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 25 of 123.
“The Executive have agreed to the ministerial direction for the Department of Health, but part of that agreement was that the overcommitment would come off the Health Minister's budget for the 2026-27 year. As I said in my initial remarks, my Department and the Department of Health have done considerable work at ministerial and official level in order to fully understand the challenges and opportunities for the Department of Health around its savings plans. The Department of Health has done a considerable amount of work recently. That shows what can be done when a Minister is prepared to make decisions and give directions to officials on how a savings plan can be achieved. None of those decisions is easy. In the case of the big-spending Departments of Health and Education, the quantum of money is huge.”
“If one Minister does not take the decisions necessary to live within their budget, that has direct implications for the ability of all the other Ministers to deliver public services across the board. We have an agreed Budget Act, and it is important that that Act is adhered to.”
“It is worth noting — it is, perhaps, understandable — that when finance issues or Budget allocations come up, people will sometimes, quite rightly, look towards or point fingers at the Finance Minister. Let us, however, look at the history of how a Budget is set. I bring a draft Budget to the Executive. The Executive discuss it, and they either vote in favour of it or vote against it. In this instance, the Executive voted in favour of the Budget, and it was passed by the Assembly. It is now the Budget Act; it is a piece of legislation. All Ministers, and those who supported the Budget in the Assembly, have their fingerprints all over it. <BR /> <BR />When it comes to living within budgets, it is vital that the Executive act collectively and in partnership with each other.”
“As I said, I believe that it should have been resolved at the start of the year, but we are where we are. The three-year Budget will give colleagues an opportunity to plan over a three-year period rather than year by year.”
“Early last month, I said that I was confident that the issue would be resolved. The Executive collectively, working in partnership, have resolved it. I urge all Ministers, when they are looking at their budget allocations at the start of the year, to have pay at the top of the list rather than at the bottom. That is the way to deal with those matters. I understand that the Health Minister has made a commitment that, in future years, he will set aside funding for pay at the start of the year. When pay awards come through in Britain and there have to be increases, he will undertake to make those awards. That is how it should be dealt with. <BR /> <BR />No worker should have to threaten strike action in order to achieve the pay award that they are entitled to. I welcome the fact that we have resolved that matter.”
“I have repeatedly highlighted to Executive and Assembly colleagues that it was unlikely that there would be any additional funding in-year and the detrimental implications of not living within budget. Departments should have already taken actions, earlier this year, to ensure that they live within their budgets, which were agreed by the Assembly and the Executive, and those efforts must now be redoubled. I have reiterated to my Assembly colleagues the severity of the constrained financial situation and the need to work in partnership in order to manage the extremely challenging financial position. All Ministers must play their part.”
“It is important to set out that the Health Minister has agreed to any funding shortfall in his Department at the end of 2025-26 being deducted from the Health opening budget for 2026-27. There has been close cooperation and partnership at ministerial and official level between my Department and Health on action being taken to deliver savings. The Health Minister has a plan in place to reset the Health and Social Care (HSC) system budget and has indicated that he will continue to do everything that he can to further reduce his Department's funding gap. <BR /> <BR />I have consistently made it clear that all Departments must live within their budget allocations.”
“Last Thursday, the Executive collectively agreed to the Health Minister's direction to deliver pay parity for health service staff. Without that decision being taken, there was severe risk of industrial action. I am sure that no Member of the House would have wanted to see health workers on strike, and I know that health workers did not want to go on strike, particularly as we approach the winter period when services are already under pressure. That would have caused disruption to service delivery, exacerbated waiting lists and, therefore, undermined the Executive's Programme for Government commitment to reducing waiting lists. <BR /> <BR />The December monitoring round, which will take place after the Chancellor's autumn Budget, will provide final allocations to Departments for 2025-26.”
“I urge Members to reflect on the importance of equality in the registration process for different couples and to support the inclusion of the schedule. I draw my remarks to a close.”
“I accept the motivations behind the amendment, but there could be unintended consequences. As I said, my officials are working their way through this at pace. However, if you run into an unexpected problem, you will run into it regardless of whether we have the amendment. The problem is that, if the amendment is in statute, it could call into question the legality of the entire process. The Member has set out his position, and I have set out mine. <BR /> <BR />I have covered Mr Gaston's comments and emphasised the importance of clause 8 and the schedule to the Bill. The provision will ensure that inequalities in birth and stillbirth processes are removed and that all couples have the same options for the registration of a birth or stillbirth.”
“It is a well-intentioned amendment, and I can understand the frustration of the public, at times, at the delays in legislation not only being passed in this place but enacted, but I think that everyone will agree that my departmental officials, in cooperation with the Department of Health, have been working their way through the process admirably.”
