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 35 of 123.
“Let us instead understand their scale, which will allow us to bring forward proposals to tackle them. We will have to do things differently in several different areas. Agencies and regulators that operate on behalf of the Assembly, the Executive and the public will have to be imaginative about how we can put in place the infrastructure to support the economy, housebuilding and people. We will have to ensure that our arm's-length bodies, in whatever form, use limited public resources as effectively and efficiently as possible. If they do not, they will be held to account. I commend the Supply resolution to the House.”
“The other legislation that will cover the outstanding spend that Mr Gaston referred to is the truth recovery Bill, which, I believe, TEO is progressing. Stand-alone legislation will cover those areas. <BR /> <BR />In conclusion, I find these debates useful in the sense that I get an overview from Members of their opinions and understanding and their evidence-based engagement at Committee level. It is very useful to me as Finance Minister to sit through these debates and listen to the experiences of Members and the information that they have at hand and that they present. We undoubtedly face significant financial challenges, and I have no doubt that we will continue to face them after the comprehensive spending review is announced on 11 June. We cannot, however, simply shy away from the challenges that we face.”
“The common denominator is that public services have not been properly funded over the past decade or more. You cannot blame the Executive for it all. The Executive have responsibilities, individual Ministers have responsibilities, and it is right that we have to be held to account over those. He also said that there was still a significant portion of funding not covered by its own legislation. Those areas will be covered once we have brought forward the Fiscal Council Bill and the financial provisions Bill, both of which, in fairness, Mr O'Toole asked about. Both Bills are with my Executive colleagues. I hope to have those passed by the Executive and brought before the Assembly before summer recess. They are with Executive colleagues.”
“I am not aware of any further consequentials at this stage, and I am not aware of what movement there has been between Departments in the Executive — obviously, my officials are gathering that information — so I am not aware of how much money there will be to allocate in June. However, I suspect that it will not be on the scale of what we saw last year. We will wait to see what funding comes forward. <BR /> <BR />Finally, Timothy Gaston exposed himself as a —. I wrote on a note that he had exposed himself as a Tory, but then I scribbled it out. Maybe he is closer to Reform UK now. I did not want to insult him by calling him a Tory. His theory that, once the Executive label is attached to something, everything goes wrong — public services go wrong — does not explain why public services in England are in such a dire state.”
“I will not get into the issue of the Department's accounts, because the Public Accounts Committee is scrutinising that. It would not be appropriate for me to comment. He asked what bids have been made as part of the June monitoring round. The closing date for bids from Departments to the June monitoring rounds is 5 June. We await bids from Departments — they have until 5 June. <BR /> <BR />I had announced a number of funding allocations, which we already knew about, as part of the budgetary statement on what will be allocated on 5 June as Barnett consequentials. Those were included in the Government's announcement on National Insurance contributions, and they stand.”
“It is too early to state what the outcome of that will be. There are different noises in some of the media around what actions are likely be taken with Whitehall Departments. Obviously, if there are swingeing cuts in Whitehall, we will have a reduced consequential. My officials will continue to engage with Treasury, and I will continue to engage at a political level until the announcement is made. It is not over until it is over. We await the announcement on 11 June. Obviously, I also raised the need for Casement Park to be properly funded. <BR /> <BR />Phillip Brett made comments as Chair of the Economy Committee. He spoke of the challenges facing the Department for the Economy, as well as the challenges facing the Committee in its scrutiny role.”
“A number of Members asked for an update on the CSR. Yesterday, I was in the Treasury engaging with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Darren Jones. The CSR is not yet complete: the discussions around it are not yet complete. We have presented Treasury with the Holtham report and given it the review that was carried out by Ulster University of the cost of doing business here. Obviously, it has the Fiscal Council report, and it has comments from Sir Robert Chote on the necessary outcomes of the CSR. Tomorrow, I will meet the Secretary of State to continue the conversations around the comprehensive spending review and the urgent need for a fair funding settlement to be given to this place in order to allow Departments to carry out their duties and to allow us, as Paul and others have said, to give people "hope" in the time ahead.”
“Today, my permanent secretary addressed a significant number of ALBs on the projected Budget trajectory for the next number of years, emphasising to them that, to use my terminology, the cavalry is not coming over the hill. We have to live within the budgets that we have and do things differently. We have to be accountable, effective and efficient. I have no doubt that Committees will take on the charge of holding ALBs to account.”
“There will not be the hundreds of millions of pounds extra that the Utility Regulator drew up — in a budgetary vacuum, it has to be said — for NI Water or for any other organisation. We have to look for alternative ways of delivering the housing, the businesses, the schools, the hospitals and all the things that we need. We simply cannot stay still in that regard. <BR /> <BR />I will move on to another point that Steve Aiken touched on. ALBs spend a huge amount of public funds — a huge amount. Steve rightly asked this: while the Assembly and the Committees hold Ministers and Departments to account, who holds ALBs to account? I would argue that it is the Minister, first and foremost, and then the Committees, if they do not do it in conjunction.”
“On NI Water, as with all bodies, multi-year budgets will assist us in planning. <BR /> <BR />Steve Aiken touched on arm's-length bodies and agencies. I say this to all arm's-length bodies: the cavalry is not coming over the hill to save you. I will touch on the CSR in more detail as I come to the end of my address. We will have to do things differently. The Member has expressed concerns and asked questions about developer contributions. Those things have to be looked at. How the NIEA examines developers' solutions on waste water has to be looked at afresh. When developers come forward with proposals on systems that are guaranteed for a lifetime and those proposals are turned down, that is short-sighted in many ways.”
“The increase in childcare funding would not have happened. The increase in funding to ending violence against women and girls would not have happened. The increase in funding to tackle the pollution of Lough Neagh would not have happened. The increase in funding for community safety would not have happened. The increase in funding for skills in our economy would not have happened. None of that would have happened had it not been for the strategic Budget decisions made by the Executive and endorsed by the Assembly. <BR /> <BR />Deborah Erskine, talking about DFI and the challenges that it faces, covered the wide aspect of the road network and road safety, which is particularly pertinent given the debate in the Chamber yesterday and the Minister's announcement about a change in legislation.”
“<BR /> <BR />Paul Frew referred to the need for Ministers to come to this place and give people hope. Although I do not agree with some of what Paul had to say, I fully agree with him on that point. I am not talking and have no doubt that Paul is not talking about people coming here and giving false hope, but there is no point in anyone coming into the Chamber and laying out a list of problems. We all know the problems. We want to see people coming in here and presenting solutions. I will continue to engage with Executive colleagues in that mode. <BR /> <BR />Jemma Dolan reminded us of a lot of the ongoing work that has come about as a result of the Budget. The cross-border health scheme that was recently announced by the Health Minister would not have happened without the Budget initiatives taken by the Executive and the Health Minister.”
“If that is his position, I have to disagree: it does matter what the allocation is. No Department receives or will ever receive, I suspect, the full allocation that it has bid for. However, as I said earlier, we expect to see moneys being used effectively and efficiently. A failing that any organisation can have is to become fixated on what you cannot do rather than on what you can do. It is vital that we are much more focused on what we can do, while we continue to lobby and engage with others on the proper funding that we need. <BR /> <BR />Colm Gildernew, Chair of the Communities Committee, touched on social housing, the need for a properly laid-out anti-poverty strategy and other matters. I have no doubt that the Committee will continue to engage with its Minister on those matters.”
“I am here for people to tell me the challenges that they face, and I will work with them when we have engaged fully and accepted the scale of the challenge that they face. That may not be resolved in one Budget year. Hopefully, with regard to the multi-year budgets that will be completed after the comprehensive spending review (CSR) on 11 June, Departments will have the opportunity to forward plan much better and we will have the opportunity to make the transformation to our services that, I think we all agree, is needed. <BR /> <BR />Unfortunately, Robbie Butler is not in his place. He mentioned a report from DAERA. I may have misheard him, but I thought that he said with regard to the Committee report that it does not matter what the allocation is if it does not meet the need.”
“However, again, as each Minister comes to me setting out their challenges, I will do what I have asked the Committees to do — I have no doubt that Committees are doing it — which is to drill down into the figures that they present to me. I will put it to them: "What are you doing to help yourself with regard to transformation and ensuring that your budget is being used efficiently and effectively, and what are your plans for change?" Then we will get down to the nitty-gritty of what I, as Finance Minister, can do for them. <BR /> <BR />It is not the role of the Finance Minister to become a counsellor for Ministers or for the chief executives of arm's-length bodies (ALBs) or other agencies. I am not here for people to tell me their problems.”
“Figures being bandied about may garner headlines. As I have said in the Chamber before, I will not be guided by the latest headline when making funding decisions. However, I want to ensure that Committees have had the opportunity to understand fully what is a real pressure, what is inescapable and what is a negotiating position. When we understand that fully, it is much easier to understand the scale of the challenge. When you understand the scale of the challenge, it is easier to find a solution, where possible, to that challenge. <BR /> <BR />Mr Mathison also talked about transformation and funding for special educational needs. There has been a significant additional allocation of around £15 million to SEN in the last Budget round. I am particularly interested in that area and want to continue to support it.”
“<BR /> <BR />Nick Mathison, Chair of the Education Committee, referred, as others have done, to the pressures on Departments' budgets — inescapables and other pressures that may be there. Figures vary, whether you are talking about £300 million for Education, £600 million for Health or maybe £200 million for Agriculture. All those figures are there and in the public debate and discussion. I encourage Committees to interrogate thoroughly the figures that are presented to them by Departments in relation to the pressures that they are under, what is inescapable and what their priorities are, moving forward. It is vital that not only Committees but the general public fully understand the true scale of the challenge that faces the Executive and the Assembly moving forward in the delivery of public services.”
“As an interested observer and as Finance Minister, I can only agree with that comment. There is deepening and growing concern about the continued presence of the Belfast Trust in the media for all the wrong reasons, particularly, from a Finance point of view, the significant overruns in capital projects in which the Belfast Trust has been involved. We rightly point towards Westminster and Whitehall for the lack in the overall, global Budget, but whatever moneys we have must be used effectively and efficiently, and we have to deliver changes in people's lives. No doubt, the Committee will continue its work. The Health Minister has put particular focus on the matter, but, as Finance Minister, I also have significant interest in it.”
“The Treasury is not yet convinced of our arguments. Perhaps I will put it that way, as it is the most diplomatic way of putting it at this stage, as negotiations continue. <BR /> <BR />Philip McGuigan, Chair of the Health Committee, pointed out the pressures facing the Health Department in the delivery of front-line health services. We all agree that there are huge challenges there, as in other Departments. I noted a comment from him which I concur with:”
“There are ways of looking at how we deliver on our commitments in a constrained budgetary period and at those with whom we partner to deliver those projects. For instance, are the reserves of housing associations and their access to loans being fully utilised to deliver our building programme? Are there other ways of doing that? It is important to look at that. I have been engaging directly with the Treasury on Housing Executive borrowing. I do not believe that that will be resolved as part of the comprehensive spending review, but it has to be resolved as part of the fiscal framework. The Housing Executive being allowed to borrow is a game changer for many reasons. It is something that we need to continue to look at.”
“I am committed to working with every Minister around the Executive table to deliver, in particular, on the Programme for Government targets. The figures set out by the Communities Minister state that he will build around 1,000 homes this year: we want to see that figure increase, but we also welcome the fact that there will be 1,000 homes built for families and people to move in to this year. Of course, there is rightly a focus on the homes that will not be built. I commit to working with the Communities Minister and others, but let us also look at what will be done: 1,000 homes will be built. <BR /> <BR />I understand that the Communities Minister will bring a paper to the Executive for discussion, and I look forward to it.”
“<BR /> <BR />I once again thank the Chairperson and the Committee for agreeing to accelerated passage. As leader of the Opposition, Mr O'Toole once again raised his concerns about the quantity of time that he has to respond in such debates. I suggest to him that perhaps quality, over quantity, might be more beneficial to us all. That is a common theme through all of these debates, and it may be a theme to go with. <BR /> <BR />Mr O'Toole rightly pointed to concerns raised in the Chamber yesterday. I have not fully studied the statement from the Minister for Communities, but there was concern that we may not meet our social housing targets for this year. However, we are in June of the financial year, and there is a long slog ahead.”
“I await a lectern, Mr Speaker. I am sure that one is heading in this direction. <BR /> <BR />Supply resolution debates can often cover many aspects of public expenditure, not always directly relating to the subject being considered. I will, however, endeavour to address as many of the points raised during the debate as I can in the time allotted. <BR /> <BR />First, I once again thank the Finance Committee for its agreement to take this important legislation through by accelerated passage. That agreement secures the timely passage of the legislation through the Assembly, thereby avoiding any risk of uncertainty over the funding of public services. <BR /> <BR />Having listened to colleagues' comments, I will respond to a few of the points made. There was a common theme in some of them.”
“Any changes to departmental budgets due to the outcome of the June monitoring round and any further monitoring rounds that take place in 2025-26 will be reflected in the spring Supplementary Estimates. <BR /> <BR />I look forward to putting the spending plans for 2025-26 on a legal footing, and I request that Members support the Supply resolution for the Main Estimates 2025-26. That, together with the Budget (No. 2) Bill, which I will introduce in the Assembly today and which will be debated at a later stage, will ensure that services continue to be funded for the remainder of the financial year.”
“The financial provisions Bill, which is due to be introduced shortly, will further reduce reliance on the sole authority of the Budget Act. My officials will continue to monitor the position. <BR /> <BR />Executive colleagues are considering their departmental budget allocations. Any adjustments will be submitted to my officials as part of the June monitoring round process, which is due to close on 5 June. Those will be considered by Executive colleagues, and I will provide an update on that to Members in due course. Due to time constraints and the need for the Bill to complete its journey before the end of July, it is not possible to include June monitoring adjustments in the Main Estimates.”
“Should the Bill proceed as planned, it is anticipated that it will receive Royal Assent in mid- to late July. In the meantime, the 45% Vote on Account, which was agreed by Members in February of this year, provides Departments with the authority to utilise resources and access the necessary cash to deliver services. <BR /> <BR />The Main Estimates for 2025-26 highlight areas of expenditure or income that rely on the sole authority of the Budget Act. That is where the authority of the statutory powers has not yet been obtained through legislation. 'Managing Public Money' provides for that as an interim measure, enabling expenditure until such powers are in place. I am pleased that a number of functions that previously required the use of the sole authority of the Budget Act have been resolved.”
“As you have set out, the debate is on the Supply resolution for the Main Estimates 2025-26, which relates to the supply of cash and the use of resources for the current year, 2025-26. It seeks the Assembly's approval for the 2025-26 spending plans of Departments and other public bodies, as set out in the Main Estimates, which were laid before the Assembly on 21 May 2025. The Main Estimates are based on the departmental spending plans that are set out in the Executive's Budget 2025-26, which I announced on 3 April 2025. The Budget 2025-26 was agreed by the Assembly on 19 May 2025 following an extensive debate, and I will not repeat the details of that in my speech today. <BR /> <BR />The Main Estimates position is set out in a detailed document, and the Budget (No. 2) Bill reflects that position.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-Leas-Cheann Comhairle.”
“I assure Members that I will continue to work with colleagues here and counterparts in the South to resolve the current inflexible funding arrangements for the North/South bodies and the opportunities lost to communities across the North.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is also important to acknowledge that the failure to fully replace EU structural funds has had a tangible and negative impact on communities across the North. The loss of long-term, predictable funding has left a gap that short-term initiatives cannot fill. It is therefore essential that all resources are strategically aligned. Without coordination on flexible arrangements, we risk fragmentation and inefficiency. We need a joined-up approach that maximises the impact of every pound that is spent across east-west and North/South dimensions. <BR /> <BR />I thank Members for bringing the motion to the Assembly.”
