22/10/2013 Stormont Today

Hello and welcome to Stormont Today. Coming up on on the programme

tonight: The Environment Minister is in feisty

form as he pulls the plug on the Planning Bill. The majority of

parties in this assembly will certainly be behind me and they will

be giving my statement the thumbs-up, not the fingers.

Another day and another row between Sinn Fein and the DUP over

education. The only two schools you are interested in. Let's dispel this

myth. And the News Letter's Sam McBride is

with me to look back at today's events.

The Environment Minister has withdrawn the Assembly's Planning

Bill because of legal concerns. Mark H Durkan said changes to the bill

backed by the DUP and Sinn Fein could run counter to the European

Convention on Human Rights. The bill was introduced by Mr Durkan's

predecessor, Alex Attwood, in June. But today, Mr Durkan pulled the plug

on it. Since taking a office, I have had meetings with key stakeholders

including representatives of the business community in Northern

Ireland, Local Government and environmental groups and academics

from Queen's and the University of Ulster in order to listen to their

thoughts on the planning Bill as amended at consideration stage. I

have carefully and fully studied the legal advice obstained by my

predecessor and I have made that advice available. It is now clear

that the intent of the amendments was not to introduce new planning

powers, but to make OFDFM a new planning authority in Northern

Ireland. I have grave reservations about the amendments to the Planning

Bill and the restriction of the right to judicial review for legal

procedural and evidential reasons. Therefore, after very careful and

lengthy consideration, I have decided not to move the planning

Bill to further consideration stage either now or in the future.

Has the minister sought or received any advice, any legal advice from

the Attorney-General in relation to this matter and can he confirm

whether it is consistent with any legal advice he has received?

I have not sought advice from the Attorney-General nor have I received

advice from the Attorney-General. I have received legal advice from an

eminent QC in this field and that is legal advice that I have shared with

this House. It is legal advice available to the public. I have not

heard any legal opinion contrary to that advice and I have spoken to

many lawyers, many academics and many planning experts over the past

four months. A proposed power grab in terms of economic planning was so

ill conceived, so badly thought through, so arrogant that it is

actually illegal and can I ask the minister if he will tell and confirm

to the House that he will stand firm in continuing to offer responsible

leadership because no doubt he will come under various pressures to

change his mind? The member used the term power grab. That's not a term

that I intend to use today. This statement is about planning. It is

not about politics. In light of the fact this decision was taken

subsequent to the Tracey Ruling which indicated that a minister who

failed to bring a controversial decision to the full executive was

in breach of the Ministerial Code. Why is there minister defying that

ruling today and breaking that Ministerial Code?

People will ask when they hear an accusation that I might be breaking

the Ministerial Code. People, the public will rightly ask what is the

Ministerial Code? If someone is deemed not to be in breach of the

code for denying someone the right to donate blood based on their

sexuality or for promoting public disorder, they are not in breach of

the court, but for trying to prevent bad law from coming in, I am. I

don't think so. I can only act on the legal advice that I have seen.

Given the fact that the minister in the past has described the use of

titions of concern as putting up two fingers to other parties. How many

fingers is he putting up to other parties today? I recall my

description of the abuse of a abuse of petition of concern. Not the use.

The abuse of a petition of concern when it was able to be used by one

party, one party to thwart the wishes of other parties in the

assembly. Now, as it stands, the majority of parties in this assembly

will certainly be behind me and they will be giving my statement the

thumbs-up, not the fingers. Mark H Durkan in robust form in the

chamber today. I'm joined by the News Letter's Political

Correspondent Sam McBride. Sam, was the announcement today by the

minister a surprise? It was a surprise in that it seemed to appear

in the order paper at short notice. There was a ministerial statement to

be confirmed which is what I saw when I loblegd at it a few days ago.

