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 15 of 51.
“We can now ensure that full safeguards are put in place to guarantee that the views of the Assembly are to the forefront. The amendments from the respective Members are not necessary at this stage. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 3 relates to clause 7. As it stands, clause 7 amends the Fair Employment and Treatment (Northern Ireland) Order 1998 to provide for an extension of the time limit for making a claim to the fair employment tribunal to allow for early conciliation under the auspices of the Labour Relations Agency. In reviewing the clause, officials established the need for a small technical amendment. I seek the agreement of the House to amend clause 7 to remove from article 46(1) of the Fair Employment and Treatment Order a reference to statutory dispute resolution procedures that are no longer operative.”
“There has been a public consultation focused on developing a better tribunal system, and policy decisions still need to be taken forward following full consideration of the evidence presented by stakeholders in response to that consultation. I do not believe that it is the right approach for us at this stage to rule out any possibility of regulations dealing with multiple deposits when the evidence is still under review. The proposed amendments would establish exactly that restriction, closing off options even if the evidence suggests that they should be explored. Given that amendment Nos 2 and 5 will give the House the ultimate say over whether regulations dealing with deposits are introduced, I hope that Members will agree with me that it is premature to close off options at this stage with regard to the enabling powers.”
“<BR /> <BR />Having thought carefully about the issue and taken on board the points made in Committee, I seek the agreement of the House to amendment Nos 2 and 5, which, respectively, would make any regulations that utilise the deposits provision for industrial tribunals or the fair employment tribunal subject to the draft affirmative procedure before the Assembly. I believe that the amendments establish the safeguard that the Committee seeks, in that any relevant regulations will need to be positively endorsed by the Chamber. <BR /> <BR />I do not, however, support amendment Nos 1 and 4 tabled by Mr Flanagan, Mr McCann and Ms McGahan.”
“I want a system that is focused on the areas that have substance and merit, and it is right that there are proportionate mechanisms to discourage people from bringing to our tribunals matters with little substance. At the same time, I fully accept that people have the right to access the employment tribunal system for a judgement, and, if they believe strongly that they have a case, they should be entitled to pursue it. That is why there are safeguards around a party's ability to pay when the imposition of a deposit is considered.”
“<BR /> <BR />Members of the Committee remained concerned, however, that such a change could be brought about by regulations subject to the negative resolution procedure. I fully appreciate that changes to the tribunal deposits regime have the potential to be contentious. It is certainly clear from responses to the public consultation on developing more efficient, effective and modern tribunals that there is both opposition to and support for that type of measure. I think that we have a responsibility to consider options to encourage tribunal claimants and respondents to think very carefully before bringing forward for the tribunal's consideration matters in which they are unlikely to succeed. When weak claims or responses are presented, other parties can incur costs in contesting them.”
“<BR /> <BR />During the Employment and Learning Committee's consideration of those clauses, members expressed concern about the potential for revised enabling powers to be used to introduce a requirement on parties to pay more than one deposit in a given tribunal case. My officials accepted that that was a potential use to which the revised enabling powers could be put. The question of whether there should be the option of requiring more than one deposit in a case was an issue on which, among many others, my Department consulted from July to September last year. My officials indicated to the Committee that no change along those lines would be made without fully considering the potential impacts on access to justice.”
“<BR /> <BR />I will turn to the issue of tribunal deposits, which is dealt with in clauses 5 and 9. There are four proposed amendments that are relevant: amendment Nos 1, 2, 4 and 5. Clause 5 gives my Department broader flexibility than has been available to it before to make provision dealing with the placing of a requirement on parties to industrial tribunal proceedings to pay deposits in order to continue with those proceedings. It does so by amending the enabling power in article 11 of the Industrial Tribunals (Northern Ireland) Order 1996. Clause 9 makes a comparable amendment to the Fair Employment and Treatment (Northern Ireland) Order 1998. The amendment fulfils the same purpose in respect of proceedings before the Fair Employment Tribunal.”
“The regulations will be developed on the basis of evidence gathered from the forthcoming review of the LRA's statutory arbitration scheme; an evaluation of how the new early conciliation arrangements in the Bill are bedding down; and consideration of the effectiveness of the early neutral evaluation process that is already being offered on a pilot basis by employment tribunals. To be clear to the House, this is not a step back from the intention behind the policy, which is to provide people with an early assessment of the issues in their case so that they can make better informed decisions about how to deal with it. On the contrary, it is a recasting of the enabling provision to ensure that the legislative framework gives sufficient flexibility to develop a process that is fit for purpose and which works well for its users.”
