Mervyn Storey
North Antrim · Democratic Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“I thank the Minister for his statement. It will be noted that there are those who cry much about the environment and purport to be the champions of the environment who did not have the courtesy to come to the House and be present when the statement was being made.”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. Clearly, there are some in the House who want to continue with the same old, same old and get the same outcomes at a huge cost to the public purse and to farms in Northern Ireland. The Minister is absolutely right: it is a scourge.”
“I am sure that the Minister will be aware, having listened to the Member who spoke before me, that the farmers of North Antrim will make an informed choice about who best supported farmers during this mandate of the Assembly.”
“A pilot scheme has been operating with the Education Authority, the PSNI and the South Eastern Health and Social Care Trust across 60 schools in the south Down area since September 2021 and was extended to a further 77 schools in the Newry and south Armagh areas at the start of February 2022.”
“As Chair of the Justice Committee, I am pleased to welcome the motion. It implements the provisions taken forward by the Committee in the Domestic Abuse and Civil Proceedings Act (Northern Ireland) 2021 to establish an Operation Encompass model in Northern Ireland, which is, as the Minister has outlined, a police and early intervention pa…”
“We had our final meeting of that Committee this morning, and I want to place on the public record our appreciation and thanks to our Committee staff of for all the work that they have done.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,983 lines we hold for Mervyn Storey, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 26 of 60.
“<BR /> <BR />The Member also raised the business rates review. The review has concluded, and we are now considering what is to be the way forward. I will comment further on that when I meet representatives from the CBI later this week. I want to ensure that we begin to have a debate around the best way in which we can move the process forward. I will listen to the concerns. In my previous role as Minister for Social Development, I was always very conscious that a consultation should not merely be a process of going out to hear having already agreed a predetermined outcome, and I reiterate that as the Minister of Finance. If a consultation is to mean anything, it will genuinely take on board the issues that are raised on the matter that is being consulted on, and the issues will be listened to and responded to in a positive way.”
“<BR /> <BR />Let me move on to what the Members have raised, beginning with the Chair of the Committee. Again, I thank the Committee for the help that it has given in the process. I welcome the positive contributions that it has made to the Budget process. I am aware of the correspondence that the Member, rightly, raised — the memorandum of understanding between the Assembly and the Executive on the Budget process. I want to make it very clear that we are making progress. I am keen to ensure that that progress is continued so that we have something of substance, even before the end of this mandate. That is a commitment that I want to honour. I want to get to a place where we have a satisfactory conclusion to the matter. It has gone on for a period, and I would like to see some progress being made on it.”
“<BR /> <BR />As I said last night, it will be interesting for the electorate and the voters who are watching this debate and the debates in the days to come to see what happens with the parties that have said we should have spent the money on this or that issue. We will see whether those parties are in government or in opposition. I have to say, however, that I read some of the comments that were made in the document that was published yesterday by the Ulster Unionist Party. They still have not made up their mind about whether they will be in government or in opposition, and they say that good government does not mean that everyone has to be part of the Government. I am sure that that will go down well when they go to canvass at the doors in the next number of weeks and months.”
“It is not perfect — I see that the Member is perturbed by that comment — given the circumstances, but Members have been able to raise their concerns in relation to the Budget over the last number of hours. <BR /> <BR />I want to try to make some progress with responses to those issues that, I trust, will give some clarity to Members. I will not dispel all their concerns, worries and fears, but, as Minister of Finance and Personnel for the Northern Ireland Executive, I am glad that we are in this position as we progress the Budget, compared with where we could have been a number of months ago. We all need to take some cognisance of the fact that we are in a better place. However, there is much more to be done.”
“Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, I have just checked with you and your staff about the time that I have to speak and have been informed that there is no limit. So, Members, you are in for a longer sit. However, I will try to be brief. <BR /> <BR />I want to make one point as I commence. I have heard a lot of criticism about there not being an opportunity to scrutinise. There are Members who could scrutinise it from now until the end of this year, and it would not matter: they would still come up with no solutions or ideas on what they would do differently. They do themselves a disservice. We are in the House for this debate, we were here yesterday and we will be back again as the Bill progresses: that is the process of scrutiny.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I concur with his comments. He will be aware that I was recently in front of the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee, which is holding an inquiry into the issue, and I think that there will be interesting conclusions as a result of that inquiry. He will also be aware that Willie Walsh made some comments today on the issue. Mr Walsh also referred to the air route development fund that we are seeking to bring into existence. I inform the Member that I intend to meet the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment tomorrow on that, because, in the absence of any movement on APD in the United Kingdom, we will need to pursue the air route development fund, which has already received some good comments from Mr Walsh.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I listened to him and thought that he had a copy of the Ulster Unionist Party's 'Vision' document, because it seems as though they are using the same script. It talks about wanting to make Northern Ireland work. Hold on: let us remember that the SDLP stayed in the Executive and voted against everything, and the Ulster Unionist Party walked out of the Executive. They had their opportunity to make Northern Ireland work and, clearly, were not capable of doing the job. Either they do what the SDLP does, which is stay in and snipe from the sidelines, or they do what the Ulster Unionist Party does, which is pack up your school bag and leave.”
“As the son of a father who has spent almost nine months under the care of the health service, I know all too well the huge amount of money that that has cost our system but, as a family, we appreciate everything that has been done, and there are many other thousands of families like mine.”
“That is already being done in Ballymena with the new centre that will be opened. The Member is almost arguing against his own point. At Altnagelvin, a huge investment has been made in a service that will be of immense benefit to people who have particular issues and challenges due to cancer, which is something that far too many households face. Let us not try to paint a different picture. <BR /> <BR />The difficulty I have had since coming into this job in recent weeks — this was mentioned by the Member opposite — is that it is almost as though we have not been spending almost half of Northern Ireland's Budget allocation on health. Sometimes, we focus on specific problems.”
“Is that the sort of rationale and rationalisation that the Member and his party support?”
“<BR /> <BR />I take his point that I like to see outcomes, but I realise that the sad reality of the House — I have said this time and again — is that we have political wish lists longer than the length of the Chamber. Collectively, parties are going to have to say, "Yes, we would like to be able to do that, but our priority is our health service and delivering for that". It is time that his party stopped making the case for some of the things that it has advocated. We would then have the resources to deal with the issues. <BR /> <BR />It also comes down to another issue, and I said this to Mrs Cochrane the Member for East Belfast. When we talk about rationalisation, tell us where you want the services to end. Tell the people. In my constituency, does it mean that we have to tell people that the Causeway Hospital should close?”
“I have listened to the Member raise genuine issues about concerns that are out there. He rightly acknowledges the work of our healthcare professionals. I did that in the House even yesterday. That is the right thing to do. Is the Member telling us, however, that his party would now reverse its position on welfare, for example, and say that the money that was negotiated for the mitigation measures and the money that we will spend on welfare should be put into our health service? Let us remember that his party voted against the Budgets, so is he saying that we should not have allocated an additional £133 million resource DEL to the Department of Health or provided £40 million before Christmas to help with waiting lists? Is he saying that those are things that we should not have done?”
“I appreciate the Member giving way. It is easy for Members to come to the House and use general phrases, but when the Member uses a phrase such as "rationalise services", which I have heard other Members use and no doubt will hear other Members repeat later, that is the same as saying that we need more tax-raising powers. Does that mean that we are going to support water charges? Does the Member mean that she can identify those locations where health provision is currently but that will have to close? That is the issue for us all, given the debate that there has been this week about the Manchester experience. Can the Member be specific about what is meant by "rationalisation of services"?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. When Invest goes out across the world to sell Northern Ireland, a big issue is ensuring that it has a suite of products for potential customers. Corporation tax will play an important role in that. Some of the comments made by some of the Member's colleagues on the issue raise a concern about their commitment. Given the issues that he rightly raises about the sites in Ballymena, does the Member agree that part of the overall suite in selling is the date and the rate that we have now secured for corporation tax? When we visit the United States in March, every effort must be made to ensure that that is a key component of the sell for Northern Ireland.”
“However, we always have to strike a balance between how we deliver and ensuring that that is done in a way that does not have a negative impact on the continuance of a business. I would be interested to hear the examples from Wales.”
“I thank the Member for giving way and apologise to other Members that this may become a bit of a discussion about what is going on in Ballymena. I listened to what the Member said. However, I spoke to traders when I was in the town on Saturday, and some told me that, as a result of the rally on Saturday, their business was down — in some cases by a third. There are always challenges for our businesses for a variety of reasons. However, as the former Minister for Social Development, I still believe that the investment of £4 million in the public realm works in the centre of Ballymena is vital. There are issues with how that is managed. When I was Minister for Social Development, I came very close to suspending the contract because I was not content with the way in which some elements of it were being progressed.”