Last night it seemed to' merge last night that there was going to be a

statement. The legal advice which seems to be the basis of what

happened today leaked out last week. It was referred to by the m are and

it emerged and I think it left him in a position where given that his

party opposed this, it was going to lose power to, it was never going to

be popular, it gave him a clear hook on which to hang this decision and

the fact that that advice came from one of the top five or six planning

QCs in the UK gave it a certain amount of clout from outside the

political system. The statement certainly provoked

strong, passionate reaction in the chamber, didn't it? Yes. From, it

was massively noticeable from the press gallery in the Sinn Fein side

there was silence. I think it was silence. But in the DUP side, there

was just constant baying. There was the sort of heckling that you get

when a party is really unhappy about something and that told a real story

because Sinn Fein are not the people who have been driving this. They

voted in the same lobbies as the DUP when this came up in June these

amendments which were controversial at the time, but it is the DUP who

really wanted this. What do you think are the

implications for planning of what happened today? That's what is at

the heart of this? And it is easy to amid the politicking of it, but the

planning Bill was one of the Bills that it tied up lots of area of

planning law. It tried to put into statute things that had been in

advice really from the minister. It did things like it increased the

fines for people who flout planning laws and tightnd the restrictions of

tree restriction orders. Lots of practical things like that and

that's now lost. It maybe resurrected as a private members

bill. That would take a long time and planning is going to go to

councils. So it is gone now. Briefly, what did you make of Mark

Durkan's performance? It was gutsy. He came of a political age here. He

showed he was no weak young minister who is going to be railroaded. Doing

this when Peter Robinson and Martin McGuinness were out of the country.

Had a political astuteness. The Social Development Minister

faced questions today and it was welfare reform that dominated

proceedings. Nelson McCausland told MLAs that he hopes to bring more

details of the reforms in front of the Assembly soon. I ask the

minister to confirm when discussions involving the First Minister, the

Deputy First Minister and the Finance Minister were on a Welfare

Reform package of getting measures for Northern Ireland concluded? This

has been a major area of work for myself and for the department over

the past year. There were very detailed and lengthy discussions and

intense discussions with those at Westminster, with DWP and DFP have

an engagement with the Treasury in that regard. We got to the point at

the end of June where we had the negotiation with Westminster. We

have had the interm discussions with OFM and with DFM and also

discussions with the Finance Ministry as well, Finance Minister

and we are at a point where we have put together, I believe we have got

a package of measures that will result, if they were implemented in

a much better situation for Northern Ireland than if we were to take

welfare reform as it is. Is the minister in a position to say

when he is going to bring the Bill back to the House? I have indicated

in response to that question, that I think it would be good for the

general public to be aware of the contents of the particular package

for Northern Ireland. For a range of reasons. That's an additional

reason. The information that was passed on by the Finance Minister is

information that has been in the public domain for sometime. The

Prime Minister has spoken about it. The Secretary of State has spoken

about it. Other Westminster ministers from DWP have spoken about

this and from the Treasury. So there is a concern there that over a

period of time, you get into a difficult position there in terms of

potential penalties. But this is not a matter that is just for me. It is

a matter which is for the entire executive and therefore, I believe

it is right and proper that as soon as possible we get this into the

executive and get it out into the public domain and into the assembly

for further discussion. You spoke in broader terms about welfare he

reform. I -- Welfare Reform. Which wonder if there is any analysis to

the loss of income to families by the welfare reform changes brought

in by the Tory Government? There are good parts in Welfare Reform and

parts which are not so good and you have the Treasury attempt to limit

the increase in expenditure on welfare benefits over the next

number of years. There are winners and losers in these things. That is

the case often. But I would just pick up on one point and that's some

of the figures that have been quoted in the media about the cost to

Northern Ireland have been unrealistic. We need to be careful.

We make people aware of the issues and get accurate information out as

far as possible and not create situations where people have

unnecessary fears. There are concerns. We all share them, but we

should not, I think, exaggerate and create unnecessary fears.

The Social Development Minister, Nelson McCausland. The differing

stances of the two main parties over education is well known, and they

came to the fore today as the Education Minister made a statement

on Shared Education. So shared education is not a bolt on or an

optional extra. It is fundamental to delivering good schools and central

to my vision that every learner should achieve his or her full

potential. Good education comes first, but equality and good

rerations add to the case for change. Choice can't be at the

expense of good education and neither can it be at the cost of

separation because of religious belief. Such separation is bad for

children and bad for society. Let me turn to the recommendation on

academic selection 18 to 20. Would surprise no one when I say I welcome

and endorse them. Some people have criticiseted the group for including

these recommendations. They claim they are nothing to do with sharing.

Those people are missing a very important point. Sharing means

education without barriers. Without segregation. The group's advice is

very clear. Selection discriminates, selection divides, selection is a

barrier to children from low income families. It is disappointing that

yet again the minister has lit the litmus paper to create more

contention and controversy around an issue whereby there shouldn't be

controversy and there is a time when the minister is under ex-tensive

pressure in relation to the common funding formula. I think he would

have been better spending his time addressing that problem rather than

putting another problem and other problems on the table today.

However, Mr Speaker, can I on behalf of the committee say that

recognising the growth of popular and sharing among schools is

something which we should celebrate in terms of the schools that have

been successful in relation to that issue... Pressure goes with the job.

