| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Let us for a minute examine the Rally Ireland event—£700,000 for a rally that few have ever heard of. I support the concept of the tourist trade in Fermanagh but not at outrageous cost—£700,000 for a rally against £33,000 for the Orange Order. Is it any wonder that people in the Protestant community feel aggrieved and marginalised? Let us look at an interesting document produced by the University of Ulster in support of the case for Rally Ireland. As the noble Lord, Lord Smith of Clifton, is aware, I have had a relationship with that university over the years. The document makes interesting reading. I am always alerted by a document, especially from an academic institution, which refers to a position as relatively unique. Section 9 of The Case for Rally Ireland makes interesting reading. The report states:
“The majority of those who attended the rally from Northern Ireland were protestant males. Their willingness to cross the border was significant and, in fact, unprecedented”.
Has no one ever heard of the Circuit of Ireland or rugby internationals in Dublin? Besides, how can you
4 July 2006 : Column GC9
The spectator figures for the events are grossly exaggerated—2,000 to 5,000 people over three days, but the report claims that there were 34,000. Bed nights were also claimed to be very high, but the Northern Ireland Tourist Board hotel bed-and-breakfast guesthouse survey for that month shows a reduction in occupancy as compared with the same period the previous year. During the event you could still book hotel rooms within four miles of it. That is not a sign that it is attracting tourism. There was an excessive fee of £200,000 for the promoter, which HMG do not normally accept but find acceptable in these circumstances Why? We should look at the internal event expenditure document which DCAL has. A general manager for one event cost €80,000; a finance manager €37,000; a sporting adviser €20,000, the helicopter €20,000; the helicopter co-ordination €10,000 and the police €50,000. To whom did the PSNI funding go? Will the noble Lord give me a breakdown of how much was spent in Northern Ireland? Were the normal tendering procedures adopted at all times? In normal circumstances that information is required by DCAL before payment is made. I calculate that the economic return for Northern Ireland was very low.
The Secretary of State publicly committed funding of €945,000 for the event without consultation with Government officials. Will the Minister explain from where DCAL got the money? This event was a waste of public money and a scandal. The event seems to operate on a political lobbying basis mainly orchestrated by a consultant for Rally Ireland. Accountable issues are being pushed aside. At a time when budgets are being cut elsewhere, this is a complete waste of public money. The case for funding was a joke as the announcement had already been made in front of the Republic of Ireland’s Tourism Minister last October. DCAL went through the motions of preparing a case to secure the money.
I will investigate this case in minute detail. The announcement of £33,000 for the Orangefest event is being used to allow DCAL to give an extra £100,000 funding to the West Belfast festival this year without evaluation or proper process. This announcement is expected to take place before 12 July. Officials hope that it will not be noticed in the lead up to the 12th and that Sinn Fein can make plenty of noise about the money going to the Orangefest to balance it. I will follow this trail as long as it takes. This is more money that is not available to unionists. It is interesting to think of all the people who have been turned down by the Community Relations Council, the Northern Ireland events companies and others—people struggling in small communities to run festivals to show off their culture to best advantage to those from other cultures. Yet the organisers and promoters of this event in Fermanagh, which no one in Belfast has ever heard of, get £200,000 of HMG’s money—and for doing what? Is it any wonder that there is a grievance? Who do you
4 July 2006 : Column GC10
I am not aware of people who drive around in rally cars creating inter-community strife, and I am not aware that they have caused problems in years gone by. But a lot of us have worked extremely hard with no government support and not even a word of thanks or praise to help to turn 12 July in Belfast into a tourist attraction which we can all enjoy and show off our culture, not being offensive to anybody else, and bring tourists into Northern Ireland. No wonder we are disgusted.
It is still necessary to have expenditure and additional workloads associated with both the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure and the Arts Council for Northern Ireland. In conjunction with the review of public administration in Northern Ireland, has any consideration been given to removing this additional and seemingly unnecessary tier of bureaucracy? It is feasible that the management of art and culture in Northern Ireland could be handled perfectly well by a combination of DCAL and the revised groups of local councils. Indeed there is already some confusion and duplication of the activities of the department and the Arts Council.