“I look forward to the debate and will endeavour to respond to as many issues raised by Members as possible.”
“Instead, it enables my Department to run an efficient cash management regime. <BR /> <BR />Finally, the Budget Bill authorises the Public Prosecution Service to use an additional £6,032,000 in 2013-14, by way of an Excess Vote. This issue has arisen due to a fair employment tribunal ruling against the Public Prosecution Service on an equal pay and indirect discrimination case. The necessity to make provision for these costs at year end then breached the Public Prosecution Service annually managed expenditure budget for 2013-14. The Public Accounts Committee recommended that the Assembly provide the additional resources through an Excess Vote. <BR /> <BR />At this stage, there is little more that I can usefully add on the Budget Bill.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Bill also authorises the 2016-17 Vote on Account for cash of almost £7,899,052,000 and resources of £8,680,276,000. That is to allow cash and resources to flow to public services in the early months of 2016-17 until the Main Estimates and the related Budget Bill are approved in June this year. The cash and resources are to be appropriated and used for the services and purposes set out in column 1 of schedules 3 and 4. <BR /> <BR />Clause 5 authorises temporary borrowing by the Department of Finance and Personnel at a ceiling of £3,949,526,000 for 2016-17. That is a normal safeguard for any temporary deficiency arising in the Consolidated Fund. I stress that clause 5 does not provide for the issue of any additional cash out of the Consolidated Fund or convey any additional spending power.”
“Under section 8 of the Government Resources and Accounts Act (Northern Ireland) 2001, a direction on the actual use of the accruing resources will be provided by way of a DFP minute, which will be laid before the Assembly in March following the Bill's Royal Assent. <BR /> <BR />Therefore, not only does the Bill authorise the use of resources but it authorises accruing resources, bringing the total resources for use by Departments and other public bodies to almost £19·8 billion. The amounts now requested for 2015-16 supersede the Vote on Account in the Budget Act (Northern Ireland) 2015, which was passed this time last year, and the Main Estimates provision in the Budget (No. 2) Act (Northern Ireland) 2015, which was passed by the Assembly in June 2015.”
“That cash is drawn down on a daily basis, as needed, from the Northern Ireland Consolidated Fund, which is managed by my Department on behalf of the Executive. The Bill also authorises the use of resources totalling £17,135,765,000 by Departments and certain other public bodies. That is some £389 million more than was authorised in the June Main Estimates. Those amounts are detailed by Department in schedule 2 to the Bill. <BR /> <BR />In addition, the Bill revises the 2015-16 limit on the amount of accruing resources that may be directed by DFP to be used by Departments. That limit includes operating and non-operating accruing resources — in other words, current and capital receipts — and amounts to £2,628,155,000. A breakdown by Department is shown in schedule 2 to the Bill.”
“Copies of the Budget Bill and its explanatory and financial memorandum should have been made available to Members today. I do not intend to repeat the detail provided to Members at First Stage. In fact, Standing Order 32 stipulates that the debate should concern itself with the narrow content of the Bill, a point that I hope Members will remember during this evening's proceedings. <BR /> <BR />For the benefit of Members, and in accordance with Standing Order 32, I will summarise the main features of the Bill. Its purpose is to authorise the issue of £15,770,704,000 from the Northern Ireland Consolidated Fund in 2015-16. The amounts for each Department are detailed in schedule 1 to the Bill. That is £359 million more than was authorised in the June Main Estimates.”
“I am therefore grateful that the Committee for Finance and Personnel has confirmed, in line with Standing Order 42, that it is satisfied that there has been appropriate consultation with it on the public expenditure proposals contained in the Bill and that it is content that the Bill may proceed by accelerated passage. I welcome and appreciate the assistance of the Committee on the matter. <BR /> <BR />I shall now briefly outline the purpose of the legislation before us today and draw attention to the Bill's main provisions. The debate follows the Bill's First Stage yesterday, which followed the debate and approval of the two associated Supply resolutions. The Bill's purpose is to give legislative effect to the 2015-16 spring Supplementary Estimates and the 2016-17 Vote on Account.”
