Stephen Farry
North Down · Alliance Party · Northern Ireland
“Speaking for a party that has a longer pedigree in advocating a public inquiry than both the DUP and Sinn Féin, I nonetheless welcome this announcement, despite the torturous path that we have had and, indeed, the missed opportunities.”
“The first was a reform of the petition of concern to take it back to the original intent when it was designed in 1998. It was clear at that stage that Arlene Foster banged the table and said, "No, never. We are not doing that. That is a way whereby we are going to have to fold on equal marriage: it's not happening".”
“<BR /> <BR />The main points that I make concern the substance of the order. There are probably three aspects that the Minister needs to address properly before the Assembly, and they really relate to what other options he has.”
“That raises the question of why they want to go as far as 2022, especially when I am not sure — I would welcome any clarification to the contrary on it — that there has been formal Executive approval of this.”
“<BR /> <BR />There are three major substantive issues that I do not believe have been properly aired on this: VAT; European Commission infraction proceedings; and, most important, the opportunity foregone to revisit the classification of Northern Ireland Water and the ability, through a separate water charge, to allow it to borrow commerc…”
“While my party was supportive of the Good Friday Agreement back in 1998, at that time, we expressed some reservations around the very detailed nature of the proposals and how those could, in due course, destabilise Northern Ireland and prevent us from realising our full potential. We have been very much vindicated in that analysis.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,504 lines we hold for Stephen Farry, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 13 of 51.
“First of all, in Northern Ireland, my Department has coordinated a response from all our higher education institutions (HEIs), to which we made our views known as part of the formal consultation exercise. The three devolved Ministers have also had discussions on how we can formulate a common approach to trying to address some of the issues, particularly those with the greatest impact through spillover issues. I have spoken already to Jo Johnson, the Minister for Universities in BIS. In the very near future, I expect that the three devolved Ministers will sit down with him to have a quadrilateral discussion on those issues.”
“There is some potential threat towards the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE). On the surface, that is a funding council for England, but it performs some research functions for the entire UK and its existence is under threat. <BR /> <BR />There are also some positive things happening around the widening participation agenda, where England has some very positive lessons to learn from Northern Ireland.”
“I thank the Member for the question. It is another example of where policy has been set by the UK Department to meet, on the surface, the needs of England but where there are various spillover effects on what happens in the other jurisdictions. In higher education, we are seeing a major divergence of policy between England, on the one hand, and the three devolved Administrations, on the other. In England, they are going for a very much deregulated system. They have fee levels of £9,000, with the potential to go beyond that. They are opening up their market to all sorts of providers, including some very small ones. They are trying to put in place a new teaching excellence framework that will allow judgements to be made over what can be funded or not, which perhaps does not really address the needs of what happens in Northern Ireland.”
“The Department for Regional Development is responsible for transport, including public transport. It has to be a multi-Department and multi-agency approach. The structures exist. We need to see people bringing to the table solutions to some of the problems that still have to be addressed.”
“I assure the Member that that process is already happening and those structures exist. Indeed, they are being revamped and are giving much stronger input. We are having discussions between Departments at ministerial and permanent secretary levels. Those discussions are focused on housing, transport and parking issues. Let me be clear: I am the Minister with responsibility for universities. Universities do not exist in a bubble; they have to take account of the context in which they exist. However, other Departments also have responsibilities in relation to this piece. Obviously, the Department for Social Development has a very clear role with respect to housing and urban regeneration powers. The Department of the Environment, of which the Member's colleague is the Minister, has responsibility for some planning powers, as does the council.”
“<BR /> <BR />Various working groups and interventions have also been organised, primarily through Belfast City Council but also under the auspices of the Department for Social Development, about how we best manage a whole host of issues on university expansion. Housing is one of those, but transport and parking are equally important.”
“Ulster University is adopting an approach where the private sector is responding. I would not say it is fair to say that there is no control over that, because obviously what happens is controlled by planning for land use and the regulation of individual applications. In that respect, Belfast City Council is the lead authority with responsibility. You are seeing the council go through its own processes. In some cases, it is granting approval and, in other cases, it is not. The overall level of applications that comes forward for housing is probably going to be in excess of the need itself, but that process is working its way through the system.”
“First, I think it is important to acknowledge that, in one respect, the fact that we are having this interest in student accommodation is a very positive sign. It is a sign that our universities are still flourishing, despite all they have been through with cuts. They are attracting students, and international students, in particular, are very much on their agenda. That is important for openness and diversity in plugging into the rest of the world. I stress that that does not come at the expense of opportunities for local students at the same time. <BR /> <BR />In terms of accommodation, we are seeing different approaches, depending upon which of the universities we are talking about. Queen's has moved ahead with its own projects and its own managed accommodation.”
