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 52 of 60.
“Specifying that in the Bill could suggest that this type of evidence is more important or carries more weight than other available evidence. This has been subject to review by Professor Harrington and Dr Paul Litchfield. Their independent reviews have come to an end, but I am conscious, on hearing concerns raised here today, that further work is needed, and I take this opportunity to assure the House that I will examine how we can best ensure that, going forward, this learning is built into the assessment process. That point was also referred to by, I think, Mr Beggs. It is important that, following the independent reviews, I take some time to look at these issues and ensure that we have covered this element in the best possible way, and I give that assurance to the House. For those reasons, I urge Members to reject amendment No 11.”
“<BR /> <BR />The proposed amendment seeks to make it a legislative requirement for health-care professionals to take account of relevant medical evidence when carrying out a work capability assessment. It is worth pointing out that the primary role of the GP or hospital doctor is to carry out a medical assessment. They do not, as a matter of course, always consider the disabling effects or restrictions of the claimant’s medical condition. The assessment carried out by the health-care professional is a functional assessment. It is designed to assess the impact of the claimant’s health condition or disability on their ability to provide for themselves through work. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 11 is not required, as the role of the health-care professional is to take account of relevant medical evidence when carrying out an assessment.”
“It enables claimants to explore, with a trained health-care professional, their aspirations for engaging in or returning to work, and their beliefs, perceptions and concerns about their particular condition. It is intended that a version of the work capability assessment will be used to decide the level of support that a disabled person receives under universal credit. The health-care professional will review all the evidence before them and provide advice to the decision-maker on the likely functional implications of any medical evidence provided. This advice helps the decision-maker to reach an appropriate decision on entitlement to benefit.”
“I will clarify that 67% of decisions made in ESA appeal cases are in favour of the Department's original decision; 30% are in favour of the claimant and are made for a range of factors, including fresh medical evidence presented on the day of the appeal; and 3% of decisions are in favour of the claimant because of incorrect decisions made by the Department. All of that can be verified by the annual report of the president of the Appeals Service. <BR /> <BR />The scope of the work-focused health-related assessment is the extent to which a person’s capability for work may be improved by taking steps in relation to their physical or mental condition. The assessment aims to support people back to work.”
“<BR /> <BR />Amendment No 11 inserts an additional provision in clause 16 to ensure that any person who carries out a work-focused health-related assessment takes account of relevant medical evidence, including evidence of mental ill health. Medical evidence is reviewed as part of the work-capability assessment process. Medical evidence will also be taken into account as part of the mandatory reconsideration process of any claim in which an individual decided to take an appeal against a decision of the agency. That is a point that Mr Beggs raised. <BR /> <BR />Mr Beggs also raised the issue of the number of appeals.”
“Therefore, the role differs from the therapeutic role of health professionals in Health and Social Care trusts and of general practitioners, which is primarily to reach a diagnosis and/or plan treatment. Training will incorporate both e-learning and face-to-face modules and will be signed off by the agency's health assessment adviser. <BR /> <BR />Furthermore, health professionals do not need to be already employed by a health and social care trust, as they will all be employed directly by the assessment provider. Clearly, therefore, it would be inappropriate to place limitations on those who can undertake the assessments. On that basis, I urge Members to reject amendment No 10.”
“Health professionals must be an occupational therapist, nurse, psychiatrist, paramedic or doctor; be fully registered with the relevant licensing body, while doctors must have a licence to practise; have no sanctions attached to registration; have at least two years' post-full registration experience, except where individually agreed by exception with the Department; and have passed all Access NI checks. <BR /> <BR />Once health professionals are recruited by the assessment provider, they are required to undertake an accredited training programme and, on successful completion, are approved by the Social Security Agency's health assessment adviser. They will receive specialist training in assessing the impact of disability.”
