29/01/2013 Stormont Today

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

The divisive issue of welfare reform was back on the floor.

Members debated a new report on the equality implications of the

Welfare Bill. In living document, as if like fine line -- fine wine

it would improve with age. We'll be speaking to two members of the

committee which put that report together.

And why a question on European peace funding provoked this

reaction from the Finance Minister. It does annoy me sometimes at the

kind of ill informed comment that comes from people that seek to

agitate when I hear this we get Proposed changes to welfare

payments have starkly divided the Assembly in recent months. The DUP

is broadly in favour of passing the legislation as quickly as possible

to avoid financial penalties from Westminster. Sinn Fein and the SDLP

are more hesitant, concerned that the changes will impact adversely

on the most vulnerable. Last year, the Assembly set up a committee to

examine the bill's implications on issues like equality and human

rights and today that committee's report was debated in the chamber.

One of the most significant aspects of the committee deliberation was

consideration of the way in which the Department for Social

Development had discharged its duty under section 75 of the Northern

Ireland Act 1998 to carry out an equality impact assessment offer

the Welfare Reform Bill. The department launched a public

consultation on its draft in 2011 and published a final version in

May 2012. Although many respondents indicated they were unhappy with

the assessment and the data on which it was based, the final EQ YJ

remained unaltered. The Department for Social Department --

development has acknowledged data deficits and proposes it should be

a living document. The committee shoot -- has been made aware of the

human rights implications at a more severe level of sanctions proposed

under the Welfare Reform Bill. Members were concerned that

sanctions should not be overly punitive or disproportionate

resulting in extreme hardship or destitution for some fun rebel

claimants. According to the committee, it has said that any

sanctions imposed should be mitigated to avoid the potential

for extreme hardship of children and lone parents or Tamas Fellegi

those with mental health issues. The committee is supportive of the

individual responsibility and encouraged people into work. The

new benefit that will replace benefits is working credit. There

were a number of anomalies highlighted to the committee and

the administration of this benefit. For example, the situation where a

claimant who was working no more than a few hours a week, in fact I

believe no more than one hour a week, will lose 100% of their help

with mortgage interest. This is a disincentive to work and runs

contrary to the rationale of the bill which is to encourage people

to come off benefits and seek work. I believe this report has examined

comprehensively the equality and human rights implications of the

welfare reform bill that we are in the process of implementing. I

would want to see a system that is accessible to all in a manner which

is easily understood and quick to complete. I want a system in which

people are not stigmatised for needing to access but that people

realise the system is a safety net and not as I have stated earlier in

the debate yesterday a viable career option. The fact is that not

everybody is going to be happy with the outcomes of welfare reform but

we strive to ensure that no one within our society is disadvantaged.

The Human Rights Commission said the commission notes the department

has not carried out a full EQ YJ in respect to race, religion and

sexual orientation. The equality commission criticised almost every

aspect of the Department's EQ I say. The failure to identify adverse

impacts, the lack of mitigation to address obligations under section

75, the Department's decision not undertake impact assessments and

run a -- relation to religion, sexual orientation and race. The

only people that tell us the bill is complied is the minister, his

department and political representatives. And when it was

exposed as less thorough and reliant on opinion rather than

evidence, they introduce the notion of a living document as if like

fine wine, it would improve miraculously with age. This is not

good enough. The minister and his department have been too quick to

accept the operation authority as no more than exercise in rubber-

stamping Westminster legislation. number of all -- examples have been

underlined with concerns. And we have concerns. We have reported in

several places there are concerns. I tell you, Mr Speaker, when I

asked the groups that came before us and one in particular, the most

vociferous group, could they point this to anything specific, anything

specific that breached human rights issues, they couldn't. There are

concerns. We have done that, but once you asked them where are the

specifics, they couldn't do that. I want to thank the groups that came

into the committee and the groups that wrote into the committee. It

is very unfortunate that the one organ of the Executive that is

supposed to look after equality issues didn't see fit to respond

adequately to the Adhoc committee. The only response they gave us was

a letter to say they wouldn't be respond in. It was one that was

thrown at the committee and it was one that I think was to all intents

and purposes a waste of time. There is no other way to save it. It is

not the chairman's fault or the staff fold. What we were doing was

repetition of what the DST committee were doing. There is not

a doubt that in fact that committee would have and could have and

should have been allowed to get on with their job and I see it as

meddling and interfering in the task that was consigned to them.