If, however, the Arts Council is to remain in existence, can we be assured that its remit will be closely reviewed and clearly spelt out, and its performance regularly monitored? There is growing concern throughout the artistic and the wider community in Northern Ireland that the Arts Council has unilaterally abdicated responsibility for promoting excellence, innovation and most activities generally viewed as high art, and overseen by the British Arts Council. It has instead taken on itself the role of social commentator and community developer and appears to be a government agency intent on spending public money on its own whims without direction or scrutiny.
There is also a strong view, for which I could give endless amounts of evidence, that there is what I would describe as discrimination against the Ulster Scots and Unionist community in the allocation of funds by the Arts Council for Northern Ireland. I am not sure who is in charge of affairs, but it seems that at every turn and cut, it is not possible to promote anything that is not pure Irish. We have the Northern Ireland Tourist Board, which I should tell noble Lords is still paying out grants owed to people for the past two years. How can you run events or create tourist activities in Northern Ireland if you do not get paid by the tourist board for two years?
I also find it extremely difficult to understand why tourism which supports Ulster Scots is not more readily available. Some 22 million Scots Irish live in America, all thirsting to come back to their homeland. The only part of the world where you can get Ulster Scots culture is in Ulster, yet when I talk to the tourist authorities, they say that they are promoting Irish culture. You can get Irish culture in Northern Ireland and anywhere else in Ireland, but the only place where you get the Ulster Scots culture is in Northern Ireland. Look at some of our tremendous sites—the battlefield at the Moy, the
4 July 2006 : Column GC11
Tourism could be one of the major industries of Northern Ireland, and if tourists are going around the Province, people are not likely to cause trouble or throw stones. If your existence is dependent on tourism, and if you want a lot of Americans drinking coffee in your coffee houses and creating wealth, you are not going to create difficulties in your home town. That stands to sense. Tourism is not just a good industry, it is actually a part of the peace arrangements for Northern Ireland. It is not a couple of cars skipping across the border in South Tyrone every now and again and 3,000 people per day watching them. That is not tourism. That is simply a rip-off.
I have concluded my opening remarks.
Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton: I rise only to make certain that the two new Members, the noble Baroness, Lady Paisley, and the noble Lord, Lord Trimble, are aware that, should they wish to say anything in this Grand Committee, this would be the appropriate time to do so. I am conscious that this is their first attendance at our proceedings. I just wanted to make sure that they were aware of that before the Minister replies.
Lord Rooker: I congratulate the noble Lord and the noble Baroness. I have not yet had a chance to have a chat with them because I was not present at their incoming. I hope that they enjoy the House of Lords as much as I have enjoyed it for the past five yeas. I did not plan to come here either, but nevertheless we have interesting debates.
I have to say to the noble Lord, Lord Laird, that I am still answering his quota of Written Questions every day. He must be aware of that because I have just finished another lot before I came to the Moses Room. Indeed, some of the questions I have answered will respond to some of the issues he has raised today. I am not using that to make a point of not giving him a considered response now, but given the amount of detail he raised, it is not possible to answer in full. However, anything that is not answered today he will get from me in writing.
The Deputy Chairman of Committees: A Division has been called. The Committee will adjourn for10 minutes and we shall reassemble at 21 minutes past four o’clock.
[The Sitting was suspended for a Division in the House from 4.11 to 4.21 pm.]
4 July 2006 : Column GC12
Lord Rooker: I shall give a few figures in respect of the headlines for education and health before seeking to answer some of the more detailed questions.
The Northern Ireland budget for education is over 20 per cent of the Northern Ireland Budget of£9 billion, which is second to the health department. It is a substantial part of public expenditure. Since 1997, the funding has increased by more than 60 per cent; and that is with a decrease of about 6 per cent in pupil numbers. Also since 1997, funded pre-school places have doubled, so over 90 per cent of children get a better quality start to their education. Some £210 million is being invested to bring interactive learning into all classrooms. Over the past seven years on capital, there have been 230 major project schemes with an investment of over £1.3 billion. In the past two years, over £600 million has been invested, covering 91 schemes. In 2006-07, the Department of Education allocated £20 million to the education and library boards for maintenance.
There is a problem with surplus places. I do not think that it needs to be addressed here today, but it is a serious issue. There are 50,000 surplus places and two-thirds are in the primary sector. Only 8 per cent of them are in small schools. There are many—too many—small schools in Northern Ireland, but that is not where the surplus places are. The issue is going to get worse with, we reckon, a decline by a further 30,000 places over the next 10 years. In terms of achievements, 61 per cent of school leavers are achieving five or more GCSEs, compared to 57 per cent in England. Some 97 per cent of pupils achieve two or more A-level passes, compared to 95 per cent in England. On both those fairly narrow but important indicators, the success rate is better than England. A lot of reforms are under way, whether it is post-primary education—on which we will have a debate of substance next Monday evening, and the revised curriculum arrangements are included in that—new procurement and delivery arrangements for the schools estate, or a single education and skills authority.
I have few figures on health. I said initially that there is an increase of 7.5 per cent from the 2005-06 into this year. Much of the additional development resources will be spent on tackling waiting times in Northern Ireland. Some £140 million is required to meet the increased pressures on the pay bill. About £217 million will be available for capital development and health and social services.
I was asked about the effect of the money on waiting lists. When the new team of Ministers arrived in May 2005, the waiting list situation was a bit of a surprise to us; we had been quite ignorant about the situation in Northern Ireland. We put additional investment in, and this year there has been a further investment of another £12 million and a further £18 million, to bring the total to £35 million. The major reform programme is under way, and the number of people waiting more than 12 months for hospital treatment has fallen from about 4,000 to zero, so there has been a substantial difference in the past year. Waiting times will be further reduced over the coming year, and by March 2007 our estimate is that no one
4 July 2006 : Column GC13
Following the education and library boards’ overspend last year, an inquiry was initiated. The department has been monitoring progress against the action plans agreed with both the boards—the Belfast board and the South Eastern board—and the Jack report made 49 specific recommendations. The review of the implementation recommendations has been initiated and a report is due to be made to the Department of Education’s permanent secretary later this month. I will make sure that noble Lords are made aware of the findings.
Efficiency savings of some £580 million have been targeted for delivery by March 2008. The latest monitoring shows that we are well on target for that delivery and further efficiencies are being pursued by the work streams relating to the Comprehensive Spending Review, which all departments will have to go through. The noble Lord, Lord Glentoran, is right that we want to get efficiency savings, but they must be efficiency savings and not just savings. We do not want to create savings by denuding services.
The noble Lord also asked about the implications of the Review of Public Administration. It is designed to deliver better services. Following the implementation of the review, there should be a clear separation between policy formation and operational delivery in the education service. That should result in the transfer of some functions from the Department of Education to the new education and skills authority. There are major changes. A lot of the PR about the Review of Public Administration centred on local government, but we always made it clear that the Assembly had set up a three-strand approach: education; health and local government.
The noble Lord, Lord Smith, asked about falling pupil numbers. I do not have all the answers. As part of the Comprehensive Spending Review, we have asked Sir George Bain to take a strategic view so that we can look at what school provision can be made to encourage greater sharing, collaboration and achieving higher standards. As I have said before, it is possible to do that, and there are good examples. You can operate more than one school in a building, which at least gives some shared services and a shared community, although you can maintain separate schools. The noble Lord, Lord Smith, asked me about integrated education. In 2006-07, approximately £25 million has been allocated for capital development in grant-maintained integrated schools. The recurrent grant aid totalling £56 million will be paid to the grant-maintained integrated schools in 2006-07. That compares to £3.9 million in 1991-92.
4.30 pm
In addition, the Department of Education funds the Northern Ireland Council for Integrated Education. The grant is a modest £528,000 for 2006-07. That
4 July 2006 : Column GC14
The noble Lord, Lord Laird, asked various questions. I have said that I will come back to the questions on Invest Northern Ireland that I am unable to answer today. The 2006-07 budget is £152 million for financial assistance. That is based on the funding requirement for existing contracts with companies coupled with an estimate of the funding needed to support new businesses and those projects which are under negotiation. It covers a very wide range of areas such as start up support, research and development, selective financial assistance and business improvement services. I wholly agree with what the noble Lord said about the small private sector and the ability to give grants to the voluntary and community sector. There is a disproportionately small private sector in Northern Ireland. The economy will never grow while it stays as small as it is; there is no question about that. The Government can do an awful lot. We want to do it not necessarily by cutting the public sector, although there can sometimes be transfers of activity, but by deliberately setting out to grow the private sector in every way we can. I realise that comparisons have been drawn and questions have been asked about the different tax rates that apply in the north and the south and about the various incentives that apply, but certainly there is a positive effort to do what I have mentioned.