“Examples might include skills training, confidence building or work experience. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 10 changes the wording in the explanation of what a "work-focused health-related assessment" means. Instead of an assessment being conducted by a health-care professional approved by the Department, it would change to a health-care professional who is employed by a health and social care trust or who is a general practitioner. Health professionals undertaking work-focused health-related assessments will all be recruited and trained directly by the assessment provider appointed by the Department, which, for Northern Ireland, is Atos. <BR /> <BR />It is important that we read into the record the requirements that health professionals must meet, because this is a very important matter for many people.”
“Those people who have been found through the work-capability assessment to have limited capability for work but who are capable of work-related activity will also have work-preparation requirements placed on them. The Department is committed to increasing the number of disabled people in employment. We will provide better and more intensive support to help people off benefits and find sustainable work. In return, claimants who are capable of taking steps to prepare for work should do so. Advisers will devise a tailored work-preparation plan for each claimant. The details of that will be included in the claimant commitment. The nature and amount of work preparation required could vary from person to person but will always be reasonable in the claimant's circumstances.”
“All claimants who are able to prepare for work should be required to do so as a condition of receiving benefit. It is likely that all but the most work-ready jobseekers will have some kind of work-preparation requirement placed on them, even if it is just updating their CV.”
“That should give the Member an assurance in relation to that issue. <BR /> <BR />It is for the reasons that I have outlined that I urge Members to reject amendment No 9. <BR /> <BR />Amendment Nos 10 and 11 relate to clause 16, which defines the work preparation requirement for universal credit. This is a requirement that a claimant takes actions that will increase the chances, now or in the future, that they will get work, get work that is better paid or increase the number of hours that they work.”
“The claimant commitment is expected to be a living document. It will be personalised to the individual claimant and regularly revised to reflect the claimant's circumstances. <BR /> <BR />As the claimant will take part in discussing all the factors that need to be considered when drawing up their claimant commitment, it is not considered necessary to legislate for the Department to have due regard to the claimant's skills, experience, caring responsibilities and health matters in the Bill, as amendment No 9 suggests. <BR /> <BR />I want to pick up on a point raised by Mrs Kelly in relation to childcare and assure her that the provisions in JSA will be retained. In other words, where there is no affordable available childcare, no lone parent will be coerced into work or work-related activity.”
“In much the same way as already happens with jobseeker's allowance, it is expected that the discussion will be central to shaping the nature of the back-to-work effort. After consultation with the claimant, the claimant commitment will take account of the claimant's skills, qualifications and circumstances, including any caring responsibilities, physical or mental disability or ill health. In addition, that will be dealt with in regulations and guidance. <BR /> <BR />Requirements imposed on a claimant will take account of all relevant matters, not just at the beginning of a claim but throughout a claimant's time on benefit. The requirements will be reviewed following any change of circumstance, should a claimant raise a particular issue or if the nature of the job search changes.”
“The claimant commitment is a record of a claimant's responsibilities in return for receiving benefit and will be tailored for the individual — I stress that it will be tailored for each individual — taking into account their individual capabilities and circumstances. <BR /> <BR />Clauses 45, 54 and 59 make accepting a claimant commitment a condition of entitlement to existing benefits and will be implemented at the same time as universal credit. The claimant commitment will determine exactly what work a person is looking for, when or if a work-focused interview should take place and the nature of any training that they will need to carry out. <BR /> <BR />Interviews will be used to develop an understanding of all factors relevant to job search: caring responsibilities, physical and mental health, skills and work history.”
“That was also referred to by Mr McCallister, as though somehow, despite the 10 petitions of concern and all the concerns he had around that and although it was difficult, challenging and we had to keep going back and many pressures were brought to bear on us all by organisations and interest groups, that process proved that, if we keep at it, we can find a way through these issues. I trust that that is the case in relation to the Bill. For those reasons, I urge Members to reject amendment No 8. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 9 relates to clause 14, and I will explain briefly what clause 14 does. It introduces the claimant commitment for universal credit.”
“It is considered more appropriate for this to be done in regulations, so that the detail can be easily amended, rather than by way of primary legislation. I assure Members that the views of the Social Development Committee will be sought on all regulations. That point was maybe referred to by Mr Beggs, and I know it was referred to by Mr O'Dowd. I almost had a sense of déjà vu because I know the difficulties that I created for him when he was endeavouring to legislate to establish a single education authority.”