That's how you deal with the pressure with I is the important

thing. I can assure you that as has been recently evidenced in the media

when I challenged political parties to come up with alternatives, they

are left fumbling to come up with alternatives. You have another three

days to come forward with alternatives to my proposals around

the common funding formula and I wish you well.

The minister does put a heavy emphasis on the education and skills

authority. Without stating the obvious, how long can he run that in

shadow form and continue to fund that? When is he going to bring the

legislation back and how does he hope to get it through the House?

This cannot go on forever. Both myself and the executive need to

make up its mind whether they want to deliver that programme for

Government commitment or they don't and that day is coming to us

realisation. I suspect now we are not going to meet the programme for

Government commitment. This is the last number of weeks in October. I

have a programme for Government signed up to by other executive

parties to have it established by 2013. I suspect that is missed. If

it is missed, the executive will have to make up its mind. Do they

want to continue with it, but it is coming to make your mind up time.

These will be taken forward through area planning. Can he inform the

House of Such all ability schools are rejected by the majority of

people will he endeavour to enforce this on a community? There is

another one defending the Protestant working class. You are not

interested in the Dixon Plan. You are interested in two schools in the

Dixon Plan. There are only two schools that you are interested in

the Dixon Plan. Let's dispel this myth.

John O'Dowd challenging the DUP's support for the Dickson Plan. The

provenance of the eggs we eat and the conditions in which the hens

that lay them are housed was on the Agriculture Minister's plate at

Question Time today that, along with the health of our woodlands and

forests. The disease whose scientific name, it is tracked over

100 species of plants. This includes ash trees and bilberry, over 600

hectors of woodland has been felled. The December is continuing to spread

within areas infected in previous years in the Antrim plateau. We

found scattered infections in Tyrone and Fermanagh. Once the disease is

well established in the woodland environment, it is impossible to

eradicate and as this is the case in south-west Scotland and parts of

Wales, we are close to that point in the north of Ireland. Since 1st

January 2012, it has been illegal to keep laying hens in battery cages. I

am pleased to report that all of our producers are compliant with that

directive. Can you confirm whether we are

imforting eggs into this country now which are being illegally produced

in other countries? I can confirm that it is Germany and Italy who are

the two member states who are not compliant. There were 11 others, but

when legal action was taken against them, they became compliant. We have

Italy and Germany that are not compliant. There is free movement of

table eggs so we can't stop the movement in, however, I can say that

in the past six months inspectors have not encountered any

consignments from any of the two member states that are non

compliant. The recent announcement of an

outbreak of ash dieback in county Leitrim is regrettable, but not

unexpected. The disease often spreads from recently planted trees

to older trees by the release of spores of ineffected spores.

Officials have kept counterparts in Dard and the forest service aware of

how they plan to eradicate this outbreak. Our surveillance has been

increased and has not found any sources of the disease in older

trees. Many constituents have planted out

land using ash and using department grants. They had to remove the trees

when ash dieback was found. Is there any grants available to replant the

areas? In June, I announced grant support for any of the woodland

owners affected. If you have had to remove trees, we have put grant

support in place that will help you to replant with alternative species

because we want to continue to be planting trees. This is something

that will scare landowners and they will be careful about what they are

planting so what we are doing is, we we have announced grant support that

will encourage replanting with species that are less susceptible to

these types of December. The Agriculture Minister, Michelle

O'Neill. Poverty, deprivation and mental

health - all serious social issues affecting people here, but what's

the best way to deal with them? Earlier today MLAs supported a

motion backing social investment programmes. John McMullan from the

Bryson Charitable Group joins me. Thank you very much for joining us

on the programme. Let me ask you to explain what the social enterprise

model is? OK, Mark. It is really not that complicated, but it may sound

that. It is when a charity changes the way it does business rather than

looking for grants, it looks for contracts. So for an organisation

like Bryon, instead of getting a grant and doing 100 homes helping

people to keep warm, we can do 6,500 or 7,000 homes. It allows you to

scale up. It is a different way to do business.

And Bryson Group is at the forefront of developing that notion of

thinking? We have developed our social enterprise model over 15

years. It allowed us to grow over 15 years and we are employing 693

people today. Turnover is at ?34 million. A year? Per year. It is a

lot of money and you employ a lot of people? It is a big part of the

economy. That's why we are glad to see the assembly debating this issue

of investing for social good and social investment.

It is because we are a big part of the real economy.

When you talk about, not using grants, but bidding forcrats. Give

us some sense of the contracts that you are bidding for and winning? In

Northern Ireland, we hold about 60% of the domestic recycling programmes

which councils. So we have to bid and keep our costs right and win the

business and we take a different way of doing business. We are driven by

maximising the quality of materials and recycling them in Northern

Ireland. 35% of our materials go into local companies for

remanufacturer. There is a further 1,000 jobs supported in Northern

Ireland as a result of that. It is about being clever how you deliver

services. Bhaes your definition of profit?

Profit is really interesting. We require a profit. We need the profit

to reinvest, but our profits are locked in because we are a charity,

our money is all used for social purposes. The profit we make allows

us to invest in people and invest in services and develop new services.

You have ex-ended d extended that model outside Northern Ireland which

is a good model for other companies and other charities in Northern

Ireland perhaps to look to? Well, absolutely. We have doubled our size

in the Republic of Ireland and we have had our first contracts in

North Wales in Conway. For us, it is good for Northern Ireland. It is

good for jobs in Northern Ireland. We bring back our profits and we

reuse them in services here. Is it letting Government off the hook? No,

it is working in partnership with Government and helping Government to

deliver its services, deliver better services. That are better targeted

and delivering better outcomes. The consultation on proposals to

change how schools budgets are allocated is to end this week. The

proposals were under discussion at last week's session of the Education

Committee and there was little support for them around the table.

This is disappointing to say the least. I have to say that we have

had what can only be described as the most shambolic attempt by the

Department of Consultation. Hear. Hear. We are four out of the five

education and library boards potentially losing 80% of funding

and we had two consultation events. One in Omagh which was advertised on

a Friday for a Wednesday at which four parents arrived. We had another

one in Belfast which ends up being the beneficiary of which 40 people

attended. Most of the people there, were people who were losing as a

result of this consultation. The message has to go out, please

listen. You know, the Prince pals that I have spoken -- principals

that I have spoken to, the parents that I have spoken to are very, very

concerned. I declare an interest here as a chair of a board of

governors. It is within budget, etcetera, etcetera, I can't see how

our schools can make cuts any further. We can't switch the heat

off. That's the stage. There is no maintenance being done. The question

about the use of children. I have no problem if the minister wants to

sort of consult children in something like this, but it depends

how much weight you give it. There is adults that don't understand this

formula, so there is not much hope for the kids. I accept the

criticisms around the public meetings that have been organised

and I know nothing about the one in Omagh, but I do know the one in

Belfast was well publicised. There is no doubt about that. But it is a

feature of these consultations that most people prefer to make written

submissions. The issue is those who already face obstacles. They are in

a situation where there is no parental expectations in terms of

educational achievement and that has to be addressed by the education

system and you know, I think some people are getting too exercised

about the issue. The minister said he will listen and I believe he

will. Sinn Fein's Pat Sheehan standing up

for his colleague, John O'Dowd. Sam McBride has rejoined me. Is there

fractured relations? The office of the First Minister and Deputy First

Minister sent an e-mail to Mark Durkan if he was planning to do what

he was going to do, he would be in breach of the Ministerial Code.

There is open disagreement between the two main parties. Peter Robinson

and Martin McGuinness are out of the country. It doesn't seem to make

much difference whether they are here or whether they are away. The

relations are very strained. They don't really trust each other at the

moment. The Maze decision was a big issue for Sinn Fein. And Welfare

Reform which we have talked about tonight. A huge unresolved issue? It

is a huge issue which comes up to the foreand it dips away, but it has

been there the whole time. Nelson McCausland had a plan since before

the summer which he thinks can get around the concerns that there are

about the Welfare Reforms which he supports, but has not been able to

bring it to the executive let alone get it on to the floor of the

assembly and have a vote. That's a massive issue about ?5 million a

month the Treasury said they will start take from the block grant from

January if they can't agree this. He could bring something to the

floor of the chamber and it could be blocked by one of the other parties?

Which would be disastrous for him. Some people criticised the DUP for

not selling the Maze Peace Centre strong enough. Nelson McCausland

supports the ethos of what has been proposed by Iain Duncan Smith and by

the coalition Government. I think there is really an onus on him to go

out and sell it and say this is a good deal if he is going to get

people behind him. What have you made of the row over

the forthcoming Miss Ulster putty pageant? It -- beauty pageant? It

caused me to look at the rules. Delores Kelly seem to be the people

who are down as the spondors of this. Today we had Joanne Dobson

pull out. It is a throw back to another age. It is not politically

correct, but there are all sorts of controversial things going on up

here. It will be interesting to see how it

ends up. That's it for tonight, but don't

forget to join me for The View on Thursday night at 10.35pm on BBC

One.