09/10/2012 Stormont Today

$:/STARTFEED. Hello. Welcome to Stormont today. In the next 30

minutes, the biggest shake up in You have to change fast without

leaving the most vulnerable behind. We're looking for the colour of the

money. Because we have not seen one of those agreed to as of yet.

Health Minister announces major changes for the Health Service.

During the next three to five years the current number of residential

homes would be reduced by at least 50% across Northern Ireland as we

support increasing numbers of people to live in non-institutional

settings. And find out why our MLAs are fighting to hold onto their

marbles. Let's start with the big issue of

the day, welfare reform. It was trailed in advance as the biggest

set piece debate for some time. In that respect it didn't disappoint.

Our reporter, Chris Page, followed proceedings through the day and

he's with me now. Chris, it had the feeling of being a big day today?

It really did. This was one of the most important pieces of

legislation this Assembly has dealt with in recent years, Welfare

Reform Bill. It's been brought in by the Westminster Government for

England and Wales. It will generate lots of changes to the Social

Security benefits system, replacing the Disability Living Allowance

with a Personal Independence Payment. It rolls six benefits into

a universal credit payment. Something that affects tens of

thousands of households and up to MLAs whether to bring it in here.

More from you shortly. First a flavour of the debate on the floor

of the House. There are people in our society who have never worked,

who have no concept of what work means or requires of them. So we

have to change systems, behaviours and attitudes. We have to change

fast without leaving the most vulnerable behind. Breaking parity

is a choice we can make. But it will have huge costs. Those costs

will be met through less money for schools. Less money for hospitals,

less money for the police. I believe there are four principles

underpinning this legislation. To protect the vulnerable, to get

people back to work, to develop a system which is fair and to

encourage personal and social responsibility. This bill is far

from perfect. I'm not saying what will emerge from our scrutiny will

be perfect, however I do hope that as part of the scrutiny process, we

will identify changes that will not have significant costs but can

address some of the shortcomings of the bill. There has been discussion

in the media about possibly defering. The truth of the matter

is we have run out of road. We have been told at all times by the

British Government ministers that yes, your circumstances as a --

they prevail in the Northern Ireland means we should have

flexibilities in the way the system will be administered. What we're

looking for is the colour of the money. Because we have not seen one

of those flexibilities agreed to. We are -- have referred to issues

like the monthly payment. The monthly payment under universal

payment is designed to be paid to a single person in the home. We know,

we know that the big fear there is that that is a regressive step.

That mean that's for the most part a lot of women once again are going

to be brought back to the position where they're going to be dependent

on somebody for every penny they might need in their household. Is

that what we want? Maybe some people do. Some of my best friends

are men, but some men are not very fair when it comes to money in

their pocket in their household. This legislation, the biggest

reform of our Social Security system in generations, has, as has

been said, the potential to encourage thousands of our people

to move from welfare dependencey into employment, to make the

failing system fairer and to save billions of taxpayers pounds, but

it also has the potential, if implemented wrongly, to destroy

lives, to take away support from people who cannot afford to lose

anything else. Of course, you could forgive us for knowing why Sinn

Fein may have tabled this so-called reasonable amendment. The dogs in

the street have a view. They can say it. They believe it's a game of

political brinksmanship. They think by getting to this stage they can

send out hard hitting basis and their base will see welfare reform

has been. We welcome the need for a simple more accessible benefit

system, but we will not accept this bill, which as it stands, is a

shameful attack on the vulnerable our society. We will not Val low

the Tories peddling of cuts dressed as reform, nor the demonisation of

those on benefits. We are not oblivious to the implications of

breaking and the constraints of parity. We hear loudly the

threatening noises from Westminster and their echoes in this chamber

and over the air waves. But we cannot and we will not accept any

legislation that will force thousands of our citizens into

poverty. We know the place to make significant changes to the bill was

in Westminster. While that leaves us in a difficult situation, we

need to acknowledge our duty is to progress with the bill and make

changes in our power. Delaying the process is not the answer. The

costs of delay are considerable, including as the minister has

already highlighted, the risk that those Northern Ireland residents

who deliver Social Security services on a UK-wide basis could

lose their jobs. We don't have the tax base to sustain our local

system or pay for deviations from what happens in the rest of the UK.

Parity works in our favour in that it enshurz a level of provision we

could not otherwise afford. Alliance does not believe it's

feasible we breach parity in terms of benefits and thresh hods. We can

push operational matters to fit local circumstances, this is where

our focus needs to be. That's a flavour of what MLAs had to say.

