Simon Hamilton
Strangford · Democratic Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“I have emphasised to the Member and the House before, that, whilst I accept that those are not good enough — that is why we have been developing the plan — there are alternative technologies in place that can present opportunities for those who just cannot get acceptable speeds.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. There are some initiatives that I believe will help and act as a driver to improve broadband access. One such intervention is the broadband universal service obligation (USO), which is being taken forward by Her Majesty's Government.”
“I thank the Member for his question. However, he is conflating two issues. I wrote to his party leader, and indeed to all Assembly party leaders, before making the announcement that I did last week about wanting to publish the details of the businesses in receipt of the non-domestic RHI scheme. It was my intention to do that tomorrow.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Chancellor, in his autumn statement, made some more funding available for telecommunications, and my Department is studying that and seeking to avail itself of that to the fullest possible extent.”
“In addition, my Department is managing a contract for the delivery of the superfast rollout programme, which, by 31 December, will provide access to superfast broadband with speeds of at least 24 megabits per second to a further 38,000 premises, both business and residential, across Northern Ireland, including in the Newry and Armagh cons…”
“I signalled the intention to do this a few weeks ago. The Member and the House will know that inspections of all installations would have taken place over the 20-year lifetime of the RHI scheme.”
The complete record
Every one of 3,625 lines we hold for Simon Hamilton, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 63 of 73.
“We discussed the training being provided in Northern Ireland to enable the harder-to-reach, digitally excluded sections of the population to gain digital skills and to access digital services. The Council agreed that officials in the BIC digital inclusion work sector should continue to collaborate on the common themes of people, partnerships and policies and investigate potential opportunities for research cooperation. <BR /> <BR />The Council noted the work that had taken place across each of the twelve British-Irish Council work sectors since the previous summit in June 2014. In particular, the Council noted the decisions made at three successful BIC ministerial meetings held in that period, namely the BIC misuse of substances, BIC indigenous, minority and lesser-used languages, and BIC environment work sector meetings.”
“We were particularly pleased to report our recent successes on the job-creation and investment fronts. <BR /> <BR />As its main agenda item, the Council also discussed the benefits and increasing importance of digital participation in everyday life. We reviewed audiovisual material produced collaboratively by the work stream to highlight these benefits and the disadvantages of exclusion. The Council was updated on examples of work under way in the different BIC jurisdictions to promote digital inclusion. <BR /> <BR />The Council agreed the importance of ensuring that everyone in their jurisdictions has the opportunity to share in the benefits of technology and the Internet, and the potential contribution towards wider government policies, for example accessing public services and tackling issues like social isolation.”
“<BR /> <BR />Digital inclusion, which is one of the BIC work streams and was an agenda item at the meeting, is about ensuring that everyone has the opportunity to benefit from the potential of information technology. It was appropriate, therefore, that, although this was the twenty-third summit of the Council, it was our first e-summit. <BR /> <BR />As is now customary at each summit, the Council discussed the current economic situation. Each member Administration outlined their latest economic indicators and the strategies that they are putting in place. We were pleased to be able to report that there are positive signals of growth across a range of economic indicators and that the cautious optimism recorded at the previous summit has been sustained.”
“The Welsh Government were led by the First Minister, the Rt Hon Carwyn Jones AM. The Scottish Government were led by the First Minister, Ms Nicola Sturgeon MSP. The Government of Jersey were led by the Chief Minister, Senator Ian Gorst, and the Government of Guernsey were led by the Chief Minister, Jonathan Le Tocq. <BR /> <BR />These twice-yearly summits continue to provide an opportunity for the British-Irish Council to play its unique and important role in furthering, promoting and developing links between its member Administrations through positive, practical relationships and in providing a forum for consultation and exchange of information on matters of mutual interest within the competence of those Administrations.”
“Mr Speaker, in accordance with the requirements of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, I wish to make the following statement on the twenty-third summit meeting of the British-Irish Council, which took place in Douglas, Isle of Man on 28 November 2014. The deputy First Minister and I attended the summit. The First Minister was unable to attend and, in accordance with the provisions of the 1998 Act, nominated me to attend in his place. <BR /> <BR />The Isle of Man Government hosted the summit, and the heads of delegations were welcomed by the Chief Minister of the Isle of Man, the honourable Allan Bell MHK. The Irish government were led by the Taoiseach, Mr Enda Kenny TD. The United Kingdom Government were led by the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, the Rt Hon Theresa Villiers MP.”
“The fact that it was able to accommodate relatively large organisations with complex requirements was recognised as a "significant achievement". <BR /> <BR />I will end by thanking all those who contributed to what has been a very lively and, hopefully, thought-provoking debate. I apologise to any Members whose issues I did not address. I hope that, above all else, unlike last year, I have not left Mr Dallat too shell-shocked to wind up the debate on behalf of the Public Accounts Committee.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee praised Account NI in relation to its considerable achievement in paying invoices so promptly. It acknowledged that it is:”
“<BR /> <BR />Mr Beggs referred to the Committee's report on Account NI. Account NI is a cross-departmental shared service facility that is the envy of many other Governments. We should all be extremely proud of it. I have noticed that it currently pays over 90% of invoices within the allotted targets. It is — I have encountered this on my travels as Minister — the envy of many European states, including Estonia, which have very advanced digital delivery of public services and want to learn from what we have done in shared services. The Government of the Republic of Ireland have visited at ministerial level our shared services to inform their delivery of shared services. From listening to some of Mr Beggs's comments, it is clear that only in Northern Ireland would we be talking down something that is the envy of others.”
“Although the Committee found that excessive numbers of agency staff had been employed for lengthy periods of time, it acknowledged that the introduction of a radical new structure for policing over the last 10 years represented an enormous challenge. The current procurement process for a new contract for temporary workers is on hold as a result of the current budgetary position and will not be progressed at this time. The existing contracts will lapse at the end of this calendar year, and the PSNI has confirmed that it will cease all current temporary worker assignments on or before that date. The Department of Justice has provided the assurance that any future contracts for temporary workers will take the Committee's recommendations into consideration and will be managed rigorously.”
“On a wider note, as chair of the procurement board, in November last year, I established a subgroup to examine all stages of the commissioning and delivery of infrastructure projects. The subgroup has prepared an action plan designed to correct the number of significant issues, such as over-design and underestimating cost, that are reducing the likelihood of the successful delivery of infrastructure projects. While several Ministers have supported the plan, I am disappointed that some have reserved their position. I will continue to work with ministerial colleagues to convince them that that is a proper course of action. In the meantime, my Department is implementing the actions in the plan assigned to it. <BR /> <BR />Mr Easton referred to the Committee's report on the PSNI's use of agency staff.”
“<BR /> <BR />DCAL has acknowledged that there were weaknesses in its appraisal and procurement processes in the context of a very ambitious capital programme, which, again, is something that Ms Lo acknowledged. DCAL has confirmed that it has implemented all the recommendations that were made in the Audit Office and PAC reports and is in the process of considering how best to engage relevant professional teams earlier in the process so that cost and time estimates are more robust. DCAL has further drafted its own capital projects guidance, which addresses the issues raised by the Committee. It is being reviewed by my officials and is also being circulated to DCAL's arm's-length bodies. My Department will provide revised guidance by next month that will address all the Committee's concerns on procurement in relation to grant recipients.”
“My Department has asked departmental accounting officers to ensure that the Committee's concerns about codes of conduct and contractual breaches be adequately addressed in their existing guidance. <BR /> <BR />I now turn to the case that both Mr Hussey and Ms Lo raised when they referred to the Committee's report on DCAL's management of major capital projects. I welcome the contribution made by Ms Lo in particular. She acknowledged that, although there were issues around the procurement, the infrastructure that was referred to and dealt with in the report is excellent new infrastructure, much of it in her constituency, as she pointed out. It has transformed the tourism offering. In many respects, it has provided fantastic regeneration of parts of the city and, indeed, other parts of Northern Ireland.”
“In addition, new guidance has been issued to staff on handling complaints. The Department has also made significant improvements in its procurement and contract-management arrangements. <BR /> <BR />As I mentioned earlier, my officials will draw to the attention of Departments the Audit Office guide on whistle-blowing once it is published. Although it is written in the context of employees raising concerns, DFP will reinforce the point that the same general principles in handling cases should be applied, regardless of who has raised the concern. <BR /> <BR />I have also already talked about the new Civil Service group internal audit and fraud investigation service and can confirm that work that it will take forward on reviewing existing guidance will incorporate the key lessons that have been learnt from the cases in DRD and NI Water.”