“Yes, I am happy to give that assurance. The House will well know that, right across the piece, we have been ensuring that the student support system has remained in place, despite all the tribulations that we have had with budgets in recent years. Some, of course, are demand-led interventions, and sometimes we may not spend our full budget allocation, but the levels of entitlement and the amount of money available as part of those entitlements have not been affected.”
“As things stand, those are still in the system for September 2016 and September 2017 entry. There may be some scope to mitigate them to a small extent, but, as things stand, the vast bulk are set to go ahead. So, by no means are we out of the woods yet. Even if we were at a standstill, we would have to be investing further in our higher education because we have to ensure that we are meeting the needs of a high-skilled economy.”
“I thank the Member for his question. We are still working through the figures from the Budget at this stage on exactly what is going to happen with the teaching and research grant for the universities in the forthcoming financial and academic years. At this stage, not least because we have had the additional £20 million that is due to be forthcoming and allocated officially for skills to the new Department for the Economy in the June monitoring round, we should be in the position where we can avoid any further cuts to the teaching and research grant on the road ahead. However, I caution the Assembly and, indeed, stress to the Member that the cuts from the 2015-16 financial year of £16 million to higher education are still in the system. We have seen only the first third of those implemented on September 2015 entry.”
“Very briefly. The Member needs to define what he means by students' best interests. Some will say that it is more frequent payments, and others will say that it is more places being available locally, because we are displacing too many students outside of Northern Ireland, where they pay more in fees. We have to take it in the round. Is that quick enough?”
“In principle, I am open to change, but the timelines are such that it will fall to a future Minister to take a final decision on the matter, and he or she will have to do so within the context of the overall higher education budget.”
“<BR /> <BR />There was no clear consensus amongst respondents about which option was preferable, and many expressed concerns over the potential cost of implementing more frequent payments, particularly if that were to detract from other areas of higher education funding. Any decision to invest in a more frequent payment system will, therefore, have to be considered within the context of the overall higher education budget and competing priorities, including, for example, our ambitions to expand student places. <BR /> <BR />As to the timing of a decision, it has emerged in recent months that the Student Loans Company has become overburdened by the demands of other Administrations — that is, England — and the earliest year in which changes could possibly be implemented will be 2017-18.”
“At present, higher education students from Northern Ireland receive their maintenance support payments in three instalments, roughly at the beginning of each term of the academic year. This tri-annual payment system supports students with any upfront costs that they might face at the beginning of term, while also allowing them to budget ahead accordingly. <BR /> <BR />Concerns have been raised in recent times that large and infrequent payments can heighten the risk of financial mismanagement and, by extension, financial hardship amongst students. It was in response to those concerns that I launched a consultation in August last year to consider options to change the frequency of maintenance payments. The consultation closed on 27 September, and a summary of responses is available on my Department’s website.”
“To be very clear: the expansion of Magee cannot come at the expense of or by undermining existing provision; it cannot come at the cost of displacing students into Derry out of existing campuses, whether Ulster University or Queen's. We need to ensure that any expansion at Magee is additional. There is a clear case for more graduates in Northern Ireland, and it is in that spirit that we should approach the expansion, subject, of course, to the Executive making money available.”
“Absolutely. I very much concur with the Member's comments. Indeed, when I met a delegation from Causeway Coast and Glens Borough Council yesterday, it made exactly that point; I am not sure whether a woman from the delegation was in communication with anyone. Let me be very clear: we have been able to expand Magee over the past five years and have found some resource to do that. To an extent, that has been undermined by recent cuts, but, overall, the Magee campus is bigger than when I took office in 2011, notwithstanding my zero budget at that time for its expansion. It has been the policy of the university all along to consider any additional places awarded to it for allocation to the Magee campus.”
“You cannot expand Magee unless you fix the wider problems first, and you then have the platform on which provision can be expanded. The case for more graduates is clear, but we have to make sure that we do that in an appropriate and orderly manner. We need a commitment from all parties to resource higher education properly to the level that is required to support our economy.”
“You will appreciate from my original answer that we have gone down that road before. Issues were raised about what was produced in the summer of last year, and it was quite some time before the revised business case came back to the Department. Whether this is the final stage of the process or whether we will have to go through another iteration depends on the point made about scrutiny. <BR /> <BR />I reiterate to the Member that this is not about the capacity of the city council, the consultants or the university to produce a business case. Whether Magee expands depends on how it is resourced by the Executive. The resources have to be found in a sustainable way. I spelt out the costs involved in addressing our wider higher education system in Northern Ireland.”