How would you sum up the tone of the debate? In the days leading up

to this debate, there had been sharp words exchanged on the air

waves between MLAs. Whenever they got into the chamber, during the

debate, the atmosphere was relatively calm, perhaps reflecting

the fact that so many people are affected by the measures under

discussion here. There were a few interinjections an the Speaker had

to call them to order a few times. That's the nature of politics here.

On the whole while speakers were passionate they listened to each

other. Sinn Fein was unhappy with aspects of the proposed legislation.

How did that play out today? Sinn Fein have reservations about

aspects of the bill. They want more flexibility on payments rather than

the payments being made once a month, as is the plan under the

reforms, they want them made more oftden. They want payments made

available to more than one member of the household. These reforms

mean one member of the household is able to pick up benefits. They

tabled an amendment that the bill should be deferred to allow more

time for the executive to negotiate with ministers in Westminster. But

they did not lay down a petition of concern, in other words demand the

issue was subject to a cross- community veto in the Assembly. The

DUP put the counterargument to that. Nelson McCausland there speaking

about breaking parity. He said if the Assembly did not keep in step

with Westminster they would lose out on millions of pounds of

funding from the Treasury. As far as what happens in e. Is concerned,

it's pretty obvious that the committee sage is going to be

critical. What can we expect? Whenever the bill goes before the

committee, MLAs will get down into the details of the bill. You can

expect lots of horse trading, discussion on really very, very key

points. Then the bill will go back before the Assembly and MLAs will

decide at the third stage when the bill will be made law. Thanks Chris.

Kevin Higgins from Advice NI also joins us. Welcome to the programme.

Thanks very much for being with us tonight. We've talked a lot already

on the programme about what politicians make of this debate.

What do you think people at home watching this are likely to be

concerned about? I think that we can't lose sight that full scrutiny

of this legislation has to take place over the next two months. I

believe that there is scope for subStan shale change. I think

people watching this, people across Northern Ireland will believe that

we Advice NI, politicians will have failed them in the legislation

which gets royal assents in March is the same as introduced today,

then we will have failed the people of Northern Ireland. The committee

stage is critical as far as you're concerned? It's critical. We

believe that the committee can influence and can change this piece

of legislation. We recognise that parity is a very serious issue.

We'll not be able to change the system of benefits and the amount

of benefits payable. But we have seen already things like monthly

payments, the inclusion of Housing Benefit can have the potential to

change. We would like to see that go further, with DLA we would like

a legislative process there that can examine and make sure the

provider does their job properly in terms of medical examinations and

also, that perhaps a statutory advice and information where people

are affected Negtively. There's no question of breaking parity with

Westminster, is there? Do you concede that? Absolutely. The

amount of money that's involved I concede that. As I said we do think

there is scope for change. In actual fact there has to be change.

We've heard a lot about Northern Ireland has a set of special

circumstances that there needs to be mitigation. Let's see the colour

of that mitigation. If this legislation means that people who

need help most get that help, if it also helps people back into work

who are currently not in work, that's what the Conservatives say

it's about, wouldn't those be good things? Wouldn't they be changes

for the good overall? Absolutely. We support the simplification. We

support changes for the good. But let's, we are also there to talk

out and speak for the vulnerable. So let's say, take the example of

Disability Living Allowance that's being replaced by Personal

Independence Payment. We had the Treasury document in June 2010 that

said that change would lead to a 20% cut in expenditure. So that

would mean there's going to be people that will miss out. People

won't get the benefit maybe that would have got it in the past.

People will be put off it that are getting it at the moment. That can

have a huge impact on household impact. What are the implications

for the people who won't meet more stringent criteria when the new

legislation is on the books? Clearly you think that's going to

be a problem. I think it has to be a problem. If we learn the lesson

of incapacity benefit reassessment where people are being reassessed

onto ESA. Not everybody is making the journey successfully. We fear

the same thing might happen with DLA to PIP. It underscores the idea

how populations engage with the committee stage. It's very

important for what happens next and what the legislation will look at

in six months' time. It's worth making the point that all the

parties actually involved in the debate had reservations about the

bill. Even the DUP said some aspects were unpalatable. But they

thought nonetheless the bill should be allowed to go to the committee

stage and that's the place where detailed cfrgs should take place.

- consideration should take place. Do you share the thought by Mark

Durkin that this could lead to the demonisation of the people who are

on benefits, is that a real dainksner We will pay careful

attention to the language that is used. We don't want to see

demonisation. Any of us could be made redundant, lose our jobs,

suffer ill health and Social Security is something to be lauded.

