08/12/2015 Stormont Today

After yesterday's high drama which saw Nigel Dodds ruling himself

out of the DUP leadership, things seemed positively pedestrian today -

though several important issues were discussed in the chamber.

The move to cut the number of government departments ramped up a

gear and the Health Minister went on the attack against people who smoke

Reducing government departments here has been a long time coming,

but some are sceptical of the benefits...

Warm and meaningless phrases, but somehow the mere reduction to nine

departments will have a transformative impact in terms of

the character of government. Simon Hamilton changes tack on

smoking in cars with children and My view is that anyone who smokes in

a confined space like a car with children in that car is an idiot.

And with me to share his thoughts on today's developments is

Back in March the First Minister, Peter Robinson,

formally announced the names of Stormont's nine new departments, and

after today we're one step closer to seeing them become a reality.

The Departments Bill, which would see the majority

of the current twelve departments renamed or replaced before next

year's Assembly elections, passed its second reading and was granted

There will be hopefully financial savings but the primary rationale

for this proposal is more efficient and effective government for the

people of Northern Ireland. It is hoped that the reorganisation will

bring more joined up government and synergies that can be delivered but

the Alliance Party would go further. We would reduce the number of MLAs

also to 90 in time for the next election and we would also like to

see greater use of a statutory duty to cooperate on government

departments. I figured his third to say that for some time now there has

been some all-party support for reform in this house and within the

structures there has been an agreement on the reduction of

departments. We now have that proposal and as far as we are

concerned, it is the time to get on with it and to deliver what we

promised we would deliver. I hope that in the context of the recent

negotiations that this will form part of evolving this place into a

more efficient working relationship. There is some sense that somehow or

another the reduction to nine departments is a more efficient

working relationship. There is some sense that somehow or another the

reduction to nine departments is up and I will give way but I will

finish this point before I do. The nine departments will lead to more

joined up government. The Junior Minister says it will eliminate

unnecessary bureaucracy. And so on and so forth. Scores of war and

meaningless phrases. Warm meaningless phrases that somehow the

mere reduction to nine departments will have a transformative impact in

terms of the character of government and the content of our politics.

That is if anyone indulges that view. It is idle as it is casual and

foolish. This is not some idea that has emerged out of the left field.

It has been around the same blog on a few occasions. This is not an

insignificant bill, it may be small in terms of clauses, but it is a

bill of acute importance because it will impact on everything a person

in Northern Ireland. From the day and hour we eventually reduce the

number of departments, that is why in this debate I state that the

Ulster Unionist Party has concerns about such an important bill being

introduced so late in the mandate and the attempts to use Excel array

to passage means it will not receive the attention it deserves. We are

not arguing against the rationale of cutting the departments, our quarrel

is not with the content of the bill, it is with the failure of the

Executive to run the government and get this matter are agreed. As

streamlined Department system will offer fresh opportunities for

improving the way we do business. The future departments will have a

clear identity which will be appreciated by citizens. The new

slimmed down structure will enable related policies and functions to be

put together and synergies to be achieved. It will provide a leaner

more efficient Executive. The changes will have consequences for

this Assembly, fewer Executive departments should simplify

committee structures and business scheduling. Together with wider

public sector services... Emma Pengelly - and the second stage

of the bill passed on an oral vote. The proposals in this bill have

been a long time coming... Yes they have been around for a

while and I think it is fitting that Emma Pengelly articulated the

argument for reform because it has been something that the DUP have

been interested in. That being said, I think Alex Attwood struck

the right though. It is one thing to say it will lead to more streamlined

government as Emma Pengelly said, however what we know is that it is

the nature of the relationship between the governing parties that

will lead to the type of synergies and interconnected government, that

remains to be seen after the next election whether he ever decides to

go into the next Executive can form a harmonious relationship that takes

it forward. Not all departments are affected

by the bill, though... A number have not been. Those that

have, the new economy department which will bring together the

employment and learning, it will be interesting to see to the DUP once

again take finance first in which case Sinn Fein have the choice of

opting for the economy department and finally take a department with

money or do they go for education. In the time ahead, that will be

interesting to see do we have new faces in terms of the parties in the

new departments. They are disappearing, but a

minister is going to be taking responsibility for those areas. The

point can be made in other jurisdictions, they can cope quite

handily with the smaller number of departments, greater

responsibilities, this is a very small region. There have been

shake-ups in Westminster without any great discussion.

