Steven Agnew
North Down · Green Party · Northern Ireland
“We need an independent, open and transparent process for investigating Ministers. I have always failed to understand the opposition to that from some in the House. Given recent events, if the Assembly was to oppose it again today, there would be public anger.”
“This process would involve one commissioner and one independent investigation, rather than a political investigation that, I have no doubt, some at the time called a witch-hunt, as is often said when people are defending their Minister.”
“I am delighted to make a winding-up speech on this debate, which has been the first-ever sole Green Party private Member's motion. Thanks to the election of my colleague, Clare Bailey, we have two Green MLAs, which has increased our ability to use the Assembly privileges to put such suggestions forward.”
“I absolutely agree, Mr Beggs. <BR /> <BR />Another point I will make is about the idea of the distinction between the Minister and the Department. When I was drafting my private Member's Bill, I asked, "Should that say 'Minister' or 'Department'?". The legal advice that I was given was that they are one and the same.”
“If an MLA is alleged to have breached the code, a member of the public can write to the standards commissioner and have their complaint investigated in an independent manner. The result of any investigation is published and can, if required, lead to a debate in the Assembly so that all the issues can be aired.”
“I would argue that it serves neither the Minister nor the public well that we do not have such a process. An individual who seeks to complain will be left frustrated if they feel that their concerns are ignored by those in office, who are supposed to act on their behalf.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,353 lines we hold for Steven Agnew, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 13 of 28.
“<BR /> <BR />In January, over 40 organisations involved with children attended the launch in support of the Bill. They included Children in Northern Ireland, the umbrella group for many NGOs in the children's sector, and many of its members were in attendance; the Children's Law Centre, which today provided an example of how it sees that the Bill could impact on and improve children's lives; and the Children's Commissioner. It was the commission's research, along with other research, that helped to inform the Bill and produce the evidence that a statutory duty to cooperate was needed. All along, from when I first joined the all-party group for children and young people, I very much felt that this Bill was the children's sector's Bill. It is a Bill for children, but it is a Bill whose genesis rests in the children's sector.”
“Indeed, the Children's Commissioner has the power to issue her own report if she feels that that is necessary. She has certainly indicated that it is likely that the commission will produce a report alongside that of the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister. <BR /> <BR />A key requirement of the report is reporting not only on what has been done but on where greater cooperation could be achieved and what other opportunities have been identified to improve cooperation. Megan Fearon's amendment added further accountability by requiring the Executive to take account of the report in their preparation of the Programme for Government. I welcome the amendment, which adds an extra layer to the Bill through its impact on changing the workings of government in Northern Ireland.”
“This is not something that just sounds good in theory; in practice, when implemented, it produces results. <BR /> <BR />The Bill also requires reports on the operation of the Act: the first will be 18 months after the adoption of the children's strategy, and there will be further reports every three years thereafter. One of the questions consistently asked was this: if Departments do not cooperate, what will be the sanction? The reporting is a key aspect of holding Departments and Ministers to account, making them accountable to the Assembly and the wider public. There was debate about whether this should be an independent report, but the feedback was that self-assessment was an important part of ensuring the operation of the Bill.”
“The evidence is there that integrated working can improve the efficient running of government. I ask that, in producing the procedures, the Department of Finance and anybody else interested in gaining a better understanding of pooled budgets and the difference between pooled and aligned budgets look to the guidance from the Department for Communities and Local Government, which I have found very informative in helping my understanding of how this can and should work. I will give an example of where it has worked well in England: Brighton and Hove City Council made savings of a quarter of a million pounds in one year in its children's budget as a result of integrated working. The cost of foster care was reduced from £561 a week to £487 a week.”
“I welcome the amendment from the Minister of Finance and Personnel, who stated at Further Consideration Stage that it would ensure:”
“While the provision in the Bill is an enabling power to allow Departments to pool resources, I believe that a key check as to whether the Bill is implemented in the spirit in which it is intended is when Departments begin to pool resources where there are common objectives in relation to children.”