“Again, it is an admirable proposal or amendment, but the difficulty with it relates to its unintended consequences, if, for whatever reason, the Department is not able to produce those regulations within the 12 weeks. If difficulties are going to arise with those regulations, they will arise regardless of whether we have that amendment. The difficulty that might arise, further from that, is that it may call into question the validity of the legislation if we do not produce it within 12 weeks. Again, I ask the Member to consider that.”
“Amendment No 6 also proposes that the regulations must be:”
“That encapsulates the concerns that Mr Gaston has expressed today. If the Bill already encapsulates his thinking on those matters, I see no reason for the amendment, and I will not support it. <BR /> <BR />I move now to amendment No 6 in the name of Mr Tennyson. The amendment would omit clause 11(5) and insert new subsections to provide that:”
“I will take Mr Gaston at his word regarding what he has presented to the Assembly for his motivation behind the amendment. In fairness, the comments of the Speaker in relation to the comments of the Deputy Speaker, who was in the Chair at that time, has clarified that position. When you look at clause 11(2), you see that it clearly states:”
“I move now to Mr Gaston's amendment No 5, which proposes the insertion of subsection (3A) following clause 11(3) to specify that:”
“We will bring forward a full report on the findings from our public consultation in due course, but there was no suggestion, during the process or in discussions with stakeholders, that a statement is required on the certificate to recognise that the baby was a member of the family. There was a clear wish for the certificate to be as similar to other life event certificates as possible, and none of those includes such statements. <BR /> <BR />As I have outlined, it is vital that the scheme reflects the requirements of those who have experienced a loss. The Bill and the subsequent regulations will provide for that, and the Assembly will have to consider them in detail. I, therefore, do not feel that it is necessary to make changes to clause 11, as proposed by amendment No 4.”
“I am sure that it was very difficult for many of them to respond to that consultation, but they did so for the betterment of all, which is a credit to them. <BR /> <BR />The baby loss certificate will include a number of details that respondents to the consultation exercise indicated that they want to be included. We expect that those will include the name and sex of the baby, where that can be detailed, along with the date and place of loss and the parents' details. We also expect that applicants for baby loss certificates will not need to provide all that information; they will be able to provide as much or as little information as they wish. <BR /> <BR />I am confident that the parents and families who have experienced loss already consider their baby to be a member of their family.”
“Those regulations will be brought before the Assembly through the draft affirmative route, which will enable all Members to consider and debate their contents. <BR /> <BR />I have always emphasised that the scheme will reflect the requirements of those who have experienced a loss and that their views and opinions will help to shape the scheme. To that end, my Department carried out a public consultation exercise between 17 June and 12 September. More than 1,100 responses were received, with people taking the opportunity to provide their views on the content of the scheme and the information that they would like to see included on the baby loss certificate. I thank each and every one of those 1,100 respondents.”
“Again, I appreciate the Member's approach to the matter and the desire of many in the Chamber for consensus as we move forward. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 4 proposes the introduction of subsection 3A to clause 11 to specify fields, such as the name and sex of the baby, that should be included in the content of the baby loss certificate. The amendment also proposes the inclusion of a statement on the certificate recognising the baby as a member of the applicant's family. <BR /> <BR />Clause 11 enables the Department to make regulations that will provide for the recognition of any loss — importantly, any loss — that occurs before the end of the twenty-fourth week of pregnancy. The regulations will set out the specification for the certificate scheme and provide for the content of the baby loss certificate.”
“Yes; just one second, Eóin. <BR /> <BR />Members have tried their best to ensure that we approach this in a mature and dignified manner.”
“I appreciate the manner and tone in which all Members have approached the debate and the entire process. Of course, there will be differences of opinion on various matters, but Members have —.”
“I thank the Member for those comments. He is being nice to me a lot today. Your move to the Justice Committee has done you the world of good”
“Whether there are fees or not, it is proposed that we will have a register of parents who have applied for a certificate and that we will hold that for at least five years. Some data will have to be held, obviously following sensitive and proper procedures. With or without fees, the proposal is to hold that data for at least five years. That would be the process. <BR /> <BR />For those reasons, I am content to support the amendment in principle and to work with Ms Forsythe and Mr Frew to propose additional amendments at Further Consideration Stage. <BR /> <BR />Moving on to amendment No 4 from Mr Gaston —.”
“if needs be. <BR /> <BR />Although it is not drafted exactly as I would like, the amendment aligns with my view that there should not be a fee for the first certificate. I also recognise the flexibility that it retains for the Department to propose fees in some, likely quite limited, circumstances in the future, again, subject to the approval of the Assembly.”