“Clause 9A is intended to replace those clauses and give the Department power to establish the service and to determine the means of delivery through regulations. Neutral assessment could, as originally envisaged, be delivered by the employment relations experts appointed by the LRA who have a strong practical experience of workplace practice. It could also be delivered by employment judges who have authoritative knowledge of case law and of what a person will need to do to succeed in presenting a case. It could also be that some other prescribed person identified in the regulations would be the most appropriate to deliver the service. <BR /> <BR />The regulations will be able to set out the means of delivery, the scope of the service and the steps involved.”
“<BR /> <BR />Taking account of my discussions and the evidence to the Committee, I have concluded that the clause, as it stands, does not set the right enabling framework for the service. The proposed neutral assessment service will be the first of its kind in these islands. It is important to take on board points that have been raised about the framework under which it is to be developed and to improve the enabling legislation so that, when the service is established, it is fit for purpose. <BR /> <BR />In moving amendment No 6, I am proposing the inclusion in the Bill of new clause 9A, which is a rethinking of the enabling provisions originally in clauses 4 and 8, taking into account the issues that have been raised.”
“I now oppose the clauses because feedback received in response to the Employment and Learning Committee's call for evidence on the Bill has raised issues with the original approach, and it is right to take the opportunity to address them. There was concern that the implications for other services, particularly the arbitration scheme operated by the LRA and the early neutral evaluation process being piloted by the tribunals, had not been fully considered. On the basis of that feedback, I have re-engaged with the tribunal service and the Labour Relations Agency. Each organisation has a key role in helping to develop practical solutions on the delivery of neutral assessment, with the key being to provide parties with a clear sense of direction when dealing with a dispute.”
“I am opposing the inclusion of those two clauses because, as drafted, they are more restrictive than key stakeholders have now suggested they ought to be. As the provisions stand, they allow an independent assessor, with parties' agreement, to provide a view on the likely outcome of a particular case that may be or has been referred to a tribunal. That would be in the context of the Labour Relations Agency (LRA) trying to promote a conciliated settlement between the parties. <BR /> <BR />The drafting of both clauses reflects the approach originally envisaged by my Department to the new neutral assessment service. It was always intended that the detail would be developed following a process of further engagement with stakeholders.”
“At the outset, I want to place on record my appreciation to the Chair, members and staff of the Committee for Employment and Learning for their extraordinarily efficient and speedy processing of the Bill's Committee Stage and the publication of their Committee report. It is particularly constructive in light of the pressing timetable as we approach the end of the mandate. That has of course been completed while giving full and thorough scrutiny to the Bill. <BR /> <BR />I turn first to my opposition to clause 4. Clause 4 deals with the proposed process of neutral assessment as it relates to industrial tribunal claims or potential industrial tribunal claims. I refer Members also to clause 8 because it has the same purpose except that it relates to claims or potential claims to the Fair Employment Tribunal.”
“All of that has to be taken in the round, but it is something that can be done. The policy work is there, so a decision can be taken if someone is minded to do so.”
“We have had the consultation, and I have an open mind to change. Powerful arguments for change were made by a number of stakeholders, so, all things being equal, we will probably want to have that move, but I stress again to the Member the issue of cost. Indeed, although extra money can be brought into higher education from elsewhere, whether from my departmental budget or the Executive's Budget, it is worth pointing out that we have major structural deficits in higher education. We still fund too few students in Northern Ireland. We have other priorities. It is not simply a case of protecting what we have versus investment in more frequent payments; we also have to look at investing in more student places. We send too many people away from Northern Ireland owing to a lack of options here.”
“I leave that as an open question, but that, in turn, will potentially put pressure on actual student places, and some people may miss out on higher education as a consequence. A choice has to be made. I am open to that debate, but I rather suspect that it will fall to a future Minister to make that decision. That is the timeline around which a decision can be taken in that regard.”
“At this stage, it is difficult to put a timeline on that. We are having difficulties with the Student Loans Company, and the Member may have been listening to the comments that I made to Alban Maginness recently. One of the other difficulties that we have with the UK Government is that they have overburdened the Student Loans Company with changes to student support. We are being advised that the 2017-18 academic year will be the first year in which we can introduce such changes. <BR /> <BR />The Member will be aware that we have carried out consultation on the frequency of student support. In principle, we can change our frequency of payments, but there will be a cost, and it will be a six-figure sum. The issue is whether Members are prepared to divert resources from other aspects of higher education to see more frequent student support.”