“Again, it is important that we have enshrined in the Bill, in effect, article 12 of the UNCRC; the right of children to have a say in decisions that directly affect their lives. I pay tribute to OFMDFM because this is an additional clause to the original draft of the Bill and it came forward from the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister at their suggestion. I welcome its inclusion in the Bill. <BR /> <BR />All along, I have been keen to highlight the importance in the Bill of the pooling of resources. If we are to make the delivery of children's services efficient, this is a necessary outworking.”
“<BR /> <BR />In the spirit of the Bill, those outcomes were agreed cooperatively and have widespread support throughout the children's voluntary sector and, indeed, from the Children's Commissioner. One aspect of the Bill is that it allows amendments to be made to change those aspects of well-being. However, importantly, it also includes a requirement that consultation would be required before such changes could be made. That was important in order to give comfort to the sector that the aims and objectives that it works to will not be changed without its input. <BR /> <BR />The Bill also requires the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister to produce a children's strategy. The aspect of consultation is key to that. Any such strategy should be outcomes-based, and children and parents must be consulted in its preparation.”
“<BR /> <BR />In the Bill, well-being has been defined by the six high-level outcomes that were in the 10-year strategy for children and young people and which had been agreed between government and the statutory sector. To provide clarity, the six outcomes became seven in the redrafting of the Bill and a further outcome was introduced in an amendment by Chris Lyttle to include equality of opportunity, and good relations. The other outcomes include physical and mental health; the enjoyment of play and leisure; learning and achievement; living in safety with stability; economic and environmental well-being; the making by them, ie the children, of a positive contribution to society; and living in a society which respects their rights.”
“<BR /> <BR />While a lot of work was being done to have the good practice of the children and young people's strategic partnership enshrined as a statutory agency, that was not able to be achieved as part of the Bill. The final amendment could not be agreed on, but I am pleased that the Department of Health is considering bringing forward, as part of its own legislative framework, proposals to do just that. While it may not be achieved by this Bill, I hope that the work that has gone into producing this Bill will see it achieved some time in the future. I know that the children's sector will be lobbying hard to make sure that that becomes a reality.”
“So, what does the Bill do to improve the systems that are in place when it comes to these cases? The key element of the Bill is a statutory duty to cooperate on all children's authorities to improve the well-being of children. The children's authorities include the Northern Ireland Departments, councils, the health and social care trusts, the Health and Social Care Board, the Public Health Agency, the Education Authority, the Northern Ireland Housing Executive, the PSNI and the Probation Board for Northern Ireland. It is, effectively, the Northern Ireland Departments and the membership of the children and young people's strategic partnership.”
“She thinks that there needs to be something in place so that schools have a duty of care to the child, with cooperation between the education and health sectors required. <BR /> <BR />That caused significant distress to the family. Again, the processes between the Department of Health and the Department of Education were not as efficient as they could be. It was well known to the Health Department that the child had diabetes. The school was informed. The education board was made aware well in advance of him starting school, yet, when September came, the provision was not in place, and much anguish and stress was caused to that family unnecessarily.”
“The child, named Josh, has type-1 diabetes and is currently in primary school. His mum, Helen, had been totally frustrated at the time that it took to have adequate resources put in place to support him. The education board did not have the resources to get a report collated for his statement in a timely manner. In the end, it took nine months to complete the statement. In the meantime, there was no one to administer insulin to Josh, a type-1 diabetic child. In the end, staff volunteered to undergo training until a classroom assistant could be recruited. Recruitment took six months, and the training took a further three months. Helen believes that the Children's Services Co-operation Bill would have helped, as it would have required that her child be at the centre, with decisions made in his best interests.”
“In that example, we can see how something that may appear simple, such as physiotherapy for a child at school, can get bogged down in wrangling between two Departments in an effort, it would appear, to avoid having to provide the resources. Indeed, one of the key elements, which I will speak more about later, is the ability of Departments to pool budgets. In such a case, a single pool could be drawn down from, either from the Department of Health or the Department of Education, whichever is in the position to provide the service. That would avoid the wrangling that comes with Departments seeking to avoid costs when clearly they have a duty of care to a child or young person. <BR /> <BR />The next example comes from my constituency and is from a family in Bangor. It was highlighted in the media at the time, locally and regionally.”
“That very much outlines the policy issues, but, of course, the key question for many people will be this: what difference will the legislation actually make? Through my work on the Bill, I came across a number of case studies. I wish to highlight two that were brought to me. The first is from the Children's Law Centre, which stated:”
“I was told that it was a Department of Education strategy. When I realised that the Department of Education did not engage with children until they were three, at the very earliest, I realised that I was being presented with a strategy for children from nought to six, which started at age three. That was unacceptable; indeed, it was a draft strategy that was widely criticised and which never came to fruition because of its deeply flawed nature. The purpose of the Bill is to ensure that such strategies are prepared between Departments, with cooperation and engagement, where relevant, by each and every Department.”
“They included the introduction of children's champions within each of the Departments and the ministerial subgroup for children and young people. More recently, it has included Delivering Social Change. Each was assessed as falling short of the fundamental culture shift that was needed in the inter-working between the Departments. <BR /> <BR />The point at which the penny dropped for me as to why a statutory duty to cooperate was needed was when I was sitting on the all-party group for children and young people and we received a presentation from the Department of Education on the draft early years strategy. It was to be a fundamental strategy on provision for children aged nought to six. I asked what, at that time, I felt was a perfectly innocent question: what work is being done on the strategy with the Department of Health?”
“Back then, it was highlighted at a number of meetings that, whilst the 10-year strategy for children and young people was ambitious in its intent, there had been a poor record of delivery. Time and time again, reports were produced that said that a statutory duty to cooperate was required. That was included in reports by the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child; Queen's University; the Children's Commissioner, in a report commissioned by the commissioner on barriers to effective working for children and young people; the Criminal Justice Inspection, in its 2012 report on early youth interventions; and the OFMDFM Committee, in its report during the 2007-2011 mandate. A number of solutions were tried to improve delivery.”
“As I acknowledged at previous stages, there was a fear that Departments, which, at one stage, may have been resistant to the Bill, would seek to water it down and undermine it. I am delighted that that has not been the case. Again, I place on record my thanks to the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister, in particular, for its work in relation to the Bill. <BR /> <BR />As far back as 2007, Eamon McTernan and Ann Godfrey published a paper on the need for an integrated children's system in Northern Ireland. My involvement with this policy proposal began when, as a researcher for Brian Wilson MLA, I represented him on the all-party group on children and young people. I am proud to say that, today, I am chair of that group.”
“Undoubtedly, the Bill has evolved considerably since that original draft, and many changes have been made to the Bill since it was introduced at First Stage. That has been a result of consultation and, indeed, cooperative working with, among others, the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister, the children's sector and my team. The one thing that has not changed is the key intention of the Bill. That has remained consistent throughout. I have been delighted by the fact that those who engaged cooperatively in bringing the Bill forward and in amending it have done so in a way that has built on those original aims and improved the Bill and its effectiveness.”
“The Bill will place a statutory duty on children's authorities to cooperate with each other to better integrate the planning and delivery of children's services. The aim is to make the provision of services effective and efficient by ending the waste of silo working. The Bill will make good practice common practice, leading to better outcomes for children and young people. <BR /> <BR />It is four years since I had my first meeting with the Bill Office in relation to bringing forward this piece of work. It has been almost a year since I submitted the Bill to the Assembly at First Stage.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Does he agree that it highlights yet again the need for a process to investigate breaches of the ministerial code?”
“I anticipate that the amendments, with the exception of amendment No 4, will receive unanimous support and that we will move to Final Stage in the near future with a good wind behind the Bill. It is about ensuring good governance. It is about effectiveness of delivery. It is about the efficient use of resources and ensuring that we move away from the silo mentality that can be wasteful and can mean that time and resources are wasted in a lack of coordination. If we start working together on the planning, commissioning and delivery of children's services, we can improve outcomes for children in Northern Ireland.”