It is a great thing to have. We would stand up against demonising

anybody that relies on the Social Security system. We'll leave it

there for now. Thank you both. Now the Health Minister has told

the Assembly that the number of publicly owned residential homes

would be cut by half under the transforming your care health

proposals. Edwin Poots was launching a public consultation

which will run until January next year. Our society is changing. We

have a growing and ageing population with people living

longer. This is of course something to celebrate that the population is

living longer, but it also means that there are more people with

long-term conditions and inevitably places more demands on the health

and social care services including hospitals and other resources. The

treatment and care of sit zepbsz is changing. We have increasingly

specialised service was technology driving improvements and how we --

can design and provide care. Transforming care indicated that

services could rise in demand by 4%. We need to improve services but in

a way that secures, improves productist and value for money.

What has not chainked is a belief in the core principles of the NHS.

These principles are that Health Services are generally free at the

point of delivery, based on individual need not ability to pay.

The new model of care is focused on ensuring that more services are

provided in the community, closer to people's homes, where that's

possible. During the next three to five years, the current number of

statutory residential homes would be reduced by at least 50% across

Northern Ireland. As we support increasing numbers of people to

live in non-institutional settings. This does not necessarily mean a

reduction in residential homes provided bit independent sector,

where there continues to be a demand for these services, they

will continue to be provided. Prot posal for mental health include six

in-patient mental health units for those aged 18 and over, to reduce

stigma and provide access. It is desirable to locate mental health

hospitals close to acute hospital provision. We cannot ignore that

significance savings would need to occur to causeway Hospital. The

community in that area need quality services over the coming years.

It's important we plan carefully to deliver that objective. This is not

a cost-cutting exercise, but about improving service delivery and

making better use of the available resources. It is also anticipated

there would be reductions in our overall workforce of around 3% over

the next three to five years. The change is proposed with a shift in

services into the community may mean some staff working in a

different way or in a different place. Some staff may choose not to

make the change and they will be supported in their decisions.

state in the statement about the proposal to close at least 50% of

the statutory residential homes. But that doesn't necessarily mean a

reduction in the private residential homes. Can you provide

assurances that this doesn't represent a privatisation of

elderly care through the tapbs forming your care strategy. First

of all, there is a lesser demand for residential care and throughout

the transforming your care process we have identified that amongst the

public there is a greater desire to spend their later years or indeed

younger people who become incapacitated to spend that in a

real home, the home of their choice as opposed to a residential home.

In that respect, we need to observe and honour the wishes of the public

and seek to do that. Second aspect of it is that many of our

residential care homes were built in the quite distant past. Many of

them do not meet the standards in terms of room sizes, in terms of

overhead hoists and so forth. That would be available in many other

facilities. I can't ask members of the public to use a facility owned

bit public, which is not as good as perhaps a facility available within

the private sector. Therefore, if the private sector are doing their

job well in that respect, they will continue to receive support to

Carrie out that work. The Health Minister, Edwin Poots. Now who

could forget recent scenes like this around Belfast city centre as

commuters complain new bus lanes are causing traffic chaos. It's not

just commuters complaining. MLAs want answers. They quizzed the

relevant minister, Danny Kennedy today. Let me make it clear, there

is no war on motorists and I tell the House that it is regrettable

that during the bedding in period some have suffered disruption to

their journeys. One of the objectives of this project is to

persuade people who drive through the city centre without a

destination there to travel around the city centre. This would free up

street space for those people who need to drive into the city centre

for shopping, work or leisure. It is designed going forward to make

car and bus journeys faster and easier. I met yesterday with the

Chamber of Commerce representatives and Belfast city centre management,

who expressed their concern that media coverage was sending out the

wrong message. Let me take this opportunity to send out the right

message - Belfast is open. Belfast is accessible. It's a good place to

do business. It's important that Belfast on the move is allowed to

bed in, settle down and work. And the plan is and my expectation is

and hope is that we can then progress to a rapid transit system

for the city. I accept the rational that the minister has said out. I

believe it's a legitimate one, but the experience of the ordinary

commuter has been one of shambles, not Belfast on the move. Either I'm

loseing my marbles or the minister has lost his marbles previously. I

have to say to the minister that this needs to be rethought and

rethought quickly. I do say to the member that significant

consultation has taken place. Full public consultation was jointly

launched by Connor Murphy and the then Lord Mayor in Belfast City

Hall on 3rd September. This consultation which included Belfast

chamber of trade and commerce and the city centre management showed

broad support for the proposals. There is an inevitable bedding in

period. We will continue to monitor and continue to work at this.