“As the Member will be aware, I have visited in the past and had a very enjoyable engagement with a number of people in that regard. A review will not be within our discretion, considering where we are with the programme, but we seek to engage with all the providers. There is a forum through which my Department engages bimonthly with all the ESF providers. Indeed, the most recent meeting occurred, I think, on last Wednesday or Thursday. Those issues are being discussed on an ongoing basis and will continue to be.”
“They are part of a wider system, and it is important that they link with progression routes that are offered in further education, higher education and employment, so that we have the ability for people to move on from that crucial first rung on the ladder to ensure that they attain the skill requirements that the modern economy requires.”
“First of all, that is not currently viable because we have an operational programme agreed by the European Commission, and we have programmes funded under that premise in the current phase of the European social fund (ESF). It is also worth stressing to the Member that there is a rationale for the decision that we have taken in the context of a squeeze on budgets. We are trying to ensure that we reduce duplication as much as possible. We recognise that the community and voluntary sector has a comparative advantage, in particular around level 1, and, in that regard, we are trying to focus their efforts when accessing the European social fund in that direction.”
“It is a major commitment, but it is certainly worthwhile. It is important that we fully mobilise all the talent in our society if we are to have a successful economy.”
“Yes — very much so. They are also a very significant resource commitment. We are talking about a figure in the region of £70 million a year. Unlike tuition fee support, which is resourced through annually managed expenditure moneys and is not part of our block grant, maintenance grants come directly out of our block grant.”
“If we see a negative Barnett consequential for Northern Ireland, I expect that the Executive will absorb that collectively, and we will continue to support access to higher education, particularly for the most disadvantaged students.”
“I am happy to assure the Member that I have done so. The maintenance grant is not under threat on my watch, and, to be fair to others, I do not think that it will be under threat in any future Assembly. We understand the importance of supporting widening access to higher education, and the maintenance grant goes a long way in that regard. Obviously, what is happening in England is proceeding in a rather underhand way and is creating tensions at a political level. It will be important, especially if we see a negative Barnett consequential. That outcome is as yet far from clear, because we are not entirely clear whether the maintenance grant is being scored as a spending provision or a tax provision by the Treasury.”
“While it is important that we highlight the importance of investment in skills, what was a good idea on paper is turning out to be a bit of a nightmare. We will need to have a very difficult engagement with the UK Government on the issue. <BR /> <BR />That is not the only area where we see such difficulties. We have also seen difficulties in the higher education Green Paper, which is about suiting the interests of higher education in England and goes off on a tangent from the direction of travel in the three devolved regions. There are also other knock-on implications for us.”
“In theory, the levy sounds like a good idea in that it adds value and is associated with training. The difficulty is that it is essentially coming across as a tax on business. A particular difficulty is that it will not be added value. It is likely that, on the back of the proceeds of the levy, the Treasury will cut the budget of the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills. That will see a negative Barnett consequential for Northern Ireland, alongside Scotland and Wales. You could argue that we will get the same amount of money back from the levy, but there will be significant administration fees, so a lot of resource will leak out of the system. We see something coming through that is complicated, of very little benefit, and it probably has potential costs.”
“In turn, it is unclear how we are going to see support for SMEs, which will not pay the levy because they are too small to meet the criteria. It is also proposed that it be levied against the public sector, which will be an interesting challenge for all of us. At this stage, it is the intention of the three devolved regions to formulate a common position and to make representations, first, to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and, in due course, to encourage our respective Finance Ministers to have similar discussions with Her Majesty's Treasury to ensure that we can seek to ameliorate the worst aspects of the apprenticeship levy and that what is proposed works in the interests of devolution.”
“Indeed, as with many decisions taken by UK Governments, particularly the current one, the interests of the devolved regions are often an afterthought. <BR />In England they have a very clear agenda on the number of apprenticeships, and they have an artificial target of three million. They are essentially badging anything that is remotely associated with training as an apprenticeship. At least the three devolved regions have their own different apprenticeship strategies, which are much more clearly focused on quality and establishing brands. There are potential difficulties, in that a number of our local companies would end up bearing the levy at a rate in excess of their ability to train in conjunction with our local apprenticeship strategies and, indeed, our youth training strategy. That will create a source of tension.”
“I thank the Member for his question. In the spirit of what you would term, "topical questions", that is extremely topical, given that I was in Dublin yesterday meeting my Scottish and Welsh counterparts to discuss the apprenticeship levy and how we are going to approach meetings with Nick Boles, the UK Skills Minister, in early February on the needs of the devolved regions to ensure that what comes forward works for our particular context. It is, indeed, somewhat ironic that the three of us went to Dublin to talk about such matters, but that seemed to be the most convenient location. We have some very deep concerns about what is being proposed and what has emerged to date. We do not think that it has been entirely thought through.”