“Accelerated passage of the Bill through the Assembly is needed in order to ensure Royal Assent before the end of March. That is necessary to obtain legal authority for the Departments and other public bodies to spend the cash and use the resources included in the Bill in 2015-16 and to ensure a smooth continuation of public services into 2016-17. Preparation of the detailed Estimates and the related Budget Bill under consideration today was a challenging undertaking, given the timetable involved. The Bill and the Estimates made must reflect the latest financial monitoring position, which concluded in January, yet the Bill requires Royal Assent prior to the end of this financial year.”
“Maybe this should be the duration of most debates on changes to legislation. I thank the Chair for his comments and want to place on record my appreciation for the help given when the issue was brought to the Committee for Finance and Personnel. I commend the motion to the House.”
“<BR /> <BR />On 13 January 2016, the Committee for Finance and Personnel agreed that it was content with the draft regulations. It is with its support that I bring the draft regulations before the House. I therefore commend these modifications to the House.”
“Indeed, Members will be aware of the debate that took place on 19 January 2016 on the Police Pension (Consequential Provisions) (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2016, which were affirmed without issue. <BR /> <BR />The changes are technical in nature. They ensure provision for the continued protection of increases in guaranteed minimum pensions for employees who were contracted out of the second state earnings related pension scheme between 6 April 1978 and 5 April 1997. The draft regulations before the House were the subject of a targeted four-week consultation that ended on 16 November 2015, and no responses were received. The regulations were subject to an equality screening exercise, and no equality issues were identified.”
“Schedule 13 to the Pensions Act (Northern Ireland) 2015, introduced in June 2015, now provides for the abolition of contracting out by way of amendment to the Pension Schemes (Northern Ireland) Act 1993. The 2015 Act modifies the definition of cessation date and introduces a specific date of 6 April 2016 for the abolition of contracting out for salary-related schemes. <BR /> <BR />Members should note that the regulations relate specifically to the Northern Ireland Civil Service pension scheme. However, as Finance Minister, I should inform you that, following my Department's instruction and that of Her Majesty's Treasury, this change to the Pension Schemes (Northern Ireland) Act 1993 will apply to all public-sector pension schemes in Northern Ireland.”
“I also thank my officials who have worked tirelessly on the preparation of the Bill and on the extensive deliberations they have had with the Committee. I want to ensure that they are thanked for the work they have done. I also commend the work of the Finance and Personnel Committee. Mr Cree made a valid point: this is an example of how, for all the deficiencies, Bills can come forward in the House, there can be agreement and we can find a solution, even when there are difficulties. I conclude by thanking all who have been involved in the proces and everybody who has helped us to bring the Bill to this stage. I commend the Bill to the House.”
“The "Top of the morning" feeling peaks in Fermanagh and Omagh. I do not think that that has anything to do with the fact that we will pass legislation in the House today in relation to pigeon clubs; it might have more to do with the fact that we now have a First Minister who is from Fermanagh. I am glad that that has brought happiness to the people of Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />In closing, I want to take the time to thank the Speaker's Office and the Bill Office as well as the Assembly staff and all who have done so much to facilitate the passage of the Bill. I also note and place on record our thanks to the Office of the Legislative Counsel and the staff in the legislative programme secretariat in OFMDFM for their work in supporting my Department through the passage of the Bill.”
“I thank the Members who have made a contribution on the Bill this afternoon. I want to make a number of brief comments. <BR /> <BR />I want to touch on the point that was made by Mr Diver. Obviously, he made a point about his concern about using accelerated passage and how there was no opportunity for the House to give the scrutiny that was due. However, he and his colleagues went through the Lobbies yesterday to vote for an amendment on which there had been no consultation or due consideration. Even the Chair said that he was not going to comment on the issue. <BR /> <BR />That brings us back to the issue of pigeons, which were much to the fore. I have to say that I smiled when I noticed that, in a new survey, Northern Ireland ranks as the happiest place in the United Kingdom.”
“<BR /> <BR />In summary, this is a short Bill that helps amateur sports clubs and shopping areas by providing further rates concessions. I look forward to Members' support in ensuring that the Bill clears its Final Stage. I commend the Bill to the House.”
“The second policy contained within clause 2 came as a result of a suggestion from the business community. Thankfully, this amendment has proved a lot less problematic. This provision will ensure that, where shopfronts or shop-window displays are used in empty retail premises, the shop owner will effectively continue to receive 50% empty property relief. This measure is novel and unique to Northern Ireland. For this reason, it is time bound within the primary legislation but can be easily extended if the policy proves successful. I thank Members, in particular Ms Hanna, who recognised the innovative nature of this measure, which builds on other positive policies delivered during this mandate, such as the empty shops rates concession.”