“<BR /> <BR />Housing is another area where the health and accommodation needs of a young person may fall between two Departments. Again, it is important to note that cooperation is required in those instances to ensure, once again, that the needs of the young person, rather than the responsibilities of the Departments, are the focus. Cooperation should ensure that that is the case. I ask the House to support amendment No 6 to ensure that all children and young people are captured by the Bill, including all those in need, as referenced by the Children Order. I believe that the amendment makes sure that that is the case. <BR /> <BR />In closing, I thank all Members for their contribution. I welcome the continuing support of the House for the Bill.”
“It should happen as a matter of course, and the pooling of budgets will go a long way to resolving such issues. <BR /> <BR />I move on to amendment No 6. I mentioned collaborative working with Departments. This was raised by the Department of Health. The provision of accommodation to young persons over the age of 16 but under the age of 21 is captured by the Children Order but was not captured by the definition of "children and young persons" in the Bill. I thank them for bringing that to my attention. The legislation that I sought to replicate in the Bill was that which defined "child or young person" for the role of the Children's Commissioner. I am not sure why that section of the Children Order is not referenced in that legislation, but I know that there were concerns about that provision being left out of the Bill.”
“We need to ensure that we do not have that wrangling and do not make it a challenge and something that has to be fought for.”
“The Department of Health perhaps had the resources in staff and skills to provide the physiotherapy, but it was, I suppose, in the Department of Education's setting that the needs were not being met. There was wrangling over who should pay for the provision of that physiotherapy in school, and there was nervousness in each Department about taking responsibility. That is an example of where, if resources were pooled in areas such as special educational needs, the focus would be on ensuring that a child gets the provision that they need to meet their full potential, and we would not have, as happened in that case, a two-year legal wrangle to ensure provision so that a child could meet their full potential and achieve in school.”
“<BR /> <BR />I welcome the amendment, which I think adds to and strengthens the Bill and ensures that the pooling of resources is on the Department's agenda. The clause provides an enabling power to allow the pooling of resources, which is a necessary outworking of the Bill if we are to achieve those aims and really end the silo mentality. I think that I made this point at the previous stage: we will have all the reporting and that will be necessary to scrutinise the operation of the Bill, but, for me, the real sign that the Bill has taken effect will be when Departments start pooling budgets for children. <BR /> <BR />I think of the example raised by the Children's Law Centre of a girl with cerebral palsy who had to go through a two-year legal battle to get the physiotherapy that she needed in school.”
“The Department is content, as indeed am I, that it should be explicit that the power to regulate the pooling of budgets and any guidance in relation to that should come from DFP; that is where the expertise lies. As I say, I think that that was always how it was intended to work, but perhaps it was not explicit. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the Minister's support. Indeed, she articulated some of what are for me the key elements of the Bill: to advance the aims of efficiency and cost-effectiveness — I think that those were her words. That is precisely what the Bill is about: to ensure that resources are spent not on bureaucratic processes, duplication and silo working in Departments but on a more joined-up, coherent system of governance, particularly in delivering for children. I welcome her presence and her contribution to the debate today.”
“Along with the reporting, the feedback and the Programme for Government, it will give another line of accountability in respect of how cooperation is taking place and how the efforts to remove duplication, end waste and improve efficiency are being achieved. <BR /> <BR />In addressing amendment Nos 4 and 5, I have said that I will not move amendment No 4 and will instead support amendment No 5, the reason being that it was, I suppose, a somewhat late-in-the-day amendment. I was aware of concerns in the Department of Finance and Personnel about drafting guidance and what it would mean in relation to pooling budgets. It was certainly always the intent of the Bill that DFP would take a lead role in that, albeit, with my amendment going through OFMDFM, I have certainly engaged with that Department.”
“She took the time to text me to wish me luck with today's debate and apologised for not being here in person to move her amendment. I appreciate that and the time that she has taken to give consideration to the Bill throughout. <BR /> <BR />The amendment is very welcome. It had not occurred to me to link the operation of the Bill to the Programme for Government, which adds another element to ensure that cooperative working and the children's strategy are at the heart of what government does. In that regard, I am pleased to see the amendment, and I thank the Members for putting it forward today.”