“For those reasons, I cannot support amendment No 2, and I urge Members to reject it to allow us to develop a narrower provision for inclusion at Further Consideration Stage. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 3, tabled by Paul Frew and Diane Forsythe, deals with the same matters as amendment No 2: the charging of fees for baby loss certificates. It proposes to amend the Bill to ensure that the regulations:”
“<BR /> <BR />For the reasons that I have outlined, I oppose the amendment tabled by Eóin. However, to ensure that no family will face a cost for a first baby loss certificate, I propose to amend the Bill at Further Consideration Stage. As I do not want to exclude the possibility of any fees being charged in the future, I have asked my officials to work with Ms Forsythe and Mr Frew, whose amendment is closer to my position, to develop an amendment for the Assembly to consider. That work will be able to take account of the results of our public consultation, which asked the public for their views on the appropriateness of fees. It will also give the Department flexibility to charge fees in the future, subject to the agreement of the Assembly, should it become necessary to do so.”
“The point that I was trying to make was that you have to write legislation in a way that, as best you can, incorporates powers that will deal with any future circumstances that arise. That way, you do not regret having the power to act and not doing so and do not have to go through the process again, which costs money and time. It is better for the Department to have a power — I will come to the DUP amendment in a moment — than it is for it to have no power. The real power rests in the Assembly, because it will decide on any regulations that are proposed. We can go around the Chamber and talk about different ifs and whether certain circumstances are to going to arise, but there is a charge for a copy of all other life event certificates, so if we are going to have equality on these matters, that is a reference point for us all.”
“<BR /> <BR />The amendment goes further, however, by requiring that no fee be levied for any baby loss certificate. It will require that a second, third, fourth and any other subsequent copy of the certificate is free. It will also set the scheme apart from other certificate schemes. Members, understandably, referred to equality in this matter and to ensuring that everybody is treated equally. If you request a copy of any other life event certificate, there is a charge. I am sure that it is difficult for all Members to discuss money and fees in this context. I was not being patronising to Mr Tennyson when I commented about introducing legislation as opposed to debating motions.”
“For that reason, it has always been my view that there should be no charge when someone applies for a baby loss certificate. <BR /> <BR />The question of fees was also considered extensively as part of the Finance Committee's scrutiny of clause 11(1). I am grateful for the Committee's detailed report in that regard. The Committee's view, as set out in its budget report, was that there should be no charge for a baby loss certificate. At the end of its scrutiny, the Committee did not recommend or table any amendments to the Bill, noting that any charges would need to be approved by the Assembly when the baby loss regulations are introduced. Consequently, I believe that there was consensus that no fees should be charged for a baby loss certificate.”
“However, I am content to accept the amendment, as it supports the route that I intend to follow to bring forward regulations for a baby loss certificate scheme as soon as possible. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 2 from Mr Tennyson is about the charging of fees for baby loss certificates and proposes that "no applicant" should be required to pay a fee for a baby loss certificate. As Members will be aware, the question of whether or not there should be fees for a baby loss certificate is highly emotive. From the outset, it has been my intention that the scheme will be compassionate and open to anyone who has suffered a loss early in pregnancy. While a certificate will not undo the pain that parents have suffered, it can provide formal recognition of the loss and validate their grief.”
“I therefore assure the Member that it is my intention that the regulations that outline the content of the baby loss certificate scheme will be progressed as soon as possible, with the aim of having the scheme operational by the end of this financial year. Officials are in the process of drafting the regulations for the scheme, and those will start the legislative process through the draft affirmative route as soon as the Bill receives Royal Assent. I recognise the desire of Members to see the scheme operational as quickly as possible. That is also my desire. Based on what I outlined previously, I do not feel that an amendment to the wording is strictly necessary as it has always been my intention to bring forward secondary legislation without delay.”
“I ask Members to consider the importance of that issue and to vote to ensure that clause 8 and the schedule stand part of the Bill. <BR /> <BR />The intention of amendment No 1 from Mr Tennyson, which is to change the word "may" to "shall", is to ensure that the Department is required to make regulations and to remove any possibility that the Department may decide not to progress them. I am aware of the importance of the scheme to families who have experienced an early pregnancy loss. The scheme will offer families the same formal recognition as those who are affected by the death of a loved one or a stillbirth. For the families, the certificate will confirm that their baby existed, and I hope that it will help them to navigate the grieving process.”
“Clause 8 and the schedule relate directly to one of the key aspects of the Bill, which is to rectify differences in the birth and stillbirth registration processes between opposite-sex and same-sex female couples. Clause 8 and the schedule are important parts of the Bill, as they will ensure that unmarried and non-civil partner couples have access to the same registration procedures, regardless of whether they are same-sex or opposite-sex couples. The inequality in the birth and stillbirth registration processes has existed for some time, and it is right that those disparities are rectified through the Bill. The provisions in the Bill will ensure that those inequalities are removed, so that all couples have the same options for the registration of a birth or stillbirth.”