“<BR /> <BR />On the face of it, the pigeon racing amendment is probably a worthy measure, but it could and should have been subject to consultation and taken forward through a change in the regulations containing the list of prescribed sporting activities — not as part of this primary legislation. <BR /> <BR />Everyone outside my party voted for the amendment because, of course, no one wanted to appear to be against it. That is all too easy, and, forgive me for saying it, but it is not the way that we should be making laws. We need to reflect on what has happened, but, as the saying goes, we are where we are.”
“One is starting to discern that Members do not apply the same standards to private Member's Bills and tabled amendments as they do to Bills from Departments. That leads to poor policy, and Members need to remember that rates revenue pays for vital public services; there is a knock-on effect where that revenue is reduced; and some standards need to be brought to bear on taxation policy. My party took the exceptional step of opposing the private Member's Bill with a petition of concern during its passage through the Assembly. That was on the grounds that proper consultation had not taken place and that there was an alternative, and more appropriate, legislative vehicle available for changing policy.”
“I do not think, therefore, that there is any way we can develop a balanced, sound, effective and workable policy to allow some clubs with bars to get 100% rating relief and for the regulations to be taken through the Assembly by September, as I noted in my comments at Further Consideration Stage. Policy may well develop in this area over the next mandate, informed by the ongoing review of rating policy. <BR /> <BR />There is one other point that I would like to make about rating relief for sports clubs, and that concerns the amendment carried yesterday, which at a stroke extends the list of prescribed sports to pigeon racing — the issue almost had us all in flight. There are lessons to be learned on due process in policymaking from the short but eventful journey of this Bill.”
“<BR /> <BR />This approach recognises the competition issues that have already been raised with my Department and the Finance Committee by the hospitality sector. I know that this does not satisfy everyone in the House and that many sports clubs with bars feel that they are disadvantaged by the measure. We also need to be mindful of business interests when we take forward policy in this area. Aside from this being the right thing to do, I also need to protect the Department from the risk of challenge should we wish to adopt a more lenient policy. That said, I know that there are community amateur sports clubs that operate a small bar for members and visiting teams after a match, and I am sure that my successor will be happy to review that issue at a later stage.”
“<BR /> <BR />I turn to the detail of the Bill, which makes some final adjustments in respect of commercial rating. First, there is the sport and recreation provision, which I have already mentioned. By amending the article 31 sports and recreation exemption in the Rates (Northern Ireland) Order 1977, the final version of the Bill provides a power for the Department to provide full rate relief for many sports clubs, subject to conditions. The conditions that I have in mind are that the club in question should be unlicensed and registered as a community amateur sports club. Following the outcome of further consultation, I will set these out in regulations, subject to affirmative resolution, after assurance was sought that they would be brought to the Assembly.”
“As I have already explained during previous debates, and as Members will be aware from their consideration, the Bill is short, and I trust that that has facilitated Members' consideration. I see the Bill as the conclusion of a series of fundamental changes to the rating system since devolution was re-established. <BR /> <BR />The House can be proud of its work on rating matters, including the delivery of an Executive review of rating that implemented a series of critical measures between 2008 and 2010; the implementation of intervention measures during the economic downturn; a non-domestic revaluation; and adjustments to respond to the reorganisation of local government. The non-domestic review will ensure that the new Executive continues that work with a renewed evidence base, which is vital.”
“<BR /> <BR />As I said in earlier debates on the Bill, I, along with many other Members, would have preferred that it had been possible for the Bill to have been progressed by normal means. However, factors outside my Department’s control contributed to the need for accelerated passage. I thank Members for the efficiency with which they have conducted affairs at this busy time for the House.”
“Before providing Members with a recap of the content of the Bill in its final form, I will briefly take the opportunity to thank Members for the support that has been shown for the passage of the Bill through the Assembly and the Finance and Personnel Committee for all the work that has been undertaken to date. I look forward to continuing that working relationship. <BR /> <BR />Yet again, we have an example of a piece of legislation that has come through the House with good practice in the relationship between the Committee, which has a statutory responsibility to scrutinise legislation, and the Members of the House, who have a duty to ensure that they are content with the legislation brought forward.”