“The Member makes a valid point: political opportunism is not going to solve the problem, and neither will distracting from the real core issue. <BR /> <BR />It is important that the Executive have the fiscal levers that they need. Members will be aware that the interim fiscal framework signed by my predecessor on 21 May 2024 included a commitment to consider further fiscal powers. However, my immediate focus, as it has been to date, is on progressing the commitments in the interim fiscal framework on the Executive's funding arrangements, which need to be prioritised ahead of the June spending review. It took a number of years to deliver the devolution of further fiscal powers to Scotland and Wales, and it will take time to deliver here, but I am committed to making progress on that matter.”
“I believe that the assurance that any additional funding to be managed through the business plan of the body, which is approved by the sponsoring Minister, with the approval of the North/South Ministerial Council and scrutiny by the Executive, should be sufficient to assure anyone that no one can set an agenda that does not receive the approval of the Executive.”
“<BR /> <BR />I see Members' calls, in the amendment, for more fiscal powers to be secured as being a distraction from the main motion. Unfortunately, the SDLP wishes to take attention away from the main issue. The DUP — it is open about this — is blocking additional funding from going to North/South bodies. Even with fiscal powers devolved, if the DUP position does not change, it will continue to block additional funding for North/South bodies. The devolution of fiscal powers is not the key that will open up the issue. It has to be recognised that the DUP's stance is blocking it.”
“<BR /> <BR />On the point around accountability and governance of the structures of the Good Friday Agreement and the role of the Executive in them, which has caused concern for a number of Members, any additional funding would be under the scrutiny, and for the approval, of individual Ministers and the entire Executive. It would be counterproductive for bodies to miss out on funding due merely to the different inflexible arrangements that restrict the work of North/South bodies. That is why my Department has asked repeatedly, since last October, for the Executive to consider alternative funding proposals. The new funding model seeks to address the risk of bodies missing out on funding due merely to financial constraints in one jurisdiction.”
“Those are matters for individual Ministers and scrutiny Committees. My understanding is that a number of financial reports have not been delivered on time due to a number of problems, including this place being down. Those are issues. North/South public bodies should — I have no difficulty with this — be open to scrutiny of their financial accounts, as anyone else should. It is public money that is being spent, and those bodies should be scrutinised by the sponsoring Minister, by the Committees involved and by this House. Yes, scrutiny should take place and financial accountability and value for money should be in place.”
“That requires the approval of the sponsor Departments, the Finance Ministers in the North and the South and, ultimately, the North/South Ministerial Council. Therefore, oversight, scrutiny and agreement is required from individual Executive Ministers, the Executive and the North/South Ministerial Council. It is not a free-for-all, as has been suggested.”
“<BR /> <BR />The new funding proposals would allow funding for specific programme activities to sit outside the established agreed funding ratios for core activities and facilitate additional funding streams from any source, including sponsor Departments in the North and the South. Given the constrained financial position that the Executive face, to which many Members have referred, the proposals minimise the risk of bodies losing out on funding that is available through their southern sponsor Departments. No cost to the Executive arises from the funding proposals. <BR /> <BR />A number of Members from the DUP and the Ulster Unionist Party raised the issue of accountability. This is the important point: additional funding that is received through the new proposal would be included in the annual business planning process.”
“I welcome the opportunity to participate in the debate on additional funding for North/South bodies. As it is a cross-cutting issue and an alternative funding proposal requires Executive approval, I have pressed, and will continue to press, for it to make it on to the Executive's agenda. <BR /> <BR />Proposed alternative funding arrangements have been developed by a North/South institutional working group, which includes officials from sponsor Departments, the North/South Ministerial Council secretariat, the Finance Departments in the North and the South and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.”
“<BR /> <BR />I will not allow myself to be dragged down into the cesspit of negativity that sometimes circulates around this place. I will not set the Budget on the basis of the latest headline. I will not set the Budget on the basis of the quite questionable reports that are published at times, and I will not set the Budget on the basis of who shouts loudest inside or outside the Chamber. That is not the way it will operate. We will work to a plan. We have the Programme for Government and our Budget, the ISNI strategy will be published, and we will push forward despite all our challenges. Will there be fiscal devolution at some time in the future? Yes. Will there still be challenges for the Budget? Of course there will, and we will still be waiting for people in the Chamber to tell me how much they would spend on health.”
“Therefore, those who vote against the Budget today, while they may make speeches — some of which were informative, and some of which were complete and utter nonsense, to be frankly honest — have brought nothing whatever to either the debate about the Budget or the well-being or future direction of this society. It is easy to stand up and be negative, produce negativity, demean our public-sector workers about the services that are being delivered daily and claim again and again that we are governing over a disaster. We are not governing over a disaster; we are governing over a huge challenge at this time, and, if the Executive continue to work in a cooperative, collaborative way, we can take on many of those challenges. That is my mission in politics and moving forward.”
“Not only that: the Executive have provided an additional £15 million for special educational needs. How much is the alternative Budget providing for special educational needs? <BR /> <BR />We will spend an additional £15 million to build the skills that are needed now and in the future. The Budget provides an additional £5 million to make our communities safer; £2 million towards ending violence against women and girls; £5 million towards the protection of Lough Neagh; and £21·3 million for Health, Justice, Infrastructure and special educational needs. The Budget has set out its priorities clearly.”
“I do not have thousands of officials working on the Budget. The Member meets the Budget team regularly, and he knows that it is in single figures. The Member has every document I have access to in terms of facts and figures around the Budget. Every Department and every Committee has access to the Budget figures that I have. You have all the information. The equation is simple: divide £19·3 billion by your priorities. How much would you spend on health this year? Would you spend £8·5 billion, £9 billion, £10 billion or £11 billion? That is what I want to know, because that is the decision that Members and the Executive have to take. The Executive, in a corporate act, have decided to prioritise health and ring-fence funding for issues such as the health waiting lists.”
“Thank you. The document was published at some stage over the weekend. It was not shared with me formally. I have managed to get a copy of it. OK, you have produced a Budget process going forward, but you have not produced an alternative Budget. You have had six months to produce an alternative Budget. Would you spend £8·5 billion or health, or would you spend £9 billion, £9·5 billion, £10 billion or £8 billion? How much would you spend on health in this financial year? I will give way a last time.”
“Yes, use it to keep yourselves cool because that is about as much use as it has.”
“I will tell you why the document was produced. It is not an alternative Budget. You have had six months to produce an alternative Budget. You knew that my first challenge to the Opposition today would be this: show me your alternative. You quickly produced a five-point plan that you gave to the media over the weekend.”
“I heard Mr Deputy Speaker refer to your document as a prop. It would not prop up very much, I can assure you.”
“OK, £10 billion, £11 billion, £12 billion, but every time that Health spend goes up, do you know what is going down? Spend on Education, Communities, Economy and Agriculture are all going down. When people ask for £10 billion on Health, the Executive and I are spending billions less elsewhere. If that is your justification, do it. <BR /> <BR />The Member wants me to give way.”
“Yes, it presents challenges to the Health Minister, but it also presents challenges to the rest of the Executive in how we approach that. <BR /> <BR />There are those who say that the Executive have not prioritised Health, but we are spending £8·5 billion on Health. Should I spend £8·6 billion, £8·7 billion, £8·8 billion, £8·9 billion, £9 billion? Feel free to stop me at any time.”
“I heard comments about silo mentality, silo working and no engagement or cooperation. Each Minister who sits around the Executive table has to make a decision after asking themselves, "Am I prepared to back a Budget that isn't everything that I wanted, doesn't cover all the priorities in my Department, and am I, for the greater good, prepared to back that Budget?". On this occasion, Ministers did exactly that. They prioritised certain areas in public expenditure that matched our Programme for Government commitments and public expectations. As Danny Donnelly said, they set a tone. The Budget sets a tone. It sets a tone that says, "We are going to tackle the waiting lists head-on. We are not going to do the same thing over and over again and expect a different outcome".”