along with other sectors in the coming days to discuss the issues that they face and how we can work together.

Minister, that is a somewhat disappointing response. While I accept that the public finances are constrained, if businesses go to the wall, our rates base shrinks. Will you commit to working with the Minister for the Economy and the chambers of commerce across Northern Ireland to bring forward some level of support for the hospitality and retail businesses that are struggling on our high streets?

I have had significant engagement with businesses, as the Member will appreciate. I understand that they face a range of issues, a lot of which are outwith our control and are because of decisions that have been made by the British Government as recently as the Budget statement. Like, I am sure, other Members, I have had significant correspondence on some of those issues. The fact remains that 70% of non-domestic ratepayers here receive some form of support, and our finances for providing additional support are limited.

I will always commit to engaging with the sector in order to understand the challenges that it faces and to see whether, as an Executive, we can take actions to support it. Of course, the rating system may not be the most appropriate approach to providing that support. I am always willing to listen to business organisations' or other Members' suggestions in respect of that.

What progress has been made on rating reform to help SMEs in particular?

As I have said on a number of occasions, I have brought forward proposals to the Executive on my approach to taking a more strategic look at the rating system in the short, medium and longer term. I hope to communicate to Members on that in more detail in the near future.

Will the Minister advise when she shared her rating proposals with her Executive colleagues?

I first circulated my proposals for consideration by the Executive on 10 October. The proposals included details on a potential consultation on certain rating policy measures. I subsequently asked that my paper be considered at four meetings of the Executive: on 17 October, 7 November, 11 November and 21 November. I also wrote to colleagues to outline the potential implications that not tabling the paper may have for the implementation of any changes in April 2025.

It is regrettable that, despite having cross-party support — from my party colleagues and colleagues from the Alliance and the UUP — the paper has not been tabled for discussion at the Executive. I am not alone in holding the view that such important matters should be discussed collectively by the Executive, as evidenced by the cross-party letter that asked for my paper to be tabled. It is important to have Executive discussion, if not agreement, on the general direction of policy prior to engaging in further supplementary consultation.

Minister, I have been in touch with you about the plight of businesses on Foyle Street in my constituency that have suffered hugely due to protracted works by Northern Ireland Water in the area and are seeking relief on their rates bills. The process of revaluation is intrusive, exhausting and expensive for those businesses, and it is labour-intensive for Land and Property Services (LPS). Is there no other mechanism by which to reduce rates when the negative impact on those business is blatant.

I know that the Member has raised that issue with me previously. I am sympathetic to businesses that are being impacted by works that are beyond their control. The Member is aware that rate relief is available through the hardship scheme for businesses that suffer from impacts that are beyond their control. The award of further relief for specific purposes would mean less money to spend on public services. As has been mentioned, rates are our only revenue generator. They fund our public services, so the choice would be to have less money to give out or to put up rates bills for other homes and businesses.

Under the rating and valuation system, every case is assessed by LPS on its merits, by considering the impact of the work on the net annual value (NAV) of the property. That is determined by established case law and a long-standing statutory framework that supports the stability of our tax base, which is used to fund central and local government services. The Member will appreciate that it is important to have that statutory framework and consider every case against it, because there are a lot of demands on LPS to make support available to businesses in difficult circumstances. There has to be that framework within which the issue is considered.

Minister, you said that you were not developing a scheme at the minute, but, if you were, would you consider putting in conditions so that public money would not be given to organisations that are hostile to unions, do not pay a real living wage or use zero-hours contracts? Would you support such conditions in a public scheme?

I did not catch the first part of the Member's question, but I think that I got the gist of it. As I outlined to Mr Durkan, rating relief is provided to businesses on the basis of a statutory framework. Some of those issues are included in our social value procurement framework for other government services.