“Southern Regional College has shown great leadership on higher-level apprenticeships and has taken advantage of funding opportunities under the change fund in this current financial year. As I mentioned to Mr Diver, we are hoping to have that mainstreamed in future budgets under the Department of the Economy. <BR /> <BR />It has been very proactive in working with local businesses, and I highlight the work that it has done with Norbrook in Newry, which clearly has requirements for lab technicians. That was pioneering work on higher-level apprenticeships in the life sciences. It has also been very proactive on accountancy apprenticeships, as well as in ICT and engineering. Those are the things that are happening across the board in some of our other colleges.”
“All the campuses of the Southern Regional College are moving ahead. At this stage, we are looking to contract for the design issues. Obviously, there are three colleges in question — Armagh, Banbridge and the new build in Craigavon to will replace those in Lurgan and Portadown. I stress that, while good work has been done and this should be a priority for the Department, we are still dependent on finance being identified for future capital bids. Work has been undertaken to ensure that we can proceed as quickly as we can when money becomes available.”
“We talk about shared and integrated education but, if we cannot get our teachers trained side by side, it will be very hard for us to credibly promote changes in how we teach our children together. It is also quite clear that, the more that we link our teacher training into the context of the university setting, with that access to high-quality research and that multidisciplinary framework, the further we will also improve the quality of the future provision of our teachers. That is also very much in the interests of the children of Northern Ireland.”
“I fully respect that people will want to pursue their passion and that people will have a passion for teaching. We will always have some replacement demand for teachers in our society so there will always be some opportunities in the system but, yet again, we are simply training too many teachers. It is important that anyone who does go into teacher training is realistic about that. Indeed, the skills barometer pointed out those figures very clearly for us. <BR /> <BR />The Member also alluded to other factors. As we look to the idea of a different system in Northern Ireland, it is not simply an issue about cost; it is also about how we should aspire to train our teachers together.”
“<BR /> <BR />The teacher-demand model, in terms of the Executive, is something that I cannot directly comment upon but, obviously, Members will be aware that, last year, I did propose the removal of the premia that is paid to the teacher training colleges. I think that virtually every other party in the Assembly took a different view on the matter and felt that that was a more worthy expenditure of resource than directly investing in our other colleges and universities to support the particular skills requirements that we need to address in our society.”
“I am grateful for the Member's supplementary question. Again, it opens a whole range of different issues. The Member and the Assembly will be aware that the teacher-demand model is run by the Department of Education. As I alluded to at the start of my answer, the Department of Education and, indeed, the Minister set the numbers for entry. I have, on many occasions, stated my opinion that those figures are unrealistically high and that we are simply training too many teachers. At times, we are artificially training too many teachers in order to ensure the sustainability of the teacher training colleges rather than promoting an agenda of reform towards, in my view, what should be a single teacher education system for Northern Ireland.”
“As I have highlighted before, it is bizarre that it costs more to train a teacher here, when we have too many, than an engineer, of which we have too few. We have to get our priorities straight, and the 'Aspiring to Excellence' report proposes several options that would be more efficient and would also improve quality.”
“<BR /> <BR />At Queen's and Ulster universities, which deliver the postgraduate certificate, my Department currently funds at a rate of just over £4,000 per student while, at Stranmillis University College and St Mary's University College, which deliver both the postgraduate certificate and the Bachelor of Education degree, my Department currently funds at £5,380 per student per annum. All courses attract a student fee of £3,805. The variance between the universities and university colleges is due to the additional premia paid in respect of their status as small and specialist institutions. In reality, it is primarily paid to ensure their sustainability. <BR /> <BR />Members will be aware that I proposed the removal of the premia as part of my Department's 2015-16 budget. I do not believe that we can afford such an inefficiency.”
“My Department is responsible for funding initial teacher education training. The Education Minister is responsible for early and continuing professional development and determining the number of teachers to be trained each year. <BR /> <BR />The Grant Thornton report, which I commissioned as part of a two-stage review into initial teacher education, analysed the cost of teacher training in our universities and university colleges against comparators in the United Kingdom. The findings at that time were that the cost of teacher training here was significantly more than in the comparator institutions and significantly higher in the university colleges than the universities. Students undertaking a course in initial teacher education here can complete either a one-year PGCE or a four-year Bachelor of Education degree.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is important to recognise that we are trying to move as many cases as possible outside the tribunal process and have them addressed through different forms of alternative dispute resolution, which is in the interests of employees and employers. Ultimately, there will be cases that need to go to a tribunal, and it is people's right to take a case to a tribunal. Where possible, however, we want to avail ourselves of more cost-efficient and effective interventions at an earlier stage.”