“In addition, I can inform you that DARD has identified the test categories for which it requires unit costs. AFBI has been asked to provide that information, including benchmarking, by March 2015. <BR /> <BR />Mr Girvan referred to the Committee's report on DRD's review of an investigation into a whistle-blower complaint. DRD has provided an assurance that it has learnt valuable lessons in the case, referred to under the Northern Ireland Water suspected fraud case. It has introduced new policies and procedures for whistle-blowing, wrongdoing and fraud. DRD has further implemented comprehensive arrangements for registering and monitoring the progression of wrongdoing and whistle-blowing cases, and it has developed and introduced an investigation checklist for initial inquiry and fact-finding through the formal investigation.”
“Among many things that she referred to — I hope that I have addressed some of them — was the Committee's report on AFBI. I note that the Committee acknowledged the recent work undertaken to further enhance corporate governance in AFBI and oversight of the institute by DARD. I have been informed that arrangements are underpinned by proactive scrutiny by DARD, and a report to the Committee is expected by May 2015. On financial management, I understand that AFBI is now using its strategic costing model to establish the full cost of its operations and set revised efficiency targets. AFBI is also reviewing its fee-setting procedures to ensure that those comply with relevant DFP guidance. The AFBI accounting officer will provide his assurance on fee-setting to the AFBI board and DARD annually.”
“<BR /> <BR />Over the past year, my officials and I have met and engaged with a number of practitioners in the areas of business improvement and policy development. Over the period, many steps, both large and small, have been taken to progress the vision of reforming the public sector and embedding the reform agenda in our business activities. Reforms have brought positive change in a range of areas, particularly in e-government, asset management, shared services and procurement. I believe that building on our existing achievements in e-government is a key aspect of the public sector reform agenda because it ticks both boxes — saving money and improving services. <BR /> <BR />I will now turn to some issues that Members raised during the debate. I will begin with those of the Chair, Michaela Boyle.”
“The work should lead to more resources being available to spend on health and education as a result of reduced fraud; whistle-blowers believing that they can come forward in the knowledge that they will be listened to and their concerns taken seriously; and those who work in the third sector being able to focus on the valuable work that they do without engaging in unnecessary bureaucracy. I believe that there is so much more than we can achieve together, and I look forward to doing so in a spirit of cooperation. <BR /> <BR />Before I address the specific issues that Members raised, I would like to bring you up to date with progress on the reform agenda, which was the main topic of last year's speech.”
“As a result, we intend to issue the guide to Departments and to highlight any further important issues and lessons learned from PAC hearings and reports. <BR /> <BR />Another example of good working practices that again takes the Committee's work forward is in relation to reducing bureaucracy in the voluntary and community sector. My Department, the Audit Office and DSD are working closely together on this important DSD-led project. That work has led to the development of a draft code of practice for reducing bureaucracy in the grant-funding process, and it is currently out for consultation. When finalised, it will help address many of the issues raised by the Committee in its report on the subject. <BR /> <BR />The issues that I have outlined are examples of our working together for the betterment of all citizens.”
“It is anticipated that the group service structure will become operational from April 2015 and that it will help to improve consistency and professionalism in internal audit and fraud investigations across the Northern Ireland Civil Service. Again, I think that that is something we all can welcome. <BR /> <BR />Whistle-blowing has come to the fore in a number of the Committee’s reports in recent years. The Committee will be aware that we have previously given an undertaking to provide additional guidance on handling concerns raised by whistle-blowers. The UK audit authorities have produced a good practice whistle-blowing guide for employers and employees, which the Northern Ireland Audit Office will launch tomorrow. Having seen and had an opportunity to comment on the draft document, we believe that it is a very useful piece of work.”
“<BR /> <BR />In that context, I will also take this opportunity to advise Members of progress in establishing a group internal audit and fraud investigation service for Northern Ireland Departments. That was a commitment that was given to the Public Accounts Committee in response to its document, 'Report on NI Water’s Response to a Suspected Fraud & DRD: Review of an Investigation of a Whistleblower Complaint'. We have now established a project board to oversee the implementation of the group service model. My officials are developing the governance and reporting arrangements for the new model and working with Departments to assess their level of fraud investigation capacity requirements.”