“At this stage, I cannot give a reliable answer on the timeline. That is subject to the ongoing scrutiny of the business case by my officials. If the economists in the Department are content with it, they will pass it to DFP for its consideration. In a context where my officials are not happy with the business case, they will have to refer it to the strategy board for further comment and amendment.”
“We have to fix the current structural deficit in higher education. We have to fix the foundations before building more investment. Members should be very clear on what that involves: we have to reverse the £16 million of cuts from the 2015-16 financial year, and we have to address the £40 million structural deficit. Then we can look to the recurring cost of around £30 million to proceed with the expansion of student numbers at Magee. <BR /> <BR />I say to the Member, his party and others that it is not good enough simply to talk about this and make rhetorical commitments to the expansion. We have to show a coherent approach to public finances in Northern Ireland that will allow us to do such projects, which are very much in our interest. We have not had that collective approach across the parties for some time.”
“The same unit of officials will work on this when it transfers to the new Department. There may well be some change in personnel, as is the case in every aspect of government, but there will be no more or less continuity in this than in anything else. <BR /> <BR />I take issue with the Member's point on "false dawns". I certainly have not been involved in any false dawns in all of this. I have made it clear all along that I support the expansion of Ulster University at Magee and would like it to happen. It is clear that we need to produce more graduates, particularly those linked to the needs of our economy. However, I have also been very clear all along that we cannot expand the University of Ulster at Magee unless, collectively, the Assembly is prepared to ensure that more resource is allocated to higher education.”
“With your permission, Mr Deputy Speaker, I wish to group questions 4 and 8. <BR /> <BR />My Department received the latest version of the outline business case on 22 January 2016. My officials are reviewing it and looking at the extent to which previous comments provided on 1 July 2015 regarding the version submitted in June 2015 have been addressed, as well as considering any additional information provided. A formal response will issue on the latest case as soon as possible.”
“We have had action, not talk — we have had real action on the issue.”
“I dare say that the Member makes some rather spurious comments. On the one hand, she asks me to reassure an organisation that its interests will be taken on board, and then she damns the process of consultation, which is designed for that very purpose. Organisations come forward with their points of view; the first draft of a strategy is published; and then we hear the feedback and make whatever adjustments are required. We have not had multiple consultations about any of these things. We have a disability employment strategy that has gone out to public consultation. There is a requirement on us to do that; if we do not, we will be judicially reviewed. That is how government does business. I am committed to delivering the strategy before I leave office, and it will be delivered before then.”
“I certainly acknowledge the importance of the part-time route for higher education and postgraduate study. The Member will be aware that, last year, we engaged in a consultation on different funding models for that, and I have informed the House about how, in principle, I wish those to go forward. I hope to confirm that position in the coming weeks, and discussions are ongoing with the Treasury and the Student Loans Company on how we can implement the preferred way forward on the back of that consultation. <BR /> <BR />We absolutely want to see an increase in part-time study. That ties in, for example, with the apprenticeships strategy as a means by which we will ensure that people are increasingly trained to the high level required by businesses and other organisations.”
“While that strategy has been agreed by the Executive, there has been no significant funding allocated to it as yet. That is a situation that I find troubling, and I encourage those who are in office after May to consider remedying that as a priority.”
“It is important that Members understand what the disability employment strategy seeks to do. It is about supporting people with employment and will be very focused on those employment outcomes. It will, however, be part of a wider landscape of interventions that will work in collaboration with other Departments, as we look to ensure a much more rounded outcome. In that respect, I draw attention, first of all, to the Executive subcommittee's work on learning disability transitions and the fact that an action plan is in place to facilitate that. Secondly, we have an economic inactivity strategy that focuses to a considerable extent on disability issues. Within that, projects have already been identified that involve collaboration between other Departments and the Department of Health on the type of outcome that the Member suggests.”
“However, looking ahead, it will not be enough simply to protect what we have in terms of skills provision, and further consideration of the longer-term options available to us will be required in the context of the next comprehensive spending review. <BR /> <BR />My Department expects to publish a response to both of these exercises in the coming weeks.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Big Conversation was launched on 15 September as an innovative approach to engaging with people about the sustainability of our higher education system. It concluded on 23 October. During the Budget process for 2016-17, I wrote to my Executive colleagues to report on the findings of the Big Conversation, to outline the extent of our funding challenges and to present a range of potential long-term solutions. That paper has led to some encouraging budget outcomes for that financial year, which I hope can prevent further cuts to higher education, despite an overall reduction in my Department's equivalent budget.”