“I thank the Member for his question; it opens up a far-reaching debate in many respects. Tribunals are a legal process. While the original intent was that people would not go there with batteries of lawyers on either side, that is their entitlement in a legal process and things have moved in that direction, although not every employee or employer will choose to have legal representation or be able to afford it. <BR /> <BR />The process in tribunals is not that of a court; it is that of a tribunal. What we are now terming employment judges, and indeed the panels, are keen to ensure that they can dispense business in an efficient and effective manner. It is worth putting on record our appreciation of the great strides made in recent years on case management to ensure that cases progress efficiently.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is important that Members are aware that, on the back of the creation of the revised early conciliation service under the Labour Relations Agency (LRA), which is part of the Employment Bill, there will be additional pressures in relation to the LRA itself. So we have to find additional resource to ensure that we can fully support what should be more efficient and effective interventions for employers and employees that, where possible, will avoid the much more confrontational engagement that you find in a tribunal.”
“I would not want to rule out additional resource at this stage, but it is important to bear in mind the context of what we face with the resourcing of employment law interventions in general. The Department has a tight budget, and we face budget cuts, and that includes the regulatory services under which employment relations fall. <BR /> <BR />I interested in and take on board the Member's comments and may engage with the Law Centre to see whether it is picking up subregional disparities in access and whether there is a problem. If we are not adhering fully to equality of access across Northern Ireland, we will seek to address that.”
“While the process does not include directive advice, it can provide parties with the information and assistance that they need to help them to resolve outstanding issues. The Employment Bill will extend that process so that most people facing a tribunal claim will have the offer of early conciliation before lodging a tribunal claim.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Department also funds the Labour Relations Agency to offer conciliation before or during tribunal proceedings.”
“My Department funds the Law Centre Northern Ireland to provide access to legal advice and representation on employment matters. The project provides specialist professional advice and advocacy through to the industrial tribunal process free of charge to those who otherwise would find it difficult to secure access to justice. That support is provided across Northern Ireland and is focused on the most vulnerable employees. <BR /> <BR />Employment tribunals seek to ensure at all times that the principles of the justice system are adhered to in all cases that come before them. Allowances are made for inexperienced individuals who represent themselves. This is done to ensure that the tribunals' overriding objective, namely that parties are on an equal footing, is preserved.”
“The colleges and universities are using the skills barometer to plan future provision, and that will play an increasing role as we look ahead, particularly in the context of tight and scarce resources. It is important that all our education and training suppliers are using their resources as smartly as they possibly can. As I said previously during Question Time, we have already seen a rebalancing of the offering in our colleges and universities, and that is set to continue as we look ahead. Universities serve a broader role than simply being the providers of graduates for particular jobs. They have a much wider function in supporting civic society and supporting learning and knowledge, but it is important that they appreciate their role in supporting the economy and that they seek to maximise provision in that direction.”
“<BR /> <BR />Obviously, skills will be at the heart of our future economic model, no matter what way you look at it, and it is important that we have evidence-based policymaking, as I stressed when I responded to the previous question. The skills barometer provides that. We have had great interest in the skills barometer from a wide range of stakeholders and, indeed, from other Departments. The message is very clear and understood, not just across the Northern Ireland Civil Service but across our civic society as a whole.”
“I have no reason to doubt that that will be the case. The creation of the new Department for the Economy is a very sensible measure. Indeed, it has been supported by virtually every party in the House, including the Member's party. It is important that we bring all the different levers and programmes that support our economy under one roof. While there is some very strong cooperation between my Department and DETI and Invest Northern Ireland at present, you will always get a certain lack of synergy from having separate Departments and separate Ministers. There should be an improvement through everything coming under one Minister and one Department.”
“We want to try to encourage as many young people as possible to build their futures in Northern Ireland and, in doing so, to study in the areas that will be most relevant to the future of the economy.”
“The Member makes an important point. The skills barometer is not simply a tool for government. However, I stress, in that context, that evidence-based policymaking is critical, and we now have a very strong skills evidence base. The barometer is also there to be used by businesses and, indeed, by students, parents and other stakeholders in society when they are planning for the future. It is available for businesses in how they can relate to where emerging skilling requirements will be in the economy. I also highlight the importance of young people using the skills barometer as part of their careers engagement to see where opportunities lie. People will have their own interests and passions, but it is important that young people make informed choices.”