Some concerns were put forward there about such a significant piece

of legislation being rushed through accelerated passage?

I do not share those concerns. We have had these discussions for years

and we are at the point that this needs to get pushed through. It

needs to be in place a head of the next elections.

Arguments also for reducing the number of MLAs.

I cannot see it happening until those five years have passed. The

reason we had 108 MLAs was so that all the minority parties would be

represented. We are now a long way into this new year and I think the

parties are comfortable about moving from six seat constituencies down to

five. Interesting what will happen after that, the number of

Westminster seats if that was to reduce further, we would move from

90 two 80. The Health Minister today revealed

to MLAs that he hopes to see smoking in cars carrying children

made illegal in Northern Ireland. In fact,

Simon Hamilton went as far as to He confirmed

the new law could be part of another larger health bill making

its way through the Assembly... Before I move on to part two I want

to address an issue that is not in the bill but many believe should be.

Many people were concerned about the omission of a clause banning smoking

in cars with children. I have listened carefully to the arguments

made by many that Northern Ireland should follow the example in other

parts of the UK and I can confirm to the House that it is my intention to

bring forward an amendment to ban smoking in cars with children. I

would like to indicate my intention to bring forward an amendment on a

sugar tax levy insuring that the Department will consult on a levy on

sugar sweetened drinks. This is a major source of our ill health,

particularly among our younger children and young people.

Conditions such as obesity, type two diabetes, cardiovascular disease and

tooth decay, so consumption of sugary drinks is higher among young

people and those on low incomes. Scotland and Wales and the Republic

are legislating while England has introduced a ban. There is a great

risk and it is welcome what the minister is doing but there is a

great risk that children here will be left behind to suffer a great

risk that children here will be left behind to suffer detrimental effects

for the introduction of the ban. Some parents smoke in cars under the

well intended assumption that winding down the window will let the

smoke out. In reality, that only pushes it back into the back of the

car. In these types of conditions, it has been proven that smoke can

reach up to ten times the recognised unhealthy level and often lingers

for hours. I believe there is a sound medical reason to introduce

this ban. Unlike adults, children do not really have any choice regarding

whether they are in an enclosed place or not with someone who is

smoking. We have already banned smoking in enclosed public places

and workplaces and that is very welcome. Smoking has also been

prohibited in vehicles if they are work-related. This extension to the

law to protect our young people would seem logical and consistent

with what we have done before. I am delighted to see that the Minister

is intending to bring an amendment which will make it an offence to

smoke in cars carrying children. The adverse effects of passive smoking

have been well documented for years and its effect on children are even

greater. Children cannot make their own decisions in respect of passive

smoking in a car so by introducing this ban, we will protect children

from these effects. Also the associated health problems. The

arguments to why we should do this are well rehearsed. The health

implications for children, the lack of choice for them, the fact that

their immune systems and their bodies are not fully developed, the

harm is exponentially worse on a young child than for example one of

us sitting in a car. My view is that anyone who smokes in a confined

space like a car with children in that car is an idiot. Given the

multiplicity of evidence that there is about the damage that smoking

does to individuals themselves, the well-established knowledge and

information that second-hand smoke can do damage and particularly be

impact that it can have on young children.

And the second stage of that bill was passed.

That debate was in the Assembly either side of lunch

but there was no rest for the Health Minister as sandwiched in

And given his recent announcement it came as little surprise that the

scrapping of the Health and Social Care Board was the hot topic...

On the 4th of November I outlined radical plans for transforming our

health and social care system, the proposed changes seek to reduce

pre-Chrissy as well as the department taking firmer strategic

control of our health and social care system. I want trust to be

responsible for the planning of care in their areas and to give them

independence to deliver it. I propose that we close down the

Health and Social Care Board. Departmental officials are currently

drafting a document that seeks views on the changes and I aim to bring

forward that consultation as soon as I can to gather views. I have been

encouraged by the positive response to my proposals from other

politicians and from members of the public.