“The consultation on the employment strategy for people with disabilities closed on 27 November 2015. A total of 58 responses were received: 32 from individuals and 26 on behalf of organisations. In addition, information was gathered at four public consultation events and two smaller events with specific disability groups. The consultation period has enabled all interested parties to submit official responses and provide feedback on each of the key themes and subsequent proposals. This has been broadly very positive, and a number of constructive suggestions have been made that will inform the final strategy document. The Committee for Employment and Learning has been briefed by my officials and provided with a detailed summary and findings. The same will apply to the disability strategic working group, which helped to develop the strategy.”
“It will add a significant degree of administration at the same time, which is a leakage of money out of the system that could be better spent at the front line on training.”
“I have sympathy with what the Member is saying. At first glance, the notion of a levy seems a much more benign concept than a tax. If we had a levy that was hypothecated towards skills interventions on a stand-alone basis, that would be a good intervention. The difficulty here is that this will be a levy on business that will be paid by businesses in Northern Ireland. At the same time, we will suffer a negative Barnett consequential because there will be a massive cut to the budget for BIS in London, which will filter down to the each of the devolved Administrations. What we are seeing is simply a shift in how training will be funded but in a way that distorts our policy preferences.”
“It may affect others to a lesser extent; for example, if you are in a business in a declining sector such as the steel industry in parts of the UK where there is no real ambition to hire new staff, there is not the same onus on training as there would be in other fast-growing sectors. Irrespective of the nature of a business, however, or the nature of that aspect of the economy, businesses will, nonetheless, be taxed on the basis of the overall size of their wage bill. There is deep concern across the board felt by the business organisations and the trade unions, and they are united in their opposition to it.”
“I am not aware of any sectors being supportive of the levy. It is, essentially, a tax on business, and it is not necessary. Our system for funding apprenticeships is not so fundamentally broken that we have to move to a levy. The genesis of this lies with the UK Treasury wanting to rebalance the UK's public finances and seeing this as one route by which they can do it. This will have major impacts on different types of business, and those impacts will be greater on some businesses than on others. If you are in a very high added-value business and you are paying, for example, quite high wage bills and have low training needs, the levy will hit you disproportionately.”
“<BR /> <BR />In the three devolved regions, we are very focused on building up quality brands around apprenticeships and ensuring that we address the particular needs of our economy. There will be a distortion in that, in Northern Ireland, some of our large companies will pay an amount of money in excess of their capacity to spend the equivalent on training. They will feel that, in essence, they have been taxed, and that will be viewed as anticompetitive. Frankly, it chips away at the positive intervention that we are making on lower-level corporation tax. We will see the potential for distortion for our local businesses and how they will spend their money and distortions in how the Northern Ireland Executive allocate their money. That will undermine our policy intent in what we are trying to do as a devolved Administration.”
“The strategy was designed by the Treasury as a means of raising additional revenue as part of its efforts to pay down the overall UK deficit. It is also based around the nature of the apprenticeships strategy in England, with very little consideration of the impact on the strategies in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. In England, they are fixated on reaching the target of three million apprentices, and there is a danger that they end up badging any form of in-work training as an apprenticeship. You could have a bizarre situation where people are given certificates as an apprentice without ever knowing that they have been on an apprenticeship-type course. They are in a race around volume, with very little consideration of quality.”
“<BR /> <BR />I have held discussions with the Minister of Finance and Personnel, with my counterparts in Scotland and Wales, and with the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) Skills Minister to press Northern Ireland's position and to ensure that any moneys due to Northern Ireland as a result of the levy's introduction are available to the new Department for the Economy to underpin the reforms that we are making to Northern Ireland's apprenticeship system and to support the wider skills needs of the economy.”
“<BR /> <BR />Although I fully support the development of a wider range of apprenticeships in both the private and public sector, in many ways, the UK Government's proposed apprenticeship levy could be viewed as an additional tax to business not only in Northern Ireland but across the UK. Furthermore, it has the potential to undermine the different apprenticeship strategies in each of the devolved regions and cut across the policymaking prerogatives of each of the Administrations on what is a devolved matter. <BR /> <BR />Northern Ireland employers will be expected to pay the apprenticeship levy, and I wish to ensure a fair and equitable reimbursement of the moneys raised to Northern Ireland and the other devolved Administrations.”
“The Chancellor of the Exchequer has announced his intention to introduce an apprentice levy for all UK private- and public-sector employers from April 2017. The levy will be set at half of 1% of an employer's total wage bill. All eligible local business and public-sector organisations will pay the levy, and all employers with an annual pay bill of over £3 million per annum are expected to be net contributors. Levy proceeds are to be used specifically to fund apprenticeship training in England. Apprenticeship policy is a devolved matter, so Northern Ireland and the other devolved Administrations will receive a proportionate share of the proceeds.”
“There are some very clear lessons for us to learn about what we can aspire to.”
“I thank the Member for her question. It is very much about how we can support the economy of Northern Ireland. Apprenticeships are not simply there as an end in themselves. It is about providing a much more efficient and effective way of delivering outcomes. We know that employers have often expressed frustration at not getting the particular skills that they require. This is the most effective way of remedying that situation. We also know, from the perspective of young people, that it will be the most reliable means by which they can find and sustain employment. <BR /> <BR />From looking around the European Union, we see that the societies that invest the most in apprenticeships and vocational training are those that are the most prosperous and have the lowest levels of youth unemployment.”
“We are reforming the careers and guidance policy in Northern Ireland so as to ensure that we have a much more modern system, and one informed by where the opportunities lie in our economy. <BR /> <BR />We need to get the message out that people can often reach even greater heights, in society and where they are in the economy, through going down the apprenticeship route rather than the more traditional and familiar route. As the Member suggests, it is important that we convince parents of that change in approach. It is a much more lucrative approach, for the individual and for the economy as a whole.”
“I very much concur with what the Member is suggesting. It is important that we establish apprenticeships as a pathway with the same parity of esteem as the more traditional routes into college or university. Indeed, an apprenticeship will often be combined with college or university support, depending on the type of apprenticeship and the level at which it is offered. We should not see a hierarchy, whereby, for example, in the case of A levels, people who do not get into university then consider an apprenticeship. Apprenticeships have to be seen as being on a par. That is why we are developing a central service. We are trying to develop a portal that will market apprenticeship opportunities to young people.”
“<BR /> <BR />In all those things, we have to recognise that we have to encourage people to progress and fulfil their potential, whatever that may be. We certainly have a challenge to ensure that we move as many people up the skills ladder as we possibly can. We know that, in the years to come, the profile of job opportunities will move more in the direction of intermediate and high-level skills and that opportunities for those with lower-level skills are set to diminish quite radically.”
“I thank the Member for his comments. It is important that we see our new apprenticeship system as part of a full spectrum of interventions. In addition to the new apprenticeship strategy, which covers level 3 through to level 8, we have the new youth training strategy at level 2. That is designed to address the needs of those young people who leave school, who perhaps do not yet have the qualifications to engage in the world of work, but who very clearly have that potential. Beyond that, we have to look at how we can assist those who are not eligible for the youth training scheme. That is why what we do with the NEETs strategy is so important, and that is supported by the European social fund at present.”
“<BR /> <BR />I suggest to the Member that we have the precise mechanisms in place. Our challenge is to make sure that we implement the strategy and get as much buy-in from employers as possible.”
“I thank the Member for his comments. I assure him that our ambitions in that respect have no limits whatsoever. We want to see as much training happening through the apprenticeship system as possible. In essence, any professional or technical area can be addressed through the apprenticeship approach. <BR /> <BR />As the Member will appreciate, an apprenticeship is a job: someone will be in employment and will be trained on and off the job. Employers are in the driving seat. They determine where apprentice opportunities will be created, because, in essence, they are creating jobs. In the past, apprenticeships were awarded as part of contracts to suppliers who then tried to create jobs in particular areas. That is not the most efficient way of engaging with the market, particularly in evolving high-growth areas.”
“The aim was to provide participants with the knowledge, understanding and competence to work at a high level in their chosen occupation. Unfortunately, the downturn lasted much longer than was originally thought. The programme-led apprenticeship programme was successful in ensuring that young people continued to train at a time when there were no job opportunities. Fortunately, we are in a different place economically, and the new programme has been developed to support our economy and employers.”
“Through sector partnerships, they will work with curriculum experts to develop and agree the curriculum and content that will form the core of apprenticeships in each occupational area. <BR /> <BR />The new strategies are focused on raising quality, supporting a breadth of learning, underpinning progression and ensuring portability to deliver skills that will be recognised nationally and internationally as an exemplar. My Department is progressing with a number of projects that will allow the new system to be fully operational from September 2017. <BR /> <BR />Programme-led apprenticeships, which were introduced in 2009, were originally intended as a short-term contingency arrangement for apprentices who had been made unemployed as a result of the developing economic downturn.”