“Northern Ireland Departments, agencies and other sponsored bodies are now in their fourth NFI cycle, with the Audit Office reporting in June 2014 that the first three cycles had cumulatively identified outcomes of almost £30 million in fraud and error. NFI has become a key tool in Departments’ anti-fraud armoury, and we must all continue to work to identify further ways in which it can be utilised to protect the public purse. Public bodies are in continuing discussions with the Audit Office to explore how NFI can be further utilised to detect and prevent fraud and error, and a number of pilot exercises are being considered as part of the fourth National Fraud Initiative cycle.”
“Recently my officials have been approached by accounting officers about that, and therefore I have asked the Treasury Officer of Accounts to raise the issue with the C&AG as part of his wider work on agreeing more efficient clearance procedures for Audit Office reports. Maybe the Committee will also wish to consider that. <BR /> <BR />I will now turn to a few areas that illustrate where we can and do cooperate effectively in the wider interests of the public sector. The first and most important area is fraud. As we all know, fraud robs the public sector of very scarce and valuable resources, so it is important that we all work together to combat it. One of our key tools in the fight against fraud is the National Fraud Initiative (NFI).”
“That is not a carte blanche to accounting officers to sit on matters and to delay them unnecessarily, but if the Department and the PAC/Audit Office are seeking to hollow out issues on which there is no agreement, I think that it is only right and proper that, in the spirit of getting an agreed report and of trying to get the fullness of the situation outlined in the report, time is taken to do that and that accounting officers do not feel that they are forced to agree to, and sign off on, something that they do not entirely agree with. <BR /> <BR />I fully appreciate the need for reports to be completed on a timely basis, but as I said, that cannot be at the expense of an agreed report that is the cornerstone of each of the Committee’s evidence sessions.”
“Just before I move on, I will say that I do not think that anybody wants to see excessive delay, and if there is blame at departmental level for that, it needs to be addressed. That is in part why my officials and officials from the PAC and, indeed, the Audit Office are working on a set of protocols to better address the issue. I think that we all agree with and welcome that. <BR /> <BR />I am raising a concern, which I think it is right to do, about the fact that, in the sort of circumstances that the Member outlined, accounting officers should not feel that they are being forced to sign off on a report that they do not entirely agree with to meet what is, in effect, an artificial deadline.”
“I think that everybody would agree that that cannot be right.”
“It seems perverse that the Audit Office can work on a study for a year with the aim of producing a factual, evidence-based report to be agreed with Departments and debated by the Committee but the process then culminates in accounting officers being railroaded into signing off on a report with which they do not fully agree.”
“Departments should work constructively with the Audit Office to ensure that such reports are not unreasonably delayed by a protracted clearance process. My officials hope to have guidance on that issue agreed with the Audit Office in the very near future. However, there is one issue within the clearance process that creates real problems for accounting officers, and that is when the Audit Office seeks to force the hand of an accounting officer into agreeing one of its reports on the basis of meeting a printing deadline which, in turn, it appears, is driven by the need to fulfil a date in the Committee's evidence session programme.”
“Since then, my officials have been working closely with the Public Accounts Committee, its staff and the Audit Office to agree protocols that will improve and streamline the processes that we use. They relate to the clearance of Audit Office reports and the production and consideration of the various memoranda of reply that we are debating. That work has been progressing well, and I want to comment on each of the issues. <BR /> <BR />In relation to the Committee's consideration of memoranda of reply, I acknowledge the constructive steps that it has taken to improve and streamline the process and commend it for that. The clearance of Audit Office reports is a challenging issue. The bottom line is that we all recognise the importance of a timely, accurate and agreed Audit Office report as the basis of the Committee's evidence sessions.”
“However, it is vital to consider the issues within the context of the bigger picture, and I consider the C&AG's comment on the high standards of financial reporting in the public sector to be that bigger picture in the context of this important debate. Maybe that is something that Members would wish to ponder. <BR /> <BR />Members who were present during last year's debate may recall that I purposely went out of my way to challenge the status quo and provoke what I considered to be a genuine debate about how things are done and why. The theme of my speech was reform and how we needed to do things differently. Shortly after the debate, I met the PAC's Chair and Deputy Chair, and I believe that we had a frank and constructive discussion.”
