| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Maginnis: The hon. Gentleman agrees that it was quite right. He has just told me that it was quite right.
Mr. McNamara: I was saying that the hon. Gentleman was quite right.
Mr. Maginnis: I am usually quite right vis-o-vis what the hon. Gentleman has to say.
More important, Sinn Fein-IRA sat for almost a year with every other nationalist party in Ireland. They sat in what was called the Dublin Forum for Peace and Reconciliation and at the end of that, the forum brought forth a report--about a fortnight ago. That report by and large picked up the elements of the Downing Street declaration--
It being Ten o'clock, the debate stood adjourned.
Ordered,
Question again proposed, That the Bill be now read the Third time.
Madam Speaker:
Does the hon. Member for Fermanagh and South Tyrone (Mr. Maginnis) wish to finish, or may we move on to the Northern Ireland order?
Mr. Maginnis:
You are very tolerant, Madam Speaker. I have literally one sentence.
Mr. Maginnis:
It is to draw the attention of the House to the fact that the one dissenting voice in what was mainly a pan-nationalist forum was Sinn Fein-IRA. I do not use the word pan-nationalist in this case in any derogatory sense, but Sinn Fein was the one party that could not agree with the other nationalist parties in Ireland. That is the party for which the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, North wants to make excuse after excuse in the House.
Mr. McNamara:
On a point of order, Madam Speaker. The hon. Gentleman cannot get away with accusing me of making excuses for a party that supports murder and violence.
Madam Speaker:
Order. The hon. Gentleman is a long-standing parliamentarian in the House. He knows that that is not a point of order; it is a point of argument and a point of debate.
Question put and agreed to.
Bill accordingly read the Third time, and passed.
Appropriation (Northern Ireland)
Madam Speaker:
It might be helpful if I make it clear at this stage that debate on this order may of course cover all matters for which Northern Ireland Departments, as distinct from the Northern Ireland Office, are responsible. Of course, police and security are the principal excluded subjects.
The Minister of State, Northern Ireland Office (Sir John Wheeler):
I beg to move,
The draft order has two purposes. The first is to authorise expenditure of £96 million in the 1995-96 spring supplementary estimates. That will bring total estimates provision for Northern Ireland departmental services to £6,238 million for this financial year. The second purpose is to authorise the vote-on-account of £2,821 million for 1996-97. That will enable the services of Northern Ireland Departments to continue until the 1996-97 main estimates are brought before the House later this year. I remind the House, as you have done, Madam Speaker, that the draft order does not cover expenditure by the Northern Ireland Office on law and order and other services.
Details of the sums sought are given in the estimates booklet and the "Statement of Sums Required on Account" which, as usual, are available in the Vote Office. I now turn to the estimates.
In the Department of Agriculture's vote 1, which covers expenditure on national agriculture and fisheries support measures, a net increase of £1.1 million is required. About £1.5 million is required for capital grant commitments, £1.3 million of which relates to the farm and conservation grant scheme. Those increases are partially offset by savings in other areas. In the Department's vote 2, covering local support measures, a net increase of £1.1 million is sought.
Turning to the Department of Economic Development, a token increase of £1,000 is sought in vote 1. Some£3.5 million is for the provision of land and buildings by the Industrial Development Board to meet additional expenditure on factories for recent inward investment projects. Some £6 million is for selective assistance to industry, mainly to meet claims made under existing offers to major inward investment projects. Those increases reflect the board's continuing success in attracting international competitive companies to Northern Ireland. The increases are offset by increased receipts and reduced requirements elsewhere in the vote.
In the Department of Economic Development vote 3, a net increase of some £1.6 million is sought by the Training and Employment Agency. The major requirement is £6 million to meet increasing claims under the company development programme. Partial offsetting savings have been declared elsewhere in the vote, to reduce the additional requirements to £1.6 million.
For the Department of the Environment, a net increase of some £6.5 million is sought in vote 1. Some£2.8 million is for compensation payments and capital grants to Northern Ireland railways. Those increases are partially offset by increased receipts.
In vote 2, covering housing, a net increase of some £3 million is sought, mainly to provide assistance to the Northern Ireland Housing Executive, and some£6.8 million is to provide private sector housing renovation grants. That increase is partially offset by the reallocation of some £2.8 million in housing grant and by additional receipts from housing associations. Gross housing expenditure in Northern Ireland this year is now expected to be about £599 million, an increase of£25 million over 1994-95.
In vote 3, covering water and sewerage services, a net increase of some £2.1 million is sought. Additional expenditure of some £4 million, mainly required for operational, new construction and improvement work, has been offset by a reduction of some £2 million on water and sewerage administration. In vote 4, which covers environmental and other services, a net increase of some £0.2 million is sought. In vote 5, covering office and general accommodation, £8.2 million is for new public building works, alterations and purchases.
I now turn to the Department of Education, where a net increase of some £8.3 million is sought in vote 1. That includes some £7.1 million for grants to education and library boards, mainly for maintenance, minor works, frost damage and replacement buses. Some £1.4 million is for voluntary schools, mainly for health and safety works.