“For Members then to somehow think that that is all being done without them or because two parties have agreed it is an unfair reflection of how we propose to deal with these issues. <BR /> <BR />I would also say to Members that the Bill and the proposed relevant regulations already contain flexibility to accommodate a decision on any frequency of payment. That flexibility is required in the event that future policy dictates an alternative option for frequency of payments. To specify in the Bill that universal credit is to be paid twice monthly unless a claimant or joint claimants opt to be paid monthly would remove that flexibility. If that flexibility is removed and replaced by a specific twice-monthly provision, in the event of new developments or policy, any adjustment would have to be done by way of primary legislation.”
“If the Member was listening to what I said earlier on, he would have heard that a lot of this was not about the difficulties in the Bill; the difficulties were in the regulations. I was going to say that I was relatively young to the House, but I came here in 2003 and maybe now I am beginning to realise how many years ago that was. I am still challenged and having difficulty in trying to get my head around all the mechanics of the legislation, but I think that the regulations will be the way in which we ensure that these things are handled and implemented. <BR /> <BR />Maybe this is putting it too simplistically, but the framework for the introduction of the policy intent is the Bill, and a huge amount of work will still have to be done over a period to bring forward the various regulations that will see enacted what we have agreed.”
“Well, it is always difficult to ascertain what is behind amendments. I do not want to in any way sound as though I am just being totally and absolutely dismissive of Members' motives when they come to this issue. I have already referred to the fact that a huge amount of concern was raised by stakeholders, including the voluntary sector, and it was all relayed through the Executive subgroup on welfare reform. Sometimes, however, you get to the point where it is difficult to come to any conclusion other than that politics is being played with these issues, and that is regrettable.”
“You scared me there, but I will give way, yes.”
“This would more closely match the frequency of current benefit payments. I went on to say that claimants would have:”
“Twice-monthly payments is one of a package of measures that my predecessor agreed with the Department for Work and Pensions to shape how welfare reform could be implemented in Northern Ireland and to mitigate some of the negative aspects of welfare reform in Northern Ireland. My correspondence to the Church leaders in October 2014 is in the public domain. It was not secret. It was not done under some guise of secrecy. It was done very publicly and openly. I was very happy to do it, and I have continued to keep the Church leaders abreast and informed of what has been going on. In October 2014, in my correspondence, which is on the website and is available to Members to check, I informed the Church leaders that I was proposing:”
“<BR /> <BR />Currently in Northern Ireland, the majority — over 99% — of social security claimants receive their payment fortnightly, with two thirds of tax credit recipients being paid weekly. Furthermore, in Northern Ireland, 32% of employees are paid more frequently than monthly, which compares with only 18% in GB. Concerns have been raised by many stakeholders, including the voluntary sector and the Executive subgroup on welfare reform, that the introduction of monthly payments will cause significant difficulties for some people, especially those on existing social security benefits.”
“<BR /> <BR />Amendment No 8 would insert a new clause 12A on the frequency of universal credit payments. The amendment introduces a default position of an award of universal credit being paid twice monthly unless a claimant opts or joint claimants opt to be paid monthly. I find it somewhat bizarre that Members today have claimed that we are working in the dark, as if, somehow, we are all living in a cauldron in which we do not know what is going on, and that this is all part of a secret deal that the public know nothing about. These things have been agreed and are now being brought forward. I will say more about that later; judging by the way things are going, it looks as though it will be much later.”
“In such cases, an identification task will be generated that will require resolution, including third-party verification. That would ordinarily happen through face-to-face contact with Social Security Agency staff in the office. There should be no difficulty for claimants without bank accounts; the simple payment service will enable such vulnerable claimants to access their money without conventional ID documents. I am providing an assurance that the current practice allowing third-party verification for vulnerable claimants will carry forward and that such claimants will still be able to make a claim and have their money paid via either a bank account, if held, or the simple payment service, which is aimed at claimants who do not have access to a bank account. For those reasons, I urge Members to reject amendment No 4.”
“That provision is being carried forward into the proposed universal credit claims and payments regulations. I underscore "is being carried forward" so that Members are clear about that issue. How evidence is currently accepted is stipulated in guidance. While there is nothing specific on handling third-party evidence, in practice, if it is from a reputable source, such as social services, it is accepted to kick-start a claim from someone who is homeless or vulnerable. <BR /> <BR />Guidance will cover, as it does currently, the continued acceptance of third-party verification when appropriate. The IT identity security system — the integrated risk and intelligence service (IRIS) — will flag up a range of risks or concerns, including those originating from identity trust flags.”
“For the reasons I have set out, I am trying to safeguard the rationale that I believe exists because of the way we have constructed the elements of the Bill. I have set out why, in those circumstances, it is better not to accept amendment Nos 1 and 3. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 4 inserts a new clause on the provision of claimant documentation when making a claim for universal credit. When a person cannot provide all the required documentation to make a claim, provision is made for third-party verification in lieu of required documentation, including identity documents, so that the claim can be made. Under the current claims and payment regulations, a person making a claim for benefit must provide certificates, documents, information and evidence as required.”
“The impact of this would be difficult to justify and would create the potential for wider and significant equality issues between claimants here in Northern Ireland and Great Britain. For those reasons, I urge Members to reject amendment Nos 1 and 3. I give way to the Member.”
“This is not behaviour that we wish to encourage or condone. Personal responsibility is one of the basic principles of the wider reform agenda, and this is particularly relevant for universal credit, where claims are to be assessed on the basis of joint income and savings for all members in a household. Treating a couple as single claimants would be financially advantageous and, therefore, unfair to couples who both agree to sign their claimant commitments. To accept amendment Nos 1 and 3 would be a clear breach of parity. There would be potential implications for the Northern Ireland block grant, and it would result in claimants in Northern Ireland receiving preferential treatment over those in Great Britain.”
“<BR /> <BR />In cases where the claimant is reluctant to accept the claimant commitment, a cooling-off period of a minimum of seven days will be allowed for claimants to reconsider the impact on the household and to sign the claimant commitment before any decision is taken to disallow. It is not anticipated that the clause will adversely affect any claimant. We believe that, once the position is explained to the claimant by their personal adviser, common sense will prevail. <BR /> <BR />Accepting amendment Nos 1 or 3 would also open the door to fraudulent behaviour. Take the scenario where a family consists of a mother, father and two children, where the mother is working and the father is not. If the mother decides not to sign a claimant commitment, removing the clause would mean that the father could claim as a single parent.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is recognised that there will be circumstances where claimants will find it difficult to accept a claimant commitment. In cases where one member of a couple is incapable of claiming due to disability or a health condition and has an appointee acting on their behalf, the requirement to accept a claimant commitment will be waived. Also, if the claimant is in hospital and is likely to be there for weeks or if there is a domestic emergency preventing the claimant from accepting a claimant commitment, the claim can be made by the other member of the couple singly. However, such claims will be treated as joint claims, as that underpins the policy principles that universal credit is a household benefit and that the income and capital of both members of the couple will be treated as being available to the couple jointly.”
“Therefore, should the amendment be accepted, amendments would also have to be made to clauses 45, 55 and 60. <BR /> <BR />The amendment raises significant issues that I want to address. A couple will be required to make a joint claim for universal credit to ensure that both take responsibility for the claim and obtain support to find work where appropriate. That is a principle already established in jobseeker's allowance for joint claims and is being extended to universal credit so that both members of a couple should have equal opportunity to access this support. In addition to work-related expectations, the claimant commitment includes responsibilities such as reporting a change of circumstances and is tailored to the individual circumstances of each member of the couple.”
“Clauses 45, 55 and 60 make accepting a claimant commitment a condition of entitlement for existing benefits such as jobseeker's allowance and income support and will be implemented at the same time as universal credit is implemented.”
“The five basic conditions that must be met for entitlement to universal credit, unless exceptions apply, are to be aged 18 or over; to be under the qualifying age for state pension credit; to be in Northern Ireland; to not be in education; and to have accepted a claimant commitment. Those requirements must be met and must continue to be met for entitlement to universal credit. In the case of joint claims, both eligible claimants in a household will be required to accept an individual claimant commitment. Amendment Nos 1 and 3 would allow, where one member of a couple does not accept their claimant commitment, the claim for benefit from the member of the couple who accepts a claimant commitment to be treated as a claim from a single person. <BR /> <BR />Clause 14 introduces the claimant commitment for universal credit.”
“My constituency is deemed affluent by the Noble indices and all the other indicators by which an area is judged. However, there are people in those communities who are dependent upon ensuring that there is a welfare system that provides for their needs. Let us not lose sight of that, because we sometimes do ourselves a disservice by the cheap, trivial way that we approach problems faced by families, individuals, lone parents and a whole variety of people such as disabled people and people who have other challenges and difficulties. I come here today, I trust, with some heart for those issues because I know what it is like to have been there and to have seen some of the difficulties that families can face. <BR /> <BR />Clause 4 sets out the basic conditions that must be met in order to be entitled to universal credit.”
“Universal credit will be a single-household benefit that will replace a number of working-age benefits and is designed to simplify the existing complex benefits system, making it cheaper to administer whilst providing incentives to encourage individuals to find work or return to work and to ensure that work always pays. It is trying to address the issue that was referred to by my colleague. He makes many valid points about that incentive and that policy intent and ensuring that we have a system and a policy intent that is about taking people out of a very sad situation. We have to face up to that. <BR /> <BR />There sometimes seems to be a view in the House that there are difficulties only in certain communities and that it is only certain locations in this city that have problems and challenges.”
“<BR /> <BR />I want to move to the issues raised by Members. To encourage Members, you will be delighted to know that we have five groups and that we are just coming near the end of the first one. I will endeavour, as time permits, to work my way through the comments that I want to make. <BR /> <BR />I will begin by addressing amendment Nos 1 and 3, which relate to the basic conditions that must be met to be entitled to universal credit. It would perhaps assist the House if I explain, first, what universal credit is and, secondly, what the basic conditions are.”
“I have given commitments to ensure that we will work our way through this process. <BR /> <BR />Let me make this point before I start into the comments that I want to make on the amendments: a lot of this was not about the Bill when it all started; it was about the regulations and about implementation. That is following on from, and trying to respond to, the point that was made by Mr Attwood earlier when he referred to the way in which this is chaotic in the rest of the United Kingdom. Members know that I have repeatedly said that it is vital that we get the legislation but that it is more important that we get the regulations and have the implementation in a way that avoids all the issues that have been to the fore in other parts of the United Kingdom. I will come back later to some of the comments that he made.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. <BR /> <BR />I have to say that we find ourselves in a position where we must get progress. Mrs Kelly made reference to the timeline and that already we are in default. Our party is a party to the Executive, their processes and the work that they do. I find it difficult, when we bring papers to the Executive and inform them of what we are doing, that that is taken and used against us, as though we are defaulting and not implementing what we agreed. I can understand the issues that the Member has raised but he, equally, has to understand the frustration that I have in trying to ensure that the issue of penalties is dealt with. Remember, that issue has not gone away. There is a requirement on us to make progress in relation to that, and I am trying to keep the focus in relation to that issue.”
“Surely, if you have the convictions that you claim you have, and if you are politically posturing in relation to these things, as we think you are, you will have an opportunity in a few months' time to put that to the test. Surely, that is the ultimate test that we all subject ourselves to. <BR /> <BR />However, I do not have that privilege or luxury. I have been given a task to do, one that is underscored in legislation: to ensure that I continue to deliver a safe and secure welfare system for the people of Northern Ireland. I can assure you that I will not deflect from that purpose or responsibility, even though it will be difficult and challenging. That is the purpose and goal that I have been set.”