Because this works in other places. There's no reason why it shouldn't

work in Belfast. Can he give the House any idea of the extent of the

investment needed to provide the greater Belfast area with a

transport infrastructure that would be fit for purpose particularly in

the light of the city centre changes? If we had �100 million we

could look at a straight fly-over, which would significantly transform

some of the travelling habits of our population. If we had �100

million we could introduce, without delay, perhaps, a rapid transit

system. That is the scale of the commitment that the executive will

need to be carrying forward, if it is serious about whole-scale and

wide-spread improvement to the strategic road network that will

make a positive contribution and improve the flow of traffic, both

in the city centre and its outer limits. Danny Kennedy. Fuel poverty

was among the main topics raised during questions to the social

develop minister. Nelson McCausland updated members on new energy

efficiency schemes which will be used to help combat the problem.

Tackling fuel poverty remains a key priority for my department.

Alongside continuing to deliver mainstream schemes, such as the

warm home scheme, the housing executive heating replacement

scheme, and winter fuel and cold weather payments, my department is

working on a number of exciting new pilots. I recently launched a

boiler replacement scheme offering a grant of up to �1,000 towards the

cost of replacing old boilers, if they have in the family an income

of less than �40,000. The housing executive has received over 14,000

expressions of interest in the scheme and they are sending out

application forms. �12 million has been allocated to the scheme over

the next three year with �4 million available for grants before the end

of March 2013. My department is working with the university of

Ulster, housing executive and a number of local councils to deliver

energy efficiency improvements to homes in small concentrated areas.

The university of Ulster has developed a sophisticated

targetting mothodology which can identify areas of poor housing and

low incomes which could indicate a high prevalence of fuel poverty and

then a pay-as-you-go for oil pilot was launched this year. The results

have been positive. I'm keen for this technology to be rolled out.

Officials have been having discussions with kings span

renewables. I have asked officials to progress this important

initiative as quickly as possible as I believe inr insulation of pay-

as-you-go oil systems would help households who struggle to pay.

I thank the minister for his response. Particularly important in

terms of the initiatives that the minister has quiets rightly

outlined. Will the minister accept and implement the recognitions in

the fuel poverty report? We will look at every piece of

documentation, every proposal that emerges and whatever we think in

there is viable and will help the situation we will consider it. If

it's practical, if it works, then we'll give it good consideration.

Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker and I thank the minister for his response

earlier on. Has his department undertaken recent research to

determine the most up to date figures of those considered to be

in fuel poverty? Yes, indeed that was referred to in the initial

answer where we spoke about work that is being undertaken by the

university of Ulster which has a sophisticated targetting

mothodology, which can identify areas of poor housing and low

incomes where it would indicate there was a high prevalence of fuel

poverty. We've been working with experts and indeed the work that

we're doing at the university is innovative. I'm very encouraged by

that. Therefore there is academic rigour, anything that we're going

to do in future will be evidence based. That's the point that the

member is making, I think. Is the minister aware of any new

technologies which will improve energy efficiency of homes?

always open to new and innovative ways to improve the domestic energy

efficiency of households in fuel poverty. For example, Glenn dim

plex has developed a quauntum system. The project is an electric

heating system using surplus renewable energy from windfarms to

heat dwellings. There's a report on the performance and this report is

currently being considered. Chris Page is with me again. Where

we've been recording this programme our politicians are still debating

the welfare bill. They're still in the chamber. The vote was supposed

to have taken place at about 8.30pm. Because this is such an important

issue for MLAs they're taking their time over it. Whenever a vote takes

place it's pretty safe to predict the bill will be voted through. The

DUP, Ulster Unionists are behind it. Sinn Fein and the SDLP have dauld

for delays. It will go to committee stage I believe. Nelson McCausland

has a meeting in London with one of the welfare reform ministers in

Westminster. He's likely to push for more concessions to say, on the

basis of this Assembly today, I'm under pressure. He may argue phoar

Northern Ireland to have more flexibility on when benefits

payments are made. That's something the parties are generally agreed on

should happen. They might push for a Housing Benefit payment to be

made to landlords and not through tenants. This is set to be one of

the touch stone issues for the Assembly. BBC Radio Ulster news and

our news online service will have the result of that vote when it

happens. Absolutely. Keep your eyes online and on the radio this

evening and tomorrow morning. was a pretty unusual sight in the

Great Hall at lunch time today. Some MLAs had apparently lost their

marbles, what was that all about? This events was called the great

push for meantal health. It looked like something resembling curling.

What it was was an event to mark World Mental Health Day. We had

teams of MLAs, journalists and civil servants playing a game where

they pushed marbles around obstacles. The aim was to keep all

the marbles. The cones represented some of life's obstacles like debt,

bereavement or illness. A good way to put it in the spotlight. Thanks

very much for everything tonight. That's all for this week. Do make a