I turn next to the Department of Health and Social Services, where a net increase of £17.6 million is sought in vote 1. That includes £26.1 million for hospital, community health and personal social services and family health services revenue, and £1.9 million for capital expenditure. Those increases are offset by increased receipts and a reduction of £7.1 million in the centrally financed services.
In vote 3, additional net provision of £5.3 million is required, due to a decrease in receipts of £6.8 million, most of which relates to recoupments from the national insurance fund in respect of administration costs, and an increase in funding for the centrally financed miscellaneous health and personal social services of£2.8 million. Those increases are offset by reductions of£4.3 million elsewhere in the vote.
In vote 4, which covers social security, £29 million is sought. That is due mainly to a greater than anticipated demand for disability benefits--in particular attendance, invalid care and disability living allowances. That is offset by decreases in income support and family credit.
Finally, £5.3 million is sought in vote 5, due mainly to increased expenditure on rent allowance and rates rebates. Those increases are partially offset by reduced requirements elsewhere in the vote.
In addition to the aforementioned increases, provision has been included within individual votes under the European Union special support programme for peace and reconciliation. European funding has been provided initially for a three-year period, from 1995 to 1997, with further funding for two years up to 1999, subject to review. Northern Ireland has been allocated £200 million which, together with 25 per cent. matching funding, brings the total value of the programme in Northern Ireland to some £266 million. Both the European funding and the matching funding will be fully additional.
Mr. Jim Dowd (Lewisham, West):
I sympathise with the Minister. It has been a long day, but at least he knows that we are more than halfway through it. He rattled through a great range of numbers, and as the order is principally a financial measure, the House should examine a few of them. The debate provides an opportunity for Members representing Northern Ireland constituencies to raise issues, and as a significant number of them are present, I shall be brief.
The order is part of the Government's projections for expenditure from 1996-97 to 1998-99 arising from the Budget statement. We welcome several of its provisions. I hesitate to say it, but some sleight of hand is involved. I do not know whether there is less to the order than appears at first glance, or more, but I hope to tease out from the Minister which it is.
Although there is no reduction in the emphasis on targeting social needs and no offset of the additional funding expected from the peace and reconciliation initiative and the EU money that was mentioned, the figures, of which the measure represents the first tranche, suggest that there will be a reduction in real terms over the next two or three years. Most of the provisions are welcome, but they should be viewed against the need to consolidate the opportunities for economic development that have arisen in Northern Ireland recently--and the need to expand the economy by some 6 per cent. if a net 60,000 jobs are to be provided.
Although the recent developments that we discussed earlier are deeply troubling, it is the will of all Members to ensure that the work that has been done to bring normality to the lives of so many people in Northern Ireland continues, and that it is not another victim of the callous brutality of the Provisional IRA.
I would be grateful if, in his reply to the debate, the Minister would say whether the priorities established in the expenditure review in early December after the Chancellor's Budget statement have been changed by developments in the past 10 days or so since the South Quay outrage. I understand that he cannot say too much, but perhaps he can inform the House whether the welcome shift anticipated by the expenditure review is likely be reversed.
The overall increase in expenditure is some 2.5 per cent., but when the increased social security costs are taken into account, the figure drops to below 1 per cent., which, as all Members will know, represents a cut in real terms. When that is considered together with the switch from security spending to industrial development, it places greater pressure on the targeting of social needs expenditure, and the health, housing and education budgets. It is fundamentally wrong, therefore, for the Government to rely on more expenditure in that sector to create sufficient wealth and jobs to improve the lot of the socially deprived.
I should refer to one of the most alarming proposals in this year's order--the implied 20 to 30 per cent. cut in the action for community employment programme. There
is widespread concern in all parts of Northern Ireland about the possible effects--up to 3,000 jobs could be lost. I asked a parliamentary question to try to elicit further information about the ACE programme, to find out the expenditure on individual organisations for the years between 1994 and 1997, and to learn how many people are employed by each body.
I was disappointed to receive an answer telling me that such detailed information was not readily available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. I should have thought that such figures were first-line information for the Training and Employment Agency in its dealings with the ACE programme.
There has been a welcome decline in unemployment in Northern Ireland in recent years, but it remains the area of the United Kingdom with the highest unemployment, especially long-term unemployment; and unemployment there is well above the EU average. Anything that jeopardises progress on this front is a matter of justifiable concern to all involved.
Although it has been said that the community work programme will be given more emphasis, the evidence is that it is nothing like as successful as the ACE programme has been. There is anxiety about the quality of community work programme training and experience, for instance.
Another worrying aspect of this affair is that the Northern Ireland Council for Voluntary Action has been deeply critical of the fact that it was not even consulted about the proposal to reduce the ACE programme.
The Minister mentioned EU special funds. Can he confirm that they remain, and will remain, additional beyond this year; and that the Government do not intend to make them "instead of" as opposed to "as well as"?
That, at this day's sitting, the Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions) Bill may be proceeded with, though opposed, until any hour.--[Mr. Streeter.]
10.2 pm
That the draft Appropriation (Northern Ireland) Order 1996, which was laid before this House on 13th February, be approved.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |