11/02/2014 Stormont Today

Hello and welcome to Stormont Today. Coming up in the next 30 minutes:

The Health Minister responds to news that delays in treatment may have

contributed to the deaths of five people at a Belfast hospital. The

public need to know that mortality is lower in Northern Ireland and it

is in England in our hospitals. We hear from an MLA angered by the

Health Minister's decision to consult further on the issue of

organ donation. The statement proves one thing in this House today, the

personal commitments of every First Minister needs nothing. You can

serve an issue to death, meanwhile people continue to die.

And the News Letters Sam McBride casts his eye over the day's

proceedings. News broke this morning that as many

as five patients died in Northern Ireland's biggest hospital last year

partly because they were not treated quickly enough. Dr Tony Stevens,

Medical Director of the Belfast Health Trust, said the deaths

happened at the Royal Victoria Hospital. A Sinn Fein MLA used his

topical question during Question Time to ask for the Health

Minister's response to the deaths. There is always an number of deaths

in emergency departments. The speed of what appropriate medical care is

a factor and that includes ambulance response times, diagnostic testing

and the provisional -- provision of clinical care. I ensure the best

outcome for the individual. I did express my concern about the Royal

Victoria hospital. I am aware of the five cases that have been referred

to. While I don't have the specific details I have asked my officials to

ascertain whether the systems in place for learning are fully

functional and to identify issues of concern. It is important to reassure

the public about the overall safety of these services. Overall,

mortality figures for Northern Ireland hospitals compare favourably

with the rest of the UK. Let's be very clear, the public need to know

that mortality is lower in Northern Ireland than it is in England in our

hospitals. Would the Minister cup -- contrast that news with his comments

in early January that the situation with the Royal was a one off? The

discussion we had in January was about three days. This particular

issue we are discussing is about the five incidents over the course of a

year. We need to be very careful and very sensitive on how to handle

these things and I don't intend to engage in some ping-pong about

people 's deaths. Can I assure the House and neither will I have the

design view for sustained political and media focus which has led to

these revelations which might not always come to the fore. We conclude

the Minister Ivan did know or didn't know about the long-term pressures

when he was making his earlier remarks. Will he agree with me the

public might the right to suspect there was at least a disguising of

the situation or at worst a cover-up? It has been said in this

House a number of times and people ignored it. I attended the Royal

Victoria hospital on the morning after the major incident was

declared. I spoke to staff and I took my actions on the basis from

speaking to staff. Nothing else, nothing more. The Health Minister,

Edwin Poots. I'm joined now by the News Letter's Political

Correspondent, Sam McBride. Another tough day for Edwin? It was. It has

to be said, he does front up on these occasions and comes out and

answers the tough questions, he did that at the time of the crisis in

the Royal a few weeks ago. It also has to be said this change to the

assembly question Time when MLAs can ask topical questions is a massive

improvement from six months ago. It would have been impossible for

anyone to ask him what was on the radio this morning. It was good he

could face those questions. It is a difficult position he finds himself

in. I suppose some people might say he ordered a major review into the

Royal last week. What else can he do? That is a fair question. It is

clear why nobody wanted this portfolio when they were dividing up

the departments at the election. Nobody wanted this, they all had the

chance to go for it. The DUP, as the largest party was left with it. It

is such a large department. Education is enormously important,

not everyone has children or interested in schools, but everyone

uses hospitals. As we move towards an election we will see this as a

big issue, OK it is a European election, but they are contested on

much more mundane issues sometimes in this part of the world. We have

had flags, parades and all of that stuff, but aside from that, and

massive issue will be the health service. He has been critical of the

media in recent weeks for its handling over the health stories

that have come to light. He was accused himself of responding to

media pressure. Is that a fair criticism? It is difficult for

journalists sometimes to report specialised issues like health. It

is incredibly specialised. The idea of having bigger hospitals, which

the evidence seems to suggest are safer and Edmonton -- Edwin Pitts

has been pioneering. It is difficult to explain to the public which ones

do have a local hospital, even if it is not the safest hospital. But a

lot of this stuff would not have come out if it had not been for

brave people in the health service you are speaking to journalists who

have concerns. It is a tough department to be in charge of. He

does not look like a man who is on the verge of being asked to

relinquish his position. He'd theoretically should have gone now

as Minister? When Simon Hamilton replaced Sunni Wilson last year, the

DP said it would be January if there was any change. January has come and

gone and we have seen nothing. It is unlikely we see him move unless

there is a huge crisis. I don't think that is likely. Sam, thank you

for now. The Health Minister was very much centre stage today as he

reported back to the Assembly on consultation about organ donation.

The Ulster Unionist MLA Jo-Anne Dobson is campaigning for a change

to the current legislation, but Edwin Poots said he needs more

evidence before changes can be made. We'll hear from Jo-Anne Dobson in a

moment, but first here's a flavour of what was said in the chamber this

morning. The strategy does not propose soft opt out legislation and

should be introduced as UK wide policy. The strategy proposes that

three groups, society, individuals, NHS hospitals and staff, NHS

commissioners need to act for this strategy to be successful and

achieve the desired outcomes. 56% of respondents said they would be in

favour in changing to a soft opt out system. However, when asked if they

agreed with the statement everyone should presume to be an organ donor

unless they register otherwise, 49% agreed, indicating there is some

confusion about the idea. Minister, your statement proves one thing in

this House today. The personal commitment of the first and Deputy

First Minister means nothing. People continue to die. Will you give a

commitment to this House when you know the results of the second

public survey, which I gather could be up to a year away. You will bring

the soft opt out system before the end of this mandate, or perhaps you

will commission and other survey followed by another survey, followed

by yet another survey? I think that I couldn't be in a position to

actually indicate that I know the outcome of what the second survey

would actually produce. I did not dictate what people responded to in

the survey. We asked people questions and they came back with

answers. I know organ donation is hugely important to the member, and

personally her family have benefited from that. I am not against the

proposals that Mr Dobson has produced on soft opt out. That might

be the right way forward but it is important we educate the public and

bring the public with us on these issues, if we are going to take what

is a significant step, but nonetheless the right step, but at

this moment in time, I haven't got the powerful evidence base that I

think we should have to move ahead just at this point in time. Recently

on a number of occasions I have heard an MLA in the assembly making

the point that when a department or minister wants to kick something

into touch, he asks for more evidence. I am wondering, given the

evidence, is this a case of looking for more evidence or are you kicking

it into touch? That MLA was Jim Wells. I could not argue with him. I

am not interested in taking this into touch, I am interested in

getting the best outcomes. People can judge me as being genuine or

not. I sincerely believe we should be encouraging more people to donate

their organs. It is a sensitive issue, and it is something we need

to be careful in how we manage the public and that we don't take the

public for granted. I would encourage people to actually read

the statistics that have been produced from the public health

agency. They are very, very interesting. In fact, it indicates

there could be a community difference or a religious difference

in terms of organ donation. People from the Roman Catholic community

for example, would be less inclined to have their organs donated than

people from the president community. That was a flavour of the exchanges

in the House today. Jo-Anne Dobson is with me now. Do you think he is

deliberately holding things up? I was deeply disappointed, as were

thousands of people about this statement. Here is the opportunity

for the health minister and the executive to provide meaningful

legislation and give hope to those waiting across Northern Ireland. I

was exasperated again, another consultation, another survey. 12

months down the line. Meanwhile, in those 12 months 15 local people will

have died waiting for a transplant. He said no powerful evidence -based

that is needed to move ahead exists at this time? I totally disagree

with that. He has got that wrong in your view? I did my consultation

over the summer, 82% in favour of soft opt out. If he came with me to

meet those charities and campaigners, members of the public

coming up to me saying, we are all behind you, it makes common sense.

He says he will carry out another survey to sample public opinion.

Your view is that it will simply tell him what you're survey has

already told him? That is why I am so frustrated, that is the reality.

Meanwhile it will be this time next year for him to know what we already

know. What did departmental officials tell you about the timing?

Why is it waiting until the autumn? I was to meet with the minister but

he had to go to another meeting. I have tried to meet with the Minister

this time to get answers to these questions. All we know is they are

doing another survey late autumn and there will be another year before we

get the results. It is unacceptable, 15 people will die. You think he is

kicking the can down the road? That is exactly what he is doing. He's

putting it off. People would say, he is the health minister, he has

responsibility for this potential important legislation and he has got

to get it right. He has to satisfy himself the evidence exist to move

in the way you want it to move. He is the health minister and you are a

back venture. -- backbencher. I wrote to them on the 20th of

November. When you have the First Minister and Deputy First Minister,

is the minister letting the civil servants rule him? The wishes of

there. Is the deal going to be cabled? That is what I'm doing, I'm

working into the small hours of the night drafting the bill, soft opt

out. Wouldn't it have been lovely for the executive and health

Minister to get behind me, sit down and work together to speed up this

bill, rather than leaving it on me to go it alone? That is why I'm so

disappointed. Here was an opportunity for the health minister

and the executive to deliver, a missed opportunity. Again, people of

Northern Ireland have been let down. Just to be clear, you are

disappointed, but you are not going to let it stop you doing what you

wanted to do, which is to pursue this yourself? Never underestimate

the power of a determined female, especially one with 20 years

association with charities and the mother of a transplant patient. I am

resolute, I will not be found lacking, I will not let the people

of Northern Ireland down. I'll be doing what is right and progressing

with soft opt out. We will continue to keep an eye on it, it's

developing into an interesting situation.