“It is to ensure that we do what we were mandated to do for the people who sent us to this House. I have listened to cheap political points and nonsense spoken by Members who, I honestly believe, if they had the convictions they claim to have, would walk out of the Executive and the Assembly and would tell the people of Northern Ireland: "I do not want to be part of this dysfunctional process, this Assembly.cannot make a decision." <BR /> <BR />It seems that when we do not make a decision it is a problem, and when we get an agreement, it is a problem and there are difficulties and issues. Clearly, I think that there are some people and parties in the Chamber for whom it is make-your-mind-up time.”
“I also want to acknowledge the work of my colleague and friend, Nelson McCausland the previous Minister for Social Development, who did a huge amount of work. I do not think that we will underestimate the work that he did to bring the measures that he negotiated to the fore. I want to place that on record and say a word of thanks to him. I also thank my staff who have worked tirelessly over the last number of months and continue to work in relation to this. I want to pay tribute to them as well. <BR /> <BR />A comment was made earlier; I think it was by Mrs Kelly. It was a quote or summary of what it was that we should be about. It was about meeting the needs of people. As I listen to the contributions, I think that sometimes we lose sight of the reason why we are here.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. After listening to all that since 10.50 am today, I wonder where to start, but I will try to make my way through this. Had I known on 24 September 2014 what awaited me, it might have coloured my answer to the question put to me by the First Minister about taking up this post. However, we are where we are, and we will endeavour now to work through the very important issues raised. <BR /> <BR />I want to say a word of thanks to all who worked on the Bill. In particular, I thank the Committee for the work that it carried out when focusing on the matters pertaining to it. Its sterling work on the consultation with organisations should be acknowledged.”
“The public consultation ended on 30 November, and the Health Minister, I understand, is to announce his way forward early in 2015. Following today's debate, I will undertake to have urgent discussions with the Health Minister. I will convey the concerns relayed by the Member. I give an assurance on record to the House that I will make that a priority.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I deliberately wanted to intervene at this stage, given what the Member has said. I could have done so on many other occasions, but I think that it is better to wait until I respond at the end of the debate. Many, if not all, of the issues that the Member brings to the House, he brings with a sense of conviction and understanding of what the issues are. <BR /> <BR />We concur with the Member's comments and pass on our best wishes to Minister Wells and his good wife, Grace. We are glad of the progress that she has made. We also send our sympathy to the McCrossan family on the very sad and tragic death. I know that it is a loss felt by many across the city. <BR /> <BR />I will give a commitment in the House.”
“<BR /> <BR />In conclusion, this issue has created considerable concern, and valid points have been raised about how the settled community is treated. There was a very valid point about historic monuments and the whole planning process. There is a planning process, and we await the DOE's decision on that. I assure Members that I will write to them on the points that have not been covered in my responses in the House this evening.”
“I thank the Deputy Speaker for his indulgence and concur with the comments that have been made. <BR /> <BR />I conclude by making one response, which is the obligation that Travellers have in relation to the keeping of animals on permanent or temporary sites. The Member made a very valid point. Horses are not permitted on caravan sites, and the Housing Executive endeavours to work with the Travelling community to find grazing land for the horses. The Housing Executive has advised me that the horses associated with this site are not on Northern Ireland Housing Executive land and that Travellers have the same rights to have a domestic pet as any other tenant. <BR /> <BR />There are other comments that I could make, but I gave an assurance to Members that I would write to them.”
“OK. Well, maybe I could deal with a couple of other issues. How many complaints were received about the site? There are no antisocial complaints about the site from the PSNI, although some complaints to the Housing Executive were from anonymous sources. Investigations from different bodies have not confirmed the allegations.”
“No. In relation to the love-in, that is the nature of our party; we enjoy a family atmosphere. <BR /> <BR />There is no electricity, so no cost has been incurred. <BR /> <BR />Mr Deputy Speaker, is my time still up?”
“To save Members counting all that up, the total comes to £33,270·76. I think that that gives some indication of the cost. <BR /> <BR />A question was asked about whether rent was charged. No rent is charged for the temporary site. If it were to become permanent and established, rent and rates would be charged. However, it would not be retrospective; it would only be from the time that the application was approved.”