PositiveSteps is the Government’s response to the report of the Taskforce on Resourcing the Voluntary and Community Sector, Investing Together. The actions in Positive Steps will help to ensure that the voluntary and community sector is better placed to cope with social and economic change. Twenty-one million pounds has been allocated to the voluntary and community sector in 2006-07. The admin costs can look high and the noble Lord, Lord Laird, was quite right to subject the accounts to forensic examination. Although the admin costs appear to rise in 2006-07, that is not the case. If that is not the case, it should not look as if it is. I acknowledge that everything is my responsibility, but nevertheless I do not remember the relevant line. However, the flat line figure for admin costs has been adjusted upwards to take account of technical changes in recognition of superannuation liabilities, which would always have been there. That brings Northern Ireland into line with the accounting approach adopted in Great Britain. It may look as though there is an increase in that regard, but that is not the case. The underlying trend in our view is a real reduction.
I have mentioned the reduction in waiting list times of more than 12 months from 4,000 to zero. Of course, I shall give way.
Lord Glentoran: I thank the noble Lord for giving way. Going back to the administration figures that he mentioned, Mr Lidington has referred in the other place to the provision for administrative costs for Northern Ireland departments in 2005-06. If we compare that
4 July 2006 : Column GC15
Lord Rooker: Without the benefit of technical advice I am not sure whether the figures are comparable, but certainly I will get an answer to that. Our view on the overall trend is that there is a reduction. There is obviously a paradox there but I shall seek to explain that in writing, as I can probably explain it better in writing than verbally. However, the point is well made by the noble Lord.
The road maintenance budget was mentioned. Funding for road maintenance over the two-year period 2006-08 is £45 million to £57 million. Some reductions were necessary in the structural maintenance budget. I believe that I mentioned that point in an earlier discussion. Last autumn we were faced with a dilemma in putting the budget together. We had to get money from other areas. We had to put the rates up by far more than we had wanted for the reasons that I have given and restructure some priorities, and that budget was one of them.
In the past three years, £735 million has been spent on developing and maintaining the road network in Northern Ireland. Over the next 10 years, £1.9 billion will be invested in roads. We were conscious when putting the Budget together that all necessary health and safety projects are going ahead. We did not cut anything with a specific health and safety rationale.
On festival funding, I realise that festivals come around annually and so do the questions. I suspect that the answers will probably come around annually as well. The noble Lord, Lord Laird, raised a lot of detailed questions, to which it is clearly impossible—even with the number of officials here today—to do justice. Nevertheless, I will get him answers to all his questions. The Northern Ireland Events Company administers the community festivals fund, which was £550 million for 2006-07 and 2007-08, including admin costs.
Perceived community background is not a factor in determining the recipients of festival funding. Assistance is provided solely on the basis of the merits of the individual festival. The first tranche of funding for festivals, between 1 April and 31 July, has been decided. Details of the successful applicants have been announced on the website. There are no plans to allocate any further funding to the Northern Ireland Events Company at this stage.
Lord Laird: I am grateful to the Minister for giving way. Can he give an undertaking that there will be no extra money provided to the nationalist West Belfast Festival, Ardoyne or New Lodge? I understand that £100,000 is going to the West Belfast Festival, but it is not coming from the events company. I would be reassured if the Minister can assure me that I am wrong.
Lord Rooker: I shall have to come back to the noble Lord. Given what I have just said about there being no further plans to allocate further funds to the
4 July 2006 : Column GC16
On health service pay, the Government intend that the Department of Health will join the doctors’ and dentists’ pay review body, and plans for that are in place. I do not have a date, but it will change how pay and ration issues are dealt with.
On Northern Ireland Railways, a programme for replacement of the trains is in place. When completed, the Government will consider the need for further investment in the rail network as part of the regional transport strategy. That does not take matters much further forward, except that it is not finished; we have not said that that is the end. Obviously, we must consider further.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |