John O'Dowd
Upper Bann · Sinn Féin · Northern Ireland
“As I set out in response to the previous question, we have in place the vacant property rate relief scheme and the small business rate relief scheme, which are very successful. I set aside £10 million in the draft Budget for small business rate relief to be invested.”
“I am particularly keen to hear from those impacted by vacant commercial units and especially about how any phased increase can be implemented in a sustainable way that is fair, proportionate and sustainable within the tax system.”
“I outlined my intent to take that approach in my statement on 18 November, alongside the fact that reform of rating policy should support growth, make better use of property and ensure that the system is fair, proportionate and aligned with wider economic objectives.”
“The accelerator will operate alongside our highly successful Back in Business scheme, which has helped to bring over 100 vacant high street properties back into use since May 2024. Those issues have been the subject of considerable interest and comment in the Assembly, and it is right that we grasp the nettle now.”
“There are no circumstances in which a hard border would be good for the people of Ireland; it would not be good for anyone. Those who suggest that are being naive at best and dangerous at worst, in the sense of not understanding this society. <BR /> <BR />Rural communities along the border are one and the same.”
“This announcement represents the next step in that. That said, I also put on record my intention to strengthen support for small businesses. In that vein, £10 million has been set aside in the draft Budget to broaden the impact of the small business rate relief scheme in order to increase the number of businesses that can benefit from it.…”
The complete record
Every one of 6,140 lines we hold for John O'Dowd, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 23 of 123.
“There needs to be an urgent review of the number of ALBs, their functions and responsibilities, and whether those could be carried out in a more effective and efficient way that delivers the front-line public services that they have been mandated to deliver.”
“All ALBs are answerable to their boards and their chief accounting officers. Under the legislative basis on which they were established, they are also answerable to their sponsoring Ministers. When I was in Departments that had ALBs, I had no difficulty in making enquiries and making sure that they were aware that a Minister was present and sought clarification and assurance on public spend. There are also the Committees, which do an excellent scrutiny job. They also have a responsibility to question ALBs on their expenditure. <BR /> <BR />The Member raises a broader point, however, about the amount of public funds that go to ALBs. That has been debated and discussed many times, and Ministers have the authority to do that at this stage.”
“Public-sector pay should be decided at the start of the financial calendar year rather than midway through the calendar year. We did that in the Civil Service branch that I am responsible for. As part of the Budget process, I will bring recommendations to Executive colleagues for public-sector pay to be set in their Departments at the start of the year rather than waiting until mid-term or the end of the year in the hope that they may receive Barnett consequentials or whatever it may be. We cannot deliver public services without public-sector workers, and we should not leave them in a position where they are waiting or becoming frustrated because their pay settlement was not dealt with at the start of the budgetary year.”
“It is up to each Minister to decide whether the level of expenditure that they are giving to statutory spend will cover their statutory obligations. If they feel that they cannot cover their statutory obligations, they have to review that, in my opinion, or they have to make legislative changes to the statutory provision. That should be done, in my opinion, through the scope of whether any statutory changes will improve services rather than reduce services.”
“It is important to clarify that I do not decide a Budget, as much as, perhaps, I would like to on some days. I make recommendations to the Executive, I bring a draft Budget to the Executive, and the Executive either agree or disagree with the draft Budget. If they agree, that draft Budget goes out to consultation. I then bring the consultation report back to the Executive and seek agreement on a final Budget. If the Executive agree, it is brought to the House. I know that Mr Frew knows the process very well. The House passes the Budget Act. I am bound by the Budget Act, as is every Minister in the Executive. On discretionary spend, I cannot micromanage every Minister's Department. Ministers have policy decisions to make in their Departments.”
“Similarly, Departments should also consider whether improved outcomes could be delivered through legislative changes. In that context, it is not appropriate to put a percentage on the level of discretionary spend in a Department.”
“When setting a Budget, the Executive collectively agree a funding envelope for each Department, typically comprising baseline funding, earmarked funding and a general allocation. Earmarked funding must be utilised for a specific purpose, which, in some instances, may include statutory functions. Baseline and general allocations may be spent at the discretion of respective Ministers in line with their departmental priorities. Each Minister is responsible for ensuring that their Department’s statutory obligations are fulfilled within the funding envelope agreed for their Department by the Executive. It is important to note that there is often a degree of flexibility and scalability within statutory functions, and it is for each Department to determine the suitable level.”
“I was just checking to see whether the Member wanted to answer the question as well as ask it. He is seeking assurance. Perhaps, if he listened, he might have assurance. Maybe he will not, but that is up to him to decide. I am satisfied that I have not been presented with any evidence that suggests to me that the system that we are currently operating is anything other than fair and equitable. If you have substantive evidence, please share it with me.”
“Sorry, do you want to answer the question as well?”
“It is certainly not down to age, because that would be discriminatory under employment legislation. As I have set out, each candidate filled out an expression of interest setting out, in their words, how they believed they met the criteria. That was assessed, and, if they met the minimum standard and they fell within the highest-scoring 900, they were invited for interview. If they did not and remain on the list, they may be invited to the next application process, which will be announced in due course. All recruitment exercises have to be carried out with due regard to employment legislation and equality legislation. If the Member has evidence that somebody has been —.”
“As I outlined in my initial answer, due to the unprecedented demand, my Department is planning a third recruitment event.”
“Candidates who expressed an interest in Civil Service administrative officer posts in the north-west were requested to submit an expression of interest in order to assess whether they met the minimum eligibility criteria, including age, right to work and pre-agreed, preferred experience requirements for the role. That involved a self-assessment that asked candidates to rate their level of experience against a set of predefined administrative and organisational criteria that are relevant to AO duties. Each criterion carried a predetermined rating, reflecting its importance to the role. The candidate's total score was calculated by combining those responses across all seven criteria and meeting the minimum eligibility criteria.”
“<BR /> <BR />Due to the unprecedented demand, my Department will be inviting further candidates to submit an application to attend a third recruitment event in the north-west. Planning for that is under way, and the next group of candidates will soon receive further details regarding their participation. At those events, applicants will have the chance to explore available vacancies, speak directly to departmental representatives and complete interviews on the day. Importantly, outcomes will be communicated within days, making it a faster and more candidate-friendly process.”
“On 28 October, I launched a new pilot recruitment initiative for administrative officers (AOs) in the north-west. That pilot marks a shift away from the traditional annual recruitment campaigns towards a more agile and dynamic approach. The response has been very encouraging, with over 4,500 individuals expressing an interest in the pilot competition. Following that, applicants were invited to complete a self-assessment of their skills and experience, and, from that process, 1,420 of the highest-scoring candidates were invited to submit an application. Just over 950 completed applications have been received, and those candidates have been invited to attend one of two recruitment days that are taking place this Wednesday and Thursday in Derry.”
“Yes, there are pressures, but I have proposals in front of me and am confident that all the Executive parties want to support our small and medium-sized businesses; I have no doubt about that. There may be slight disagreements as to how and why we do that, but I have to engage with my Executive colleagues in order to seek agreement on it. If everybody approaches it with an open mind and the objective of supporting our small and medium-sized businesses, we will achieve consensus.”
“It is understandable that there is a focus on rates, as that is the Executive's only major tax-gathering power. Therefore, it is understandable that there is a focus on what businesses or homeowners pay in rates. It is also worth looking at the other side of that equation, however, which is the £1·6 billion that we bring in through the rates and that goes directly to the delivery and maintenance of front-line services. That, in turn, benefits businesses directly and indirectly, with public-sector workers doing business with their businesses. There is a circular economy around that. <BR /> <BR />I have set out how, within our current funding envelope, we can reshape our support for small and medium-sized businesses without placing additional burdens on those who cannot afford to pay. It is about fairness and equity around the entire issue.”
“As I said, it will progress and enhance support for small businesses. It will bring forward an increase in liability for vacant commercial units. It will develop a policy to help businesses to expand or renovate. That is a very important policy, because many businesses want to expand on their current site but are concerned that, if they do, they will immediately have a rates hike to their bill. I propose that we give them a holiday from that hike, which will allow them to bed the new expanded premises in and absorb the construction costs etc. That will be a benefit to businesses. <BR /> <BR />The proposal will also benefit construction businesses and stimulate the construction industry further through renovations to properties. That is a win-win situation for everyone, and I want to see it move forward as quickly as possible.”
“Politics is the art of the possible. It is better for me to try to attain consensus on a policy around the Executive table rather than simply drive a policy through. There are instances when I will use the three-Minister rule and when it will be appropriate to use it, but we are not at that stage yet. <BR /> <BR />We have to engage at political level and at ministerial level, and I want to seek consensus on the issue and get agreement. It might be a useful headline in which the Member can say, "Do this", "Do that" or "Do the other", but where will it bring you? Will it bring agreement? My strong view is that it will not bring agreement at this stage. My strategy is to seek consensus around the Executive table.”
“That will give businesses the chance to share final views before changes are put to ministerial colleagues on enhancements to the support. <BR /> <BR />In order to tackle the high prevalence of vacant units, work now needs to be undertaken to move the non-domestic rate from 50% to 75% and then to 100%. Given the Executive's Programme for Government commitments on housing and regeneration and the work on preventing dilapidation, there is a unique window of opportunity to maximise the impact of the change by working actively at a cross-departmental level. It is, however, a significant change that connects to many strands of policy across Departments. Therefore, Executive agreement will be required before the change can be implemented. I have instructed my officials to take forward the policy work required to secure Executive agreement.”
“Mr Speaker, with your permission, I will group questions 2 and 6. <BR /> <BR />In my statement to the Assembly last Tuesday, I outlined my plans to accelerate the strategic review of rates to secure positive and progressive changes to the business rates system: changes that would see enhanced support for small businesses, which are the backbone of our local economy; change that tackles the high level of vacancies in our towns and city centres; change that supports businesses that are starting out; and change that helps to accelerate business growth. The current small business rate relief scheme provides vital support to around 30,000 small businesses. The support delivered under the scheme has, however, remained unchanged since 2012. I want to create a fair environment for all businesses, and I plan to consult before the new year.”
“The scheme, as it is currently mapped out for the two years, is the best that we can deliver at this stage. However, once a business moves off that programme, it will go into the small business rate relief scheme, which will also offer rate relief to the business if it falls into that category. As I said to the Members who spoke previously, I want to broaden that criteria and support more businesses through the small business rate relief scheme. <BR /> <BR />The Member mentioned vacant properties. I have proposals for a gradual removal of the vacant non-domestic properties rate relief, moving to a 75% tariff and then to a 100% tariff to encourage the owners of vacant properties to put those properties into use.”
“Continuing the Back in Business scheme will require legislation, and officials are already preparing legislation to continue that programme and the support for our high-street businesses. We use the small business rate relief scheme, which is an effective support mechanism for our local businesses. As I said in my original answer, considerable support is being delivered to our business sector through the scheme, and I want to enhance that support from our current spending envelope. As Finance Minister, I have to tell other Ministers to look at what they have so that we can move forward, so I want to use the scheme as an example of how we can redirect spend to support our small and medium-sized businesses.”
“The Member will, I hope, be aware of the statement that I made to the Chamber on, I think, this day last week on how I see future business rates support. My proposal is cost-neutral, because I am conscious that the Executive's Budget continues to face considerable constraints. I have proposed using money from other areas, which includes reducing benefits for those who can most afford to pay and using the savings to help our small and medium-sized businesses. On the basis of my original proposal, we could probably raise around £6·8 million, a significant proportion of which I would like to see being used to support our small and medium-sized businesses.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Back in Business scheme aims to help businesses establish themselves in or expand into previously vacant premises, breathing new life into those sites and revitalising our town centres. Since its reintroduction in April 2024, 79 businesses across all 11 district councils have benefited from a 50% reduction in their business rates through the scheme, amounting to almost half a million pounds in support.”
“The Back in Business rate support scheme was reintroduced last year as part of my Department's efforts to encourage business ratepayers to occupy long-term vacant retail premises. The scheme provides a 50% rate reduction for up to two years once a retail premises that has been empty for 12 months or more becomes occupied. That provides vital support with operating costs during the challenging early stages of setting up. Our high streets and shops are vital to supporting the local economy and employment. For many, they are essential not only for getting daily supplies but for meeting and socialising with others and are at the heart of our local communities.”
“Once agreed by the Executive, the multi-year Budget will go out to consultation. That will be an opportunity for everyone to have their say and help us to shape the final Budget and the future of our public services for years to come. As I outlined, the need for transformation and embracing new methods of service delivery has never been clearer. That will require a willingness from all of us across the Executive, the Assembly and society to embrace change. Like all of you, I want to see our funding used for what matters most. We must work together in true partnership to confront our challenges and seize the opportunity that a multi-year Budget gives to create lasting, positive change.”
“My Department will lead those negotiations. I will have to go back to the Executive with recommendations, and that will require Executive engagement and discussion on the way forward. Progressing that important work will require the agreement of the Executive and the British Government. In Scotland and Wales, that process took a number of years to complete. We can learn valuable lessons from their experiences to help to expedite the process, but it will take time. I want to make progress as quickly as possible whilst ensuring that we get the approach that meets the needs of workers, families and businesses here. <BR /> <BR />Following the Chancellor's autumn Budget tomorrow, I will put forward a multi-year Budget for consideration and agreement by the Executive early next month.”
“Engagement with the Treasury thus far has been on our level of need. We have had success in relation to our level of need, and, as part of those negotiations, I got agreement from the British Government to continue discussions on a full fiscal framework. Part of that full fiscal framework is discussions around fiscal devolution. That engagement has started. It will intensify after the Chancellor announces the Budget. <BR /> <BR />It would be fair to say that the Treasury goes into lockdown about six weeks before a Budget because of the intensity of the work involved, and I have to understand that. However, I have asked my officials, once the Budget is announced, to increase their engagement with officials in the Treasury on full fiscal devolution on the basis of the findings of the Fiscal Commission.”
“However, when Ministers act cooperatively, particularly in engagement with me and my officials, that is worth acknowledging. All Ministers face challenges, but, if we work in a collaborative and partnership way, we will be able to move through those challenges and secure our front-line public services. That has to be done in cooperation. <BR /> <BR />Turning to fiscal powers, it is vital that the Executive have the funding arrangements and fiscal levers necessary to deliver the public services that our citizens rightly expect and deserve. Mr O'Toole seems to believe that there is some sort of delay or stalling here, but there has been a programme of work to get us to the point where I want us to be and where I need to convince Executive colleagues that we need to travel to.”
“Last week, I set out proposals in the House that have the power to raise an additional £9 million through the rating system. Those positive and progressive changes could see savings redirected to provide additional support to small and medium-sized businesses, which are the backbone of our economy. Those proposals are not seeking additional funding; instead, they are focused on better using what we have. I encourage other Ministers to do likewise. <BR /> <BR />Mr Aiken referred to my comments about Mr Nesbitt. One of the difficulties of complimenting a Minister from a different party is that somebody will remind you about it.”
“It is worth noting that the Executive already raise somewhere in the region of £1·6 billion through their rates policy. All of the rates policies are open to review, including the one that the Member referred to: rates relief for manufacturing and for other types of businesses in that field. All of those will be reviewed in the next year or so, and Members will have an opportunity to contribute towards that. <BR /> <BR />When I talk about revenue raising, I also add that that should be done in a fair and equitable way. Those with the broadest shoulders should bear the burden of any further increases across the board, particularly any announcements coming from Westminster on tax rises. Those with the broadest shoulders should bear that. There are other ways as well.”
“<BR /> <BR />Transformation and innovation are essential to driving productivity and ensuring that public-sector pay remains affordable and sustainable throughout the Budget period. Each Minister must strive to improve efficiency in how our public services are delivered. I know that change is difficult, but we have to do things differently if we are to change our public services for the better. That means embracing technology, it means embracing new ideas and it means embracing looking at areas where we can raise additional finances. No, I am not promoting kicking the working class. I have been in the Executive in one form or another over the past 15 years, and nowhere in the decisions that I have made have I been accused of kicking the working class.”
“However, the Member did not read out the list of programmes and investment that is going on across all Executive Departments and the differences that that makes to people's daily lives. Are we doing everything that we want to do? No, because we cannot. Are we making a difference? Yes, we are. <BR /> <BR />Despite the financial constraints, much has been delivered, but there is still much to do. It is important that we are honest about the scale of challenges facing us. I have said that many times in the House and around the Executive table. Our finances are significantly constrained, particularly in 2026-27, as the biggest uplifts in day-to-day spending power occur in later years. With demand for services outpacing the funding available, continuing to do what we have always done is not an option.”
“The Executive have invested £55 million in early years and childcare, which includes funding to support families with childcare costs through the childcare subsidy scheme, and they have invested in waste water capacity, contributing to the unlocking of waste water capacity for over 5,000 properties across the North, supporting future housing and wider economic development. Those are just some examples of how the Executive are working together to make improvements to people's lives. <BR /> <BR />The leader of the Opposition pointed to issues where DFI could not do the work that it wanted to do. Austerity is a real thing, and the reality is that you cannot do as much as you would like to do.”
“He is absolutely right: we managed to garner from those who have inflicted austerity — not just this Government but the previous Government — an additional £1·3 billion. I do not see what the problem is with that. Maybe the Member has an ideological opposition to that, and, if he wants to explain that, I am more than happy to listen. The record shows that, through our engagement along with the Executive, public services in this community are £1·3 billion better off. <BR /> <BR />Through the 2025-26 Budget, the Executive have invested in waiting lists, enabling an additional 122,000 patient interventions to be delivered in the first six months of this financial year, surpassing the Programme for Government target of 70,000.”
“The Executive have shown their commitment to doing what matters most and are working in partnership to deliver for people. <BR /> <BR />Since I took up the role of Finance Minister, my focus has been on securing a fairer funding model. The leader of the Opposition referred to the first republican Finance Minister, Michael Collins, raising £20 million in today's money: I would never compare myself to Michael Collins, but I can go one better. Between me and the previous Finance Minister, we have raised an additional £1·3 billion for public services here as a direct result of our engagement with the Treasury and our pursuit of a full fiscal framework. I think that the leader of the Opposition, even on this last Opposition day of the calendar year, will acknowledge that £1·3 billion does outmatch £20 million.”
“It will provide Departments with funding certainty, allowing them to plan on a longer-term and more strategic basis, in turn creating the conditions to drive much-needed transformational change in the delivery of our public services. In working towards agreeing a multi-year Budget, we must be guided by our Programme for Government — 'Our Plan: Doing What Matters Most'.”
“This will be one of the biggest decisions that the Executive and Assembly will make between now and the end of the mandate, and it is important that we get it right. <BR /> <BR />Agreeing a multi-year Budget in a mandatory coalition will mean that there has to be give and take on all sides. The multi-year Budget will, of course, present challenges, not least because the quantum of funding falls short of what we had hoped for and, in my view, what is needed to provide the public services that our people deserve. We need to be realistic; there is not sufficient funding to do all that we want to do or to provide any Department with the level of funding that it has requested. However, we must also recognise that the multi-year Budget will present opportunities.”
“I welcome the opportunity to respond to the motion. Since taking up post as Finance Minister, I have consistently outlined my intention to bring forward a multi-year Budget. As the motion rightly acknowledges, the Chancellor's autumn Budget may have an impact on the Executive's Budget. Therefore, it is only right and proper that I await its outcome before I bring the multi-year Budget to the Executive. <BR /> <BR />The spending review that was announced in June set out our day-to-day funding for three years and capital allocations for four years, providing us with the opportunity to set the first multi-year Budget in a decade. Multi-year Budgets will shape the future of our public services for years to come.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-Leas-Cheann Comhairle.”
“I urge Members to continue to support the passage of the Bill and to support the amendment in order to ground in permanent legislation the remote registration practice for deaths and stillbirths, to remove inequalities in registration procedures and to provide for the establishment of a baby loss certificate. Each of those important steps will contribute to the building of a more equal, empathetic and efficient registration service for people at key points in their lives. I commend the amendment to the House.”