The concern of the impact to those with disability has not been

assessed. The view that it is 0 living document is remarkable. This

Assembly will be asked to pass massively important legislation

without even having quantified its adverse impact on our citizens. The

lack of a fall analysis of the impact on this region means this

Assembly will effectively walk into welfare reform with its eyes shut.

Just to pick up on Katrina Allen who excelled herself today, big on

rhetoric, low on content. She has disappeared again. It sounded to me

like an extract from some revolutionary Marxist magazine. I

have difficulty taking it seriously and I was disappointed that she

went down this road of those awful people in the chamber. Those awful

Unionists, those people are the only people with compassion.

The Social Development Minister, Nelson McCausland.

Listening to that, two members of that ad hoc Committee. Its chair,

Trevor Lunn from Alliance, and Paula Bradley from the DUP. Welcome

to you both. Trevor Lunn, we heard a flavour there of some of the

concerns the committee had about the equality and human rights

implications of the Welfare Bill. What do you think are the most

pertinent issues the Social Development Minister needs to

address? The equality impact assessment was a big issue for us.

There is no doubt it is not a complete document and they are not.

It was described as a living document which has to be updated

from time to time. Does it make sense? It does. It is ongoing. It

can be updated as time goes on. The major issue was that we were able

to look at the Bill before us. If there is trouble, it will be to do

with the regulations that followed. This is an enabling bill and the

real teeth will be in the regulation, so it is important they

are scrutinised as well. One of the main recommendations is the

sanctions which will be imposed on welfare recipients if they step out

of line. When these changes happen, what would you like to see in place

to mitigate those sanctions so that the most vulnerable are protected?

Well, the sanctions you referred to are those that would place people

into desperate need or destitution. That should not be too difficult to

provide a baseline below which people cannot go. I heard certain

members through the debate saying, and the minister refer to it, that

only one side of the house cared about these people but that is not

true. Isn't deliberations were very intense and concentrated. We were

aware everybody had concerns. We were trying to identify actual

breaches in terms of human rights and equality. And we couldn't find

any. Paula Bradley, we heard your party

colleague Lord Morrow describe the committee as a waste of time. Do

you agree? I personally did not find it a waste of time but that is

maybe because I sit on the Social Development Committee and I find

clarity in many issues. If you asked me if I found the committee a

necessary, absolutely. But not a waste of time? Not for me. But what

about the safe guards, the need for the most vulnerable not to fall

through the net. Do you think that framework can be put in place?

agree that we have a duty of care to protect the most vulnerable

within our Society and I said that I highlighted lone parents and

accessible childcare, so I believe we have to put certain

recommendations in place to protect those people. He also said today

that welfare should not be seen a fight -- as a viable career option.

Do you think there are people, for example, in your constituency who

do see it that way and how, in your view, will this bill tackle that?

It is something we have to tackle. On a personal level, I would like

to think that is not how people see it, that they do not see that the

benefits system is a viable option. But they need to be put right?

That's right. There are people fulcrum there is no alternative.

For the rest of their lives that will be dependent on this benefit.

They might be a bit depressed listening to what you have to say

because they've got no alternative. We still have to protect those

people. I assume you're talking about people with disablement and

welfare reform is there to provide for those people. Some of those

people are a little bit concerned that while that might be the

intention, that might not happen in practice. There are lots of

concerns and lots of fears. Some of those fears have been alleviated

and it is up to us to go through this book and make the

recommendations but make welfare reform work for those people.

that final -- thought, a job well done? I was satisfied with the

committee. There was an argument that the committee, the DST

committee, could have done this. It was the first time Stormont has had

an Adhoc committee set up for specific purposes like that. It was

a good decision? It was a worthwhile decision. It may have to

happen again. Maybe a standing Now we are a low tax committee,

that's the comments of Sammy Wilson. Mr Wilson batted any criticism from

fellow fellow Unionists who claim they get nothing from peace funding.

I am sure the minister heard, as I have complaints within the

Protestant community that it doesn't receive its fair share of

peace funding. Can the minister give a view on this, but also if he

has the figures, provide us with the precise percentage that the

Protestant community get with peace funding for its projects? Well, if

one looks at the various peace programmes that there have been one,

peace one, peace two, and peace three, the maximum that has has

been - I should the figures somewhere - the maximum which has

been drawn down by groups which come from the Unionist community

was was 47%. In In peace one, there was 44% uptake by groups from the

Protestant community. In peace two, it was 47% and although we are not

at the end of peace three, it is standing at at 46% and it is

something which concerned me and something which I have been saying.

You have to address and there has been considerable effort, I can say

this, I'm critical, but there has been considerable effort in trying

to get applications from the Unionist community and to work with

groups within the Unionist community. Groups where there is

areas where there is little capacity. Groups such as the Orange

Order, the various police organisations and I have got to say,

Mr Deputy Speaker, it does annoy me sometimes at the ill informed

comment that comes from people who seek to agitate when I hear, "We

get nothing." Let's just look at some of the money which has gone.

East Belfast, where some of this agitation has come interest. A

project there, a magnificent regeneration project, �6 million as

a result of money from peace three. The grand Orange Lodge for stepping

towards positive engagement has got nearly �1 million. The Grand Orange

Lodge, �3.6 million. The apprentice boys, �2 million. All of these

things going to Unionist orientated groups and I wish some of those

people who complain we get nothing would actually look at the facts.

When some members opposite talk about revenue raising powers, what

they are meaning is tax increases for hard-pressed businesses and

households across the Profferens and -- Province and that's not the

direction in which the Executive should be going and many of the

areas identified would come at a huge cost to the block grant?

I have made my position clear in the House and that's that I do not

believe we ought to be taking money from the public if there are ways

of making savings within the public sector that we have got charge of

at the moment. And for that reason, of course, we have frozen in real

terms rates this Northern Ireland - - in Northern Ireland and they were

frozen during the last period. I hear these things about the

assembly and taxes and everything else. We have got a very good

record, the best record, of anywhere in the United Kingdom of

where we have tax raising powers we have not exercised them to the

detriment of people in the middle of a recession and we ought to be

proud of that and it is something that those who continually complain

about the performance of this assembly ought to bear in mind. We

are a low tax assembly and that's the way I want to keep it.

We have an arrangement from place where any contract, construction

contract, which is worth more than �1 million and in which there is a

substantial amount of sub contracting in the contract and

providing it is actually one which is overseen by CPD, we are going to

encourage others to use the same projects. Once the money - the

money will go into the pro jet account -- project account and as a

result of the money going in, within five days of the money being

deposited. The sub contractors should be paid from that. So no

longer will the money go to the main contractor who may decide to

use it as working capital and hold back and hold back and pay the sub

contractors at their leisure and I believe this will be an important

development for helping sub contractors. It only applies to

those contracts which are put out by CPD. They have to be

construction contracts. They have to have a substantial number of sub

contractors in them and they have to be over �1 million.

The Finance Minister, Sammy Wilson. One-third of students who go to

university across the water return to work in Northern Ireland. That's

what the Employment Minister told the assembly today. Stephen Farry

was asked what his department is doing to attract more graduates to

come home? In the 2011 lsh/12 academic, one-third of academics

left this region to study at a higher education institution in

Great Britain. That in the main, those who opt for a university

place in Great Britain do so upon choice. The most important reason

cited was the student considered a particular institution as being the

best placed to undertake their course. Issues of location were

also important to the respondants. In that respect, a large number of

these students are determined leavers. Data on those who return

can be sourced from the higher education destination Surrey. This

survey -- survey. This survey survey shows over one-third of

people who go away to study return for work. 39% of Northern Ireland

domiciled full-time leavers from from higher education who studied

in Great Britain and were in employment six months after

graduation returned to Northern Ireland for work.

I am sure the the minister will agree we want our most talented

people to come back to Northern Ireland and the best way to do that

is having the graduate opportunities here and I know he

and other executive ministers are working hard to ensure those

opportunities exist. Can the minister outline the type of work

that his department do in going across to universities in Great

Britain and participating in jobs fairs or employment seminars to

encourage those graduates from Northern Ireland to return home and

seek to find employment back in Northern Ireland? There is a number

of issues that Mr Ross identifies there that we need to be minuteful

of. First of all, the effect of the executive's decision to freeze

tuition fees in Northern Ireland has been helpful in terms of

encouraging our students to stay in Northern Ireland. And if they stay

in Northern Ireland, they are more likely to build their career here

as well. We have sought to expand the number of under graduate places

in Northern Ireland and we have had the biggest rise in provision in

over a decade. All of those are in stem subjects. Could the minister

indicate how the pupils and students that go to Great Britain

to take part in degree courses fair compared with those that stay at

home both in terms of completing degrees and passing one?

We will come back to the member with the specific figures in that

regard. But it is worth stressing that the universe in Northern

Ireland have high retention rates. Overall, higher education in

Northern Ireland does compare favourably to higher education

elsewhere in the world in terms of retention as well. For different

reasons. If you look at somewhere like the United States, they have

low graduation rates because a lot of people drop out sometimes for

economic reasons. If you look at the Continental European model,

they tend to have a very flexible approach to entry where large

numbers of people will be enrolled and a lot of people drop out

whenever they discover the courses aren't for them. So the approach we

take within these islands is probably the best balance between

those different extremes, but I am more than happy to give the member

the detailed figures. Stephen farry. In a report last

October, the Prison Ombudsman criticised the Prison Service for

failing to investigate the death of a young man who took his own life

at Hydebank Young Offenders' Centre. Last week the ombudsman discussed

the case at the Justice Committee. On two occasions Samuel shef harmed.

He was -- self harmed. He was physically assaulted twice

seriously and in July 2010, Samuel was briefly kept in the healthcare

centre for what was described as respite from the bullying that he

reported was occurring on his landing. The investigation

identified that firstly numerous recorded instainss of Samuel being

subjected to at times serious verbal abuse and threats were not

investigated and did not lead to any action being taken. Numerous

allegations of bullying and noted instances of bullying were not

contrary to Prison Service anti- bullying policy. A security

information report was not completed and required referrals

were not made to the anti-bullying co-ordinator.

Bullying investigations did not take place or abandoned when Samuel

withdrew allegations even though it was known to staff that the

withdrawal was due to Samuel's concern that he would be subjected

to more severe bullying. Samuel was seriously assaulted on the 9 9th

October 2010 by inmates he told staff a number of times that were

bullying him. Staff seemed reluctant to raise bullying

incidents reports. Investigations into bullying and resulting action

were not effective. On a number of occasions there was no evidence

that recommended action was implemented by the anti-bullying

co-ordinator or by other staff. On 7th March Samuel was kicked and

punched by by two inmates. He was taken to hospital when he started

to cough up blood. The security staff and some prison staff

appeared to regard the bullying of alleged or committed sex offenders

as inevitable. A number of concerns were identified in connection with

Samuel's healthcare. It was found no mental health assessment took

place between August 2010 and Samuel's death in May 2011. It is

to note that there was evidence that Samuel's overall wellbeing was

significantly affected by the fact that because of paramilitary

threats connected with the nature of his charges, his repeated

attempts to find a bail address failed.

I notice items going missing and records not being kept and the sort

of things that you would anticipate to be happening as a matter of

course, not being done. Are you aware of any disciplinary follow-

ups as a result what was negligent behaviour? I am not. It is fair to

say that we were satisfied, we didn't believe there was anything

sinister. We think this was an efficiency issue in terms of the

information being lost. I agree it is not acceptable, but it is

exceptional that we have a problem getting information. It is better

than it used to be and generally speaking the efforts that are made

around record keeping have improved and generally don't create problems.

Trevor Lunn is still with me. There was a lot of discussion last week

about the leaked draft document. Your party removed itself from that

process and now you have published your own proposals about a shared

future. There is there has been criticism about your plans for

shared education, that target for integrated education. 20% by 2010.

Is that deliverable? If you look at it the other way around, Mark, if

the facilities were there so that everybody who wanted integrated

education to be facilitated, we would achieve that target in no

time. There is clearly a public demand for children to be

integrated in school, to be educated together.

Is there a great demand for it? I saw a representative of the

Catholic education system today today saying there is over capacity

within the integrated system. Not all integrated schools are fully

subscribed. Do that and you might be able to make the argument that

more places are needed, but when there are empty desks already, it

is hard to make the case? percentage of of empty sector and

the Catholic maintained sector is higher. In the integrated, it is

about 5%. You are talking about 80,000 empty desks. In a way that's

a different issue. We are talking about bringing children together.

There is lots of good reasons why they should be educated together.

The plans leaked in draft form last week. Can they come together where

people can have a better shared future? Well, we pro produced our

plans because the other process appeared to be going nowhere. We

stuck with it for a long time and we did our best.