The budget bill is currently making an accelerated passage through the

assembly. While it was discussed today, the roadblock prevented

welfare reform from getting anywhere and reared its head. One MLA called

it a Mexican stand-off between the the DUP and Sinn Fein. The purpose

of the bill is to authorise the issue of ?15,530,833,000 from the

Northern Ireland Consolidated fund in 2013-14. This is an additional

123 million since the estimates were presented last year. This cash is

drawn down on a daily basis as needed, from the Northern Ireland

Consolidated fund, managed by my department on behalf of the

executive. The bill also authorises the use of resources totalling

?16,606,564,000 by departments and certain other bodies, 5 million more

than approved in the last estimates last June. The order states that

accelerated passage may be allowed for budget bills, provided that the

committee are satisfied and it has been appropriately consulted on

public expenditure proposals contained in the bill. On the 5th of

February, departmental officials briefed the committee and her

questions on the budget bill being debated today, including on issues

relating to a range of departments. In addition to the evidence, the

committee has also scrutinised the bills to the financial year. Finance

minister suggesting a figure of ?1 billion, the figure may be in

dispute, but the fact that there is and will continue to be a cost of

doing nothing is indisputable. I don't support every part of the

welfare legislation. However, the place that proposed it was not

Westminster. The room that we have in this house is for local

determination. I support local determination in the framework of

the bill. Where there is room for... What there is not room for is

a continued Mexican stand-off between parties. What we need is

constructive dialogue on the welfare bill, not a microphone debate. The

minister yesterday and today has been right to highlight that issue.

It is the elephant in the room, the elephant of welfare reform. There is

a catastrophe, potentially coming down the road, for all constituents,

if the issue is not grasped soon. Deputy Speaker, when we compare this

with the approach to financial scrutiny and the devolution of

further tax powers to Northern Ireland, the difference is again

starker. Scotland held a far-reaching commission to examine

the issues in their entirety and make progress on financial scrutiny.

Despite the executive's unanimous support for devolving corporation

tax, what preparations for enhanced scrutiny have we made in this house?

Inevitably, this brings me onto welfare reform, also referred to as

cuts my colleagues across the way. The finance minister has been saying

much of this recently. To be fair to him, I concur. With much of what he

says, anyway. But it is deeply regrettable we have seen ?50 million

set aside for penalties. This is wasted money. It was not ?50 million

that directly affected the most vulnerable, nor was it spent wisely.

It was spent while the parties engaged in an exhaustive process of

negotiation around the issues. It is not acceptable that this bill is

still festering away in the corridors of Stormont Castle. The

question the minister has to decide in relation to this debate and where

he takes his department forward is simply is he a Sammy or is he a

Swinney? That is the difference between a minister knowing what it

is to be in power, John Swinney, the finance secretary, and one two,

whilst capable, is more about theatre than substance, which, is

the legacy, in my view, of his princess. Now our third and final

instalment from the health minister. Before topical questions, Edwin

Poots was asked about cancer drugs, flu vaccinations and the major

incident at the Odyssey Arena. I think the first responders provided

an excellent service at the Odyssey Arena. They dealt with a lot of

people at a site, without bringing them to hospital. There were able to

provide them with the support and care they needed. Indeed, they

initiated a major incident, that was something absolutely necessary and

the right thing to do, given the scale of the event that was a caring

and the possibility that it could have got considerably worse. They

ensure hospitals were well placed to deal with the numbers that that come

in. In response to a recent question I tabled to the education minister

that indicated that 50,000 were days were lost amongst the teaching

profession last year as a result of flu related illnesses, with the

Minister consider working with a minister to extend a flu vaccination

programme to teachers? We are targeting schoolchildren because flu

is so common and easily spread whenever you get into that

environment. Certainly, we want our teachers to be teaching, not sitting

at home sick, and I'm sure they want to be teaching as well. If that is

something the education minister wishes to take up with me, I am

happy to liaise with him. The cancer programme in England has granted NHS

access to a 238 drugs that are not available here. Would the Minister

consider a Cancer Drugs Fund model year or approaching his counterparts

to address this inequality? Certainly, and if they approached me

to do it I would do it very quickly. That would be charging something for

perceptions once again, which would allow others to establish a

specialist dogs fund, not just for cancer drugs, but for specialist

drugs that are not regularly available. -- drugs fund. I think it

is the right thing to do. I think any good socialist would want to do

it because those of us who could afford to pay for drugs would ensure

that people who really need them but can't afford them would have the

opportunity to receive them. We would save people's lives. The

busiest man in Parliament buildings today, Edwin Poots. The environment

Minister Mark H Durkan said he would consider a ban on election posters

during his questions today. The minister was also asked about one in

the consumption of alcohol on buses. His session began with some

confusion over planning applications. With the Minister

detail any sensitive planning applications which he is currently

discussing to transfer to OFM DFM, or is likely or intending to discuss

such a matter with them soon? Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Thank you

for the supplementary. Any failure to answer the supplementary will not

be a deliberate attempt to avoid answering it, it will just be down

to a complete lack of understanding as to what he means. I am the

Minister for the environment. My department is responsible for making

planning decisions and I am currently involved in no

negotiations with the First Minister and Deputy First Minister. I am

fairly certain that my department is not involved in any conversations

with the Department of the First Minister, or the Deputy First

Minister, around the transfer of any particular application, sensitive or

otherwise. However, if there is a particular application that he would

like to discuss with me, or with OFM, DFM, I would be happy to meet

with him at a later stage. Can I ask the minister if he has given any

consideration to review the legislation relating to the display

of election posters, including a ban on election posters? Under the

legislation as it stands, planning rights to all parties in advance of

an election, reminding them of the requirements. Under planning law, no

advertising and may be displayed without consent granted at the

department, but exemptions exist for election posters in advance of a

pending election. The display of election posters is a cause of

annoyance for many members of the public and political parties are

reminded of this annoyance every time we have an election. They are

also a headache for those of us who have to put them up and take them

down, although I have been told that my days as a poster boy might be

over. It is an issue I am very much aware of. It is something I am

willing to look at. I have been considering a review of current

legislation in advance of the media interest in this particular issue.

As part of that review, I will examine a range of options,

including a ban. Has the minister had any update in respect of the

allegations Rambus is being used to ferry alcohol at the weekend towards

the Odyssey Arena? -- allegations of buses being used. Thank you for that

question. I have just answered Mr Eastwood's question and I see this

very much as a follow-on to that. Yes, I am aware of alcohol

consumption on many buses and coaches responsible for taking young

people to the event at the Odyssey on Thursday night. That is something

I have said we had to address. We have to deal as a department,

weighing gauge, with the proprietors -- we have to engage with the

proprietors of the buses and make sure they were taking every step

possible to ensure that alcohol was not being consumed on their bus,

particularly by minors. Sam McBride has joined me. We just heard from

Jo-Anne Dobson earlier about organ donation, something she is clearly

passionate about. Where is the DUP on this? We seem to have

contradictory positions from the First Minister, the health minister,

Alistair Ross, preserving his own agenda? It's an unusual position to

seek the DUP or Sinn Fein MLAs take radically different positions on

this. Some people in the DUP feel extremely strongly and they are

willing to come out and say they disagree with the position the First

Minister seems to be adopting. Last week, Peter Robinson released quite

an intriguing statement, where he said he supported both his own the

UUP MLA Alistair Ross's bill, but also Jo-Anne Dobson's bill, even

though a lot of people would see them as being close to, if not

completely, mutually exclusive. He is in a somewhat difficult position.

But in many ways, these pills and the issue of human trafficking, this

is the normal politics that happens in any legislative area in the

world. In that regard, it's not unusual that in a big party,

increasingly a broader church than it used to be, the DUP will have

people that take different editions on what is pretty much an issue of

conscious. How do you see the debate unfolding? The DUP has various

issues on how it recedes. Then we have Jo-Anne Dobson, clear in the

studio, that she is going to pursue her agenda and try to get her

private members bill through as soon as possible. She seems very

determined, she was very articulate in terms of how she got it across.

She clearly has a story in terms of her son which is very persuasive.

When she says people will die if it is not taken forward, I think it's a

difficult argument to counter. I think Alistair Ross's argument has a

certain amount of merit in that he is saying that the evidence from

other countries is that the best way to get people onto a register is not

to make them feel they are being forced onto it. I think there is a

genuine split and I don't think, that some people have assumed, that

this is the DUP trying to block a bill, I think it is very much a

difference of opinion within the DUP. Some people think it would be a

popular measure, they would be happy to see it go through, Alistair Ross

does not. A different political debate. And, isn't it? Don't forget

to join me for The View on Thursday night at 10:35 on BBC One. Thanks

for watching. Goodbye.