“I thank all the Members who contributed to the heartfelt debates on the matter, who corresponded with my office and who otherwise engaged meaningfully to help push forward this important Bill. I am grateful for the support from across the House for the element of the Bill that establishes a legal footing for a baby loss certificate scheme. I particularly thank the Members who spoke so sensitively on the matter and those who worked with my officials to draft and provisionally agree the language of today's amendment. I also express my gratitude to the Committee for its work on the legislation. <BR /> <BR />I tabled an amendment that will ensure that the vast majority of families will never face a charge for a baby loss certificate. It will happen only in exceptional circumstances, if that is the will of the Assembly.”
“As legislators, we have to create legislation that is workable and future-proofed as best we can, and sometimes you have to get into areas that are unsavoury, for want of a better word, but those are the things that we as legislators have to do. However, I am sure that Members are focused on the purpose of what we are about today.”
“That told us that the public overwhelmingly favoured baby loss certificates being free and believed that amendments to certificates should also be free but that it was reasonable to charge for duplicate certificates. Although the public were narrowly split on the question of a charge for a faster delivery service, the amendment also seeks the power to charge for that service. We will bring specific proposals on that matter to the Assembly for consideration through the regulations. <BR /> <BR />One of the unfortunate aspects of making legislation is that we have to discuss matters such as fees. I appreciate that Members will remain focused on the purpose of the legislation and the purpose of the baby loss certificates.”
“<BR /> <BR />Using the faster service would not affect a person's entitlement to get their free first certificate and duplicate certificate. Any changes levied would be for the faster service not the certificate. Charges in those two circumstances for the faster delivery service and for a third subsequent certificate can be introduced only with the approval of the Assembly. As clause 11(5) sets out, the regulations will specify the detail of the scheme and follow the draft affirmative process, whereby Members will be given the opportunity to consider and debate any changes proposed. <BR /> <BR />It is important to me that the proposal is closely aligned with the findings of the public consultation on the details of the baby loss certificate scheme that the Department conducted over the summer.”
“The proposed amendment will give the Department the flexibility to charge fees in the future, again subject to the agreement of the Assembly, for subsequent copies of the baby loss certificate when first and second copies have been issued. The amendment will also enable a fee to be applied, subject to the view of the Assembly, for the provision of a faster delivery service for a baby loss certificate. Although an option will be retained for a free standard delivery service, a faster service will enable an application for a baby loss certificate to be accepted and processed within one hour at General Register Office (GRO) public counters or issued on the same day for online or postal applications. Those arrangements will be in line with the faster services options offered for other life event certificates.”
“That is consistent with the compassionate service that we are seeking to provide.”
“The amendment will mean that a family applying for a first baby loss certificate will not be charged for it and that, if they require a duplicate copy for any reason, they will not be charged for that either. If the family discover an error in a baby loss certificate or want to add information to it, such as the name or sex of the baby, they will also be able to do that free of charge. No fee will be applied in respect of amended certificates.”
“I thank Mr Frew, Ms Forsythe and Mr Tennyson for working with my officials to draft and provisionally agree the language of the amendment that I propose today. <BR /> <BR />The amendment is narrowly drawn. It states that the regulations may provide for there to be no fees for a first baby loss certificate and a first duplicate of that certificate and no charges for amended certificates. It makes arrangements for baby loss certificates that are similar to those for other life events in that it allows for the possibility of charges for subsequent copies of certificates and charges for an expedited delivery service, subject — this is the important part — to the agreement of the Assembly.”
“It has always been my intention that the baby loss certificate scheme should be a compassionate service open to anyone who has suffered a loss early in pregnancy. Although a certificate cannot undo the pain of their experience, it can provide families with a formal recognition of their loss and validate their grief. For that reason, it has always been my view that there should be no charge when someone applies for a baby loss certificate. At Consideration Stage, two amendments were tabled on the matter of charges for baby loss certificates. Neither amendment was moved at Consideration Stage after I suggested that the Department would work with Members to agree a consensus amendment that would ensure that no family would be charged for the first two baby loss certificates.”