“I estimate that the inclusion of those anomalous activities has no practical effect because no rateable premises are associated with them, so their removal from the list would be a straightforward tidying-up exercise, which I am sure the Member would support. Hopefully, a commitment for further review in this area will provide some reassurance to the Members who tabled amendment No 2.”
“I agree with the Member that those pursuits are not exactly in keeping with the principle enshrined in the governing primary legislation that the activity should involve:”
“<BR /> <BR />Leaving aside the appropriateness or otherwise of the amendment, it is legally unworkable in practice as it expressly refers to a statutory rule, the Rates (Recreational Hereditaments) Order (Northern Ireland) 2007. The use of the express legislative reference in the amendment means that, if that statutory rule were to be replaced, the provision inserted by the Member would have no effect and would fall into disrepair. <BR /> <BR />I am happy to undertake a review of prescribed recreations for the Member, should he think that that would be of benefit. Such a process could, however, go both ways. The proposer of the amendment has, understandably, pointed out anomalies in the existing list — those were well listed by Mr Cree — such as model powerboating, model airplane flying and wildfowling.”
“Unfortunately, I am still in a position of being unable to support the amendment. The proposer will be aware from recent responses to questions for written answer from my predecessor and my response to him during the Second Stage debate that such an amendment is untenable. It is more appropriate that the change proposed in the amendment be in the subordinate legislation that lists prescribed sports and recreations. In response to his amendment, part of the usual standard for revision of the list of sports and recreations is a compulsory requirement for consultation with sporting bodies and representatives of local councils under article 31(6). Members will note that such a consultation process is not in evidence for this amendment.”
“To understand how complex it is, I recommend that Members review the evidence sessions organised by the Finance Committee before Christmas, which will give them some indication of those complexities. <BR /> <BR />Should amendment No 1 pass, I am content with the final form of the clause and endorse the wording brought to the House by Mr McKay following our meeting. <BR /> <BR />I thank the proposer of amendment No 2 for his commitment to the issue. Mr Swann is out of the country, so I thank Mr Cree for meeting us this morning and having a discussion, albeit we would have preferred an opportunity for a longer discussion prior to the amendment being tabled, which created a difficulty and challenge for us. I underscore the commitment of Mr Swann — he has been a strong advocate on the matter — and his colleagues.”
“<BR /> <BR />I would like to put on record that I am happy for such matters to be looked at further in light of the outcomes of the specific consultation exercise on that area and in the fullness of time when we have looked at the whole issue of reliefs in the round following the wider non-domestic rating review. <BR />Incidentally, that review highlighted the differences in valuation treatment of clubhouse bars and restaurants compared with normal licensed premises. In the final analysis, the valuation method is normally left to the courts to decide and is not something that anyone would normally legislate for. It is, however, a factor in considering future rate relief policy and the competition issues that make this policy area so complex.”
“While the preferred policy will take the starting point of enhanced relief in the sector, there is the case of community amateur sports clubs that operate a small bar that serves a few pints to members and visiting teams after a match. I and, I am sure, my successor will be happy to review that issue at a later stage. <BR /> <BR />We have a review of the whole system of business rates running at the moment, and that is asking some difficult questions about the way reliefs are targeted. That includes the rules around the existing 80% scheme for amateur sports clubs and whether that needs changed. I do not think that there is a way that we can develop a balanced, sound, effective and working policy to allow some clubs with bars to get 100% rate relief and for the regulations to be taken through the Assembly by September.”
“<BR /> <BR />I have taken heed of the views of other business sectors, which were reiterated and well articulated in front of the Finance Committee just before Christmas, and I think that it is safe to say that any club with a successful bar can already count itself lucky in comparison with commercial bars in their area and that getting a minimum of 80% relief on their sporting facilities could not exactly be deemed unreasonable. Ms Hanna made a valid point on that issue at Consideration Stage. I accept, having met Mr McKay last week, that policy can and should evolve over time and that this support measure can be refined in due course.”
“I can, therefore, endorse the second part of the amendment. <BR /> <BR />On the outworking of the revised clause, I will make a number of points in relation to the next steps. Now that the Bill has taken its final shape, my Department will undertake a targeted consultation on the use of the clause in the coming days and weeks. That consultation will present my preferred policy that unlicensed community amateur sports clubs get the enhancement of 100%. Given the law of unintended consequences, I think that it is wise and logical to have a starting point for developing policy in that area.”