“If the PAC has evidence of fraud, the organisation it should speak to is the PSNI, not the BBC. I hope that the Committee notes my view on that issue and that it is not something that we will have to return to next year. <BR /> <BR />A number of issues and concerns that the Committee raised in its reports over the past year have been highlighted by Members today, and I will address them or at least some of them shortly. Again, I need to stress that they must be considered in context, which, at times, I think is an alien concept to some. When you have a public sector that spends in excess of £10 billion annually, it is unfortunately inevitable that things will go wrong, correct processes will not always be followed and things may not always be done as quickly as we would wish. The benefit of hindsight is, indeed, a wonderful thing.”
“However, both DCAL and the Lyric have provided assurances that there is no evidence to support that and asked the Committee for its evidence to support the allegation. None has been forthcoming. Let us be clear: the PAC suggests that there was fraud and makes these allegations publicly. It slurs organisations and, indeed, individuals, but, when asked to produce that evidence, none is forthcoming. In my view, the press releases that accompanied those particular reports were undoubtedly sensationalist in nature, were not evidence-based and sought to attract media attention to specific issues, rather than provide a fair and balanced view of the Committee's deliberations. The Committee should not seek such headlines or, indeed, allege fraud where there is no evidence for it to do so.”
“<BR /> <BR />On DCAL's management of major capital projects, there was intense media coverage following the PAC's report with regard to the tendering process for the Lyric Theatre and the PAC's conclusion that it was:”
“On the issue of promoting our public services, I continue to have a difficulty with the fact that, on occasion, the publicity surrounding PAC reports is unbalanced and appears to seek to sensationalise certain aspects of the reports for maximum media effect. The Committee's reports on Account NI and DCAL's management of major capital projects are two examples. In relation to Account NI, the Committee sought headlines that focused on excessive costs for transaction processing based on a comparison with other public bodies. However, the comparisons were drawn from what proved to be a flawed Audit Office cost comparison, as they were not on a like-for-like basis, and, as the Committee is aware, I issued a press release to ensure that the correct figures were placed in the public domain.”
“<BR /> <BR />During the past year, the Audit Office and the Public Accounts Committee have looked at and reported on poor practices and things that have gone wrong in specific areas of the public sector and rightly so. That is an important part of the accountability process and a way of effecting change and improvement for the future. However, many of the issues raised are organisation- or project-specific. They are not representative of the high standards that pertain in the wider public sector, and that is something that, I consider, we all have a duty to promote.”
“He goes on to comment that the standards of financial reporting across central government remain high. The C&AG has made such a statement for at least the last six years, and we should all be proud of the high standards achieved by the vast majority of our central government public bodies, not just during this year but for many years. In the main, public money is being accounted for properly and to a high standard; that is something that we need to remember. It is important that we do not lose sight of that fact, because it is all too easy to note a critical media headline associated with an Audit Office or PAC report and assume that it is representative of what is happening across our public services: it is not.”
“I welcome this, my second Public Accounts Committee debate as Finance Minister. Before moving to the main business of the debate, I note the work of the Public Accounts Committee and the Northern Ireland Audit Office since last year's debate. Both have been churning out reports at a prodigious rate, which provides plenty of material for us to discuss today. <BR /> <BR />I would like to start on a positive note and, in doing so, create a context for the debate. I will quote from the Comptroller and Auditor General's (C&AG) most recent annual report, 'Financial Auditing and Reporting'. It deals with the accounts of Departments and their arm's-length bodies. In it, the Comptroller and Auditor General states:”
“I do not imagine that a lack of funding will be the problem; it is probably more, at this stage, that the lack of broad political support for the action plan will see it not move forward. However, I hope to iron out those problems, which I think are minor, with Ministers over the next month or so.”
“The Member asks a good question about the impact of reductions in public spending on the delivery of infrastructure. The capital budget is the one brighter spot in the Budget. The Member will be familiar, as will the whole House, with the reduction in our resource expenditure, which is down 1·6% in real terms. With the decisions we have taken as an Executive, that equates to a £213 million reduction in our public spending for the next financial year. The capital budget has been rising and is slightly above this year's figure, so I do not anticipate that funding per se will be a particular issue in delivering infrastructure moving forward. The investment fund I mentioned in response to Mr Kinahan gives us another vehicle through which we can continue to invest in infrastructure in Northern Ireland.”
“I intend to take up the issue with the Ministers who are yet to respond. I am optimistic and take the fact that they have not yet responded to mean that they are not being negative about it. In the bilateral meetings I will have on the draft Budget over the next month, I want to engage with them on the infrastructure action plan so that it can be endorsed by the whole Executive as quickly as possible.”
“That was not a power grab by me; it was a way of ensuring that there was uniformity of delivery and efficiencies through cost savings in delivering through one service rather than several. There were some areas of infrastructure development that would remain outside my Department's responsibility for delivery, but we were going to try to amalgamate as much as we could. We have already seen Health Estates move into my Department from 1 October. It was also an attempt to prioritise big infrastructure projects. We have had a problem in the past, particularly with the likes of the A5 not moving forward, in trying to then fast-track major infrastructure projects to fill the breach. <BR /> <BR />The plan has been circulated and has received support from several Ministers: Enterprise, Social Development, Justice, and Employment and Learning.”
“The House may be familiar with my plan some time ago to speed up planning — I am sorry, speeding up planning is someone else's responsibility. We could do with speeding up planning as well, of course. My plan was to speed up the delivery of major infrastructure projects in Northern Ireland. That flowed from analysis that showed that we were significantly slower than other parts of the UK or Ireland in delivering big infrastructure projects. Perhaps planning was, in many cases, the reason why they were slowed up. <BR /> <BR />I developed an infrastructure action plan that focused on the greater centralisation of infrastructure delivery. The proposal was that the delivery arm for a range of infrastructure projects would be centralised in my Department.”
“We will try to make it as thorough and comprehensive a consultation over the eight-week period as we can.”
“It is important, given that it is an eight-week consultation, that we try to structure that engagement as best we can to ensure that we get the best out of it in the run-up to its conclusion on 29 December. Many of the groups that the Member talked about will be directly or indirectly represented at those stakeholder engagements. <BR /> <BR />The draft Budget is out for general public consultation. We know from past experience that it will get some responses but not in a structured and focused way. That is where, I think, stakeholder meetings are important and valuable. I will not be able to engage personally with everybody over that period, but I will conduct bilateral meetings with each Minister and expect them to reflect the views expressed to them by various interested groups in their Department.”
“<BR /> <BR />My Department will engage in sector-by-sector stakeholder meetings with the likes of trade unions, the business community and others, including those in the third sector and community sector who have a particular interest in the outcome of the Budget. That will continue over the coming weeks. Obviously, equality screening of the Budget will also be done in accordance with the relevant legislation.”
“The same people are drawn to ask topical and oral questions here. <BR /> <BR />The Member will be aware that the draft Budget is out to an eight-week consultation. The key part of the eight weeks will be used by Departments to establish spending plans for the budget allocations that they now have. They will outline where they want to spend money and where the savings that they are required to make will impact. There will be work for the House and its Committees to do scrutinising that. I hope that Committees will engage with interest groups in each Department's area of responsibility.”
“I hope that businesses in the Member's constituency and others will welcome the results of the non-domestic revaluation when they are published.”
“In towns and cities, such as the Member's, where there has been a proliferation in the last number of years of large out-of-town and edge-of-town shopping centres and retailers, one would expect — I put it no more strongly — to see that reflected in changes in non-domestic valuations for businesses within a city centre, town centre or on streets or roads that have not, perhaps, done as well. Some places will do well out of the revaluation; some will do not so well because they have held up; and others will remain more or less unchanged. <BR /> <BR />The attempt is to re-establish fairness that, I accept, has not been there over the last number of years. We were not able to proceed with a non-domestic revaluation because the market was in such a state of flux.”
“I cannot commit to no major businesses anywhere in Northern Ireland, including Londonderry, going out of business as a result of anything. I cannot make such a commitment. The Member is chancing his arm in asking me to do that. <BR /> <BR />With the revaluation, we are trying to re-establish fairness in the non-domestic rating system. I had what, I hope, was a useful meeting with his party colleague Mr Ramsey and traders from the city of Londonderry, at which I explained the history of non-domestic rates and what I anticipate will be the results for Londonderry city centre of the non-domestic revaluation. <BR /> <BR />I cannot, conclusively, say now — I do not want to pre-empt publication of the draft list by saying what I expect from it — but I expect a rebalancing of non-domestic rating values across Northern Ireland.”
“Most of the fieldwork for the review of non-domestic revaluation has concluded. Some final bits and bobs of work are going on. I hope that we will be able to publish a draft list of the new valuation of our 70-odd thousand non-domestic properties across Northern Ireland within weeks.”
“I feel that he gave up on it some time ago, and, as a result, we are in a position where his Department is £20 million worse off this year.”