“I begin by thanking all Members who have contributed to the debate on this important matter. As Members will be aware, the key aims of the Bill are, first, to place the temporary processes contained in the Coronavirus Act 2020 that enable the remote registration of deaths and stillbirths and the electronic transfer of registration documents on a permanent footing; secondly, to rectify the differences in the birth and stillbirth registration processes for some opposite-sex and same-sex female parents; and, thirdly, to enable the making of secondary legislation for the introduction of a baby loss certificate scheme. <BR /> <BR />Mr Gaston has indicated that he will oppose the Questions that clause 8 and the schedule stand part of the Bill. Those are, of course, decisions for Mr Gaston.”
“It is vital that we have an inclusive society. At the head of that society, Departments and government have to be accessible to all. I agree with the Member that we have to ensure that our public services are accessible in a user-friendly way.”
“My Department will prepare as it would for any legislation and will take on board any legislative requirements that fall to my Department as they come about.”
“I am pleased to say that good progress has been made in line with my intention to act at pace to make progress on positive changes to the rating system. I submitted a paper to the Executive prior to the summer recess. If that paper is agreed, we could generate about £9 million per annum for central and local government. Other significant work has been undertaken in recent months on the review of small business rate relief and non-domestic vacant rating. My officials have already completed the research and tax-base analysis associated with that review. They have also completed an extensive series of interviews with key stakeholders. I will shortly outline to the Assembly my intended way forward, following review of the findings.”
“The Back in Business scheme allows businesses to access rates support that incentivises business ratepayers to consider occupying empty retail premises when looking for a business property. The scheme provides a 50% rate reduction for up to two years, once a retail premises that has been empty for 12 months is occupied. That rate reduction is a huge boost to any new business and allows a business to, hopefully, establish itself in the long term.”
“Discussions are ongoing. I have also asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister to write to the Prime Minister about the matter. I am conscious that there are legal proceedings — an ongoing court case — in regard to the matter, but we continue to discuss how we will deliver our commitments in regard to the financial consequences of the data breach.”
“The Justice Minister and I have had a telephone conversation in that regard. We were due to meet again yesterday. Unfortunately, that meeting had to be cancelled, but it will be rescheduled as quickly as possible. The matter has been raised on a number of occasions during Executive discussions as well. Therefore, there are ongoing discussions and a push in regard to that matter.”
“Yes. That is one of the direct calls that I made to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury in person and in my recent correspondence to him ahead of the Budget on 26 November. It is important that our hospitality sector is supported, particularly given the changes to VAT across the border. They are competing in an all-island economy, so they should be supported in that regard. VAT is a non-devolved matter, and it is up to the Chancellor to make a move on it.”
“Yes. That matter has been raised repeatedly at various venues and by various Ministers, including me, with representatives of the British Government. Unfortunately, they do not appear to be listening to that. It will have a significantly greater detrimental impact on our agriculture sector than on that in England or Wales. It is another example of decisions being made in Whitehall with no understanding of the local picture here.”
“I will give careful consideration to that and will report to the Committee or the House when I have concluded my deliberations.”
“The next steps are that the report needs to be studied, and we need to engage with all the sectors involved in it to see whether there is further potential for shared use of properties across the entire public-sector estate. Efficient, effective use of all resources has to be primary in all discussions that Ministers and Departments have.”
“I am sure that the Member is aware, as is whoever informed the House yesterday, that Executive business is confidential.”
“I am aware of the proposal from the Education Minister, but we also need an estate plan from the Department of Education. The Member will have heard me refer to my Department's estate plan in relation to Civil Service buildings. It would be useful if the Department of Education were to come forward with an estate plan and an area plan, and then the Executive collectively could examine how we dispose of the public assets that can be disposed of and how we reinvest that money. The proposal is that that money is reinvested in building SEN schools — that is a worthy cause for any investment — but all parts of the equation need to be included before we can come to an answer.”
“That is a procedural matter within the Department; it is not a matter for the Minister. The guide is not mandatory; it is guidance, as it says on the tin. I am not aware of what funding has been set aside for training etc in that regard, but I am more than happy to supply that information to the Member. Those matters are dealt with as procedure in the Department and not by the Minister.”
“I cannot confirm whether the Equality Commission was directly involved. I will have to come back to the Member directly on the matter. However, equality issues relating to the Department reflect our equality programme, which was approved by the Equality Commission.”
“It is best that we await the independent inquiries of the head of the Civil Service. If I were to commission an urgent review, I would be accused of political interference. It is best that we allow the head of the Civil Service to carry out her inquiries into the matter. If, as a result of those inquiries, it becomes apparent that I, as the Finance Minister, have a role, I assure you that I will not shirk it.”