The ministers of the potential for change before the Admiral Sir George

Zambellas -- legislation has been put in place? The panel will look at

the best confederation of our services. -- configuration. It will

probably take 18 months to do that. That is a reflection of what I

believed to be the realistic timetable to get the legislation in

place. Bearing in mind there is an election coming up. Officials have

been working assiduously on producing a consultation document

and I hope to be in a position to prove that shortly and launch it

soon after to start this process of consultation which will provide the

format for the drafting of legislation. Can the Minister assure

the house there will be no redundancies? I do not envisage any

compulsory redundancies but that is not to see there will not be the

need to get rid of some posts. I do not see a compulsory redundancy

process. It is worth emphasising that this is about getting a system

which is appropriate in place for our staff so weak and get the best

from them. I do not believe the system currently in place is getting

the best out of our staff, talents are not being optimised. There are

too many layers. Has the Minister not got a target in terms of savings

which will come out of it as well as other organisational advantages? Are

there are too many people, it has grown too large over the years? I

accept the point he makes about the size of it growing. It has increased

since its inception in 2010 by 160 members of staff. And interview to

the Belfast Telegraph said that he wanted the organisation to be a

leading organisation and there should be a maximum of 250 staff but

after a lot of crying that they could not do it with that number, I

allowed it to go to 350. In fact it started off at 436 members of staff

during his tenure. A lot higher than the 250 we envisaged. I presume he

was talking about crying and civil servants who he told me could not

run our health service at the committee but it was clear they

could get him to do whatever they wanted.

Simon Hamilton, unable to resist having a pop

Dealing with the past - it was the one issue that

politicians failed to agree on in the recent Fresh Start deal.

But while the talks didn't bring about a resolution on that matter,

the Justice Minister announced today that he's agreed to recruit

investigative support for the Coroners' Service

The failure of the latest political agreement to come to an agreement on

legacy matters makes progress on legacy matters more difficult. I

appreciate the disappointment this will cost effectiveness. I want to

deliver as much as I can for families so I have agreed to the

Tribunal service launching a recruitment scheme with a view to

providing support for the Coroners' Service. The scheme is launched

yesterday and I would expect appointments by next spring. The

cost of such appointments will result in further pressure on my

department. Does he agree the current process does not provide

access to investigations with unacceptable timeline? He makes a

point which has a number of different factors. There are

problems around resource in for the Coroners' Service. There are also

issues regarding legacy issues were matters have been engaged which need

clarification from the police or Ministry of Defence, especially

where a national security issues are engaged. I am determined to put the

maximum resources into the Coroners' Service. Good work has been done to

strengthen the complement of coroners by assigning judges to deal

with coroners cases. Until we resolve the fundamental issue of

resourcing, it will not be done as fast as we would wish. I am away in

the case of the Kingsmills inquest, a preliminary hearing has been held

and a further is due to be held before Christmas. The intention is

to proceed if matters can be strengthened at the preliminary

hearing, we will proceed to a full hearing in early 2016. This hearing

is being looked after by one of the High Court judges who has been moved

across to assess the Coroners' Service. This should help produce

results for the families concerned. Could the minister inform the house

if there's 56 outstanding legacy requests will be completed within a

reasonable period of time or will be completed at all? At the moment, the

Lord Chief Justice having assumed the presidency of the coroners

courts in line with an Assembly decision, has instructed one of the

senior judges to review all of those outstanding 56 cases. That will lead

to a healing by Lord Justice we're in each of them in the month of

January. That will establish the position for all of those cases and

which will move forward speedily and which will take longer or creative

goodies. There are difficulties and disclosure matters which are causing

delay in a number of them. I am determined that we will put the

resources in, if they can be made available. Members will recall there

was a promise from the Prime Minister when you Google for funding

to deal with legacy matters but we have not seen the additional funding

so far. I am determined to see blue will make progress within the system

and funding will be put from the limited budget into dealing with the

past. There was plenty of legislation

today for Members to get their teeth into and it was onto the last course

for the Food Hygiene Rating Bill as it now moves to Royal Assent

after passing its final stage. The bill aims to make it mandatory

for food businesses to display a food hygiene rating sticker

on their premises. Not only will the bill Ann Maguire

consumers to make an informed choice regarding where they choose to eat

or shop for food but it will provide an impetus for businesses to

maintain food hygiene. It will drive standards for individual businesses.

There are 40 cases of foodborne illnesses every year which result in

hospitalisation and resulted in 24 deaths. This costs ?83 million to

the economy. The intention was that businesses would only be required to

display as sticker made of plastic at a physical location on their

premises. The committee was concerned that the Food Standards

Agency did not intend this should be displayed on websites. We will of

the view that given that customers place orders for food on websites,

those websites should display this. The previous scheme was voluntarily

and played a valuable role in establishing overall authority. It

has been very successful. It operates on that completely

voluntary basis. When the committee found only 56% of establishments

where I'd healing to it, it underscored the need for action.

Where I'd healing to it. Many people were not aware of these stickers

were mandatory so this bill has addressed what some would consider

an omission of existing policy. Overall, the voluntary scheme has

worked well but inevitably people who had something to hide were least

likely to get involved. The numbers proved that.

Bullying - either online or in the playground.

It's something the Education Minister is very keen to

And today John O'Dowd's bill addressing the issue reached

The Minister began by outlining the bill's goals...

This is a short bill with just three objectives, to provide an inclusive

definition of bullying, introduced a duty for schools to keep a record of

bullying and to introduce a duty for the Board of Governors to play a

more direct role in how bullying is dealt with in their school. These

will help establish a framework of good practice which schools can

adapt to their individual needs. I think the committee hopes the

department will use the information from the database along with pupil

absence data to develop useful pupil guidance which will start getting

rid of bullying from our schools. That is a general welcome from the

education committee for the spell. Sometimes teachers are afraid to

deal with issues arising from bullying. This is not helping

pupils. This notion of banter, just traditional banter. I see this as a

member of a football club and someone who has coached young

people. The use of language, some people describe it as banter. I

strongly support the principle behind the clause but I have

concerns. I believe the language should be stronger and be specific

to place a duty on the school to actively review its policies on a

yearly basis. Schools review their policy and practice as part of their

annual review of their development plan so I think this should be

incorporated in this. We also need to see the supporting guidance to

the bill. What formal brigade against take? Who will rate it and

window be finalised? Will it be before the end of March 2016 when

this Assembly will be dissolved? -- who will write it. Sectarianism is

not specifically mentioned, political opinion is and religion or

belief. But we have a particular problem year at around sectarianism

so perhaps it needs to be in there. The danger of not tackling wider

issues as we risk losing another three up to five years. The Lord

Chief Justice said keeping MPs with legislation is often a slow response

in keeping up with these issues. NI21's Basil McCrea - and Chris

Donnelly is here for a final word... Let's stay with the topic of

bullying - you're a vice principal, do you feel this is an issue that

needs to be on the statute books? Very much so. I welcome it. Schools

will be keen to share the definition with children and parents. The bill

is also giving clarity to schools to see when they are obliged to

intervene. Not just about bullying inside the school. There is a

responsibility to children outside school grounds. It is important that

schools have the authority to take action as necessary. Let us talk

about musical chairs. And we could be about to see

the return of a former Minister. It seems Michelle Gildernew is

in the hunt for a seat in Yes, Pat Ramsey was a very popular

MLA and he has also had his house attacked over a period of years by

dissidents. No one will graduate in his retirement. Sinn Fein are

looking stunned by the loss of Michelle Gildernew's seat and they

want her back in the Assembly. I think they want her back in the

Assembly because she is one of their stronger candidates. Thank you very

much, as ever. That's it from the Stormont

team until the New Year. Do join me for The View, though,

on Thursday at 10.35 on BBC1. We'll leave you with this Christmas

send off from across the chamber. From everyone in the team -

bye bye and Happy Christmas. I thank the member for his question

and his Christmas cheer. We think there are some people in this house

who need a hug but I am not up for that. I would not even ask an elf to

hug you Gregory, let's be frank. Sometimes, all that's needed

is a helping hand. Recognising someone's value,

and seeing when they need help. A few minutes out of our lives

to show that we care. We're all doing something to

support older people this Christmas.