“Indeed, its coming to the Floor of the Assembly has really got Departments to grapple with it, which is why, for example, we see amendments from DFP. The will of the House is clear that we progress this, and Departments are already stepping up to make sure that it is right. I include in that, as well as DFP bringing its amendment today, the work of the Health Department alongside OFMDFM in getting the clauses right and the drafting correct. I urge Members to support amendment No 2. From the comments to date, it appears that there is broad support for it. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 3 was spoken to today by Chris Hazzard and will be moved by Mr Maskey. First, I wish Megan Fearon well. I am aware that she is unwell, and I hope that it is not serious.”
“I think that his point was well made that, when the Bill, hopefully, receives Royal Assent — I am confident that it will — there must be an urgency and a drive and that, from day one, children's authorities are engaged in ensuring that cooperation takes place and children's well-being is improved. The amendment will help to ensure that there is urgency and that the Bill can start to take effect from the moment it is passed. <BR /> <BR />The Bill has been long in progress, and Departments and other authorities were well aware that it was under way. I think that some of the intention of the Bill has already hit home with Departments. That process has already started, but the passing of the Bill will ensure urgency.”
“<BR /> <BR />Amendment No 2 is my amendment on reducing the reporting time from the point when the Bill is enacted. Credit goes to Mr Alex Attwood, who made the point at Consideration Stage that there was a risk that, if a report were not required until three years after Royal Assent, it may take two years before anybody starts to really have any urgency or drive around the implementation of the Bill. My intention in the original draft with three years was to ensure a balance between the operation of the Act and reporting and the need to maybe answer some of the questions about bureaucracy, ensuring that a children's authority's time is spent enacting the Bill rather than reporting on it.”
“Once again, I thank the Chair, Mr Nesbitt, and the Committee for their work on the Bill. Mr Nesbitt made the point about a definition of "good relations", which I know is an ongoing issue that has come up with other legislation. In the context of the definition of "well-being", around some of the other high-level duties, we were given advice that the drafting allows for some less precise language. That is why, I suppose, they were moved from being outcomes in themselves to being part of the definition of well-being, with well-being itself being the outcome so that the legal language was tight. I think that the amendment can sit within the all-encompassing definition of well-being, but I agree that progress on the definition of good relations is something that the Assembly needs to address and put right in the future.”
“I think that, in the amendment, they are mentioned as separate entities, and, in my reading, neither appears to take precedence over the other. I am content with the amendment in that regard.”
“It is certainly the case that a child's well-being can be enhanced only if we live in a society that promotes good relations and equality. Mr Attwood made a point about the international nature of the outcomes in the original Bill. I suppose that the local nature of this amendment reflects our local circumstances that that is required, whereas in other international practice, a reference to good relations may not be necessary. However, we know the specific circumstances of Northern Ireland, and the promotion of good relations and equality can only help outcomes for children and young people. <BR /> <BR />Mr Hazzard made the point that equality and good relations should not be conflated, and I can see the point that he is trying to make.”
“At the outset, I thank all Members for their contributions to the debate and for their work on the Bill. As I have said all along, it is important that a Bill that requires Departments to cooperate is, in itself, produced in a cooperative manner. That has been the case throughout among Members, the OFMDFM Committee, OFMDFM itself, the children's sector, as well as the other Departments. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the amendments and the input that they bring to the Bill in getting the final details correct before we move to Final Stage. I will speak to each of the amendments briefly and refer to Members' comments on them. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 1, which was proposed by Chris Lyttle, adds a new high-level duty to the definition of well-being.”
“As the Minister outlined, he issued warning letters, but unauthorised sand dredging continued; he then issued an enforcement notice, but unauthorised sand dredging continued. Will he now issue a stop notice to make sure that unauthorised sand dredging cannot continue?”
“So, I think we should have an open, transparent and accountable process, and the recruitment of special advisers should be brought into line with that of other civil servants. <BR /> <BR />They have been referred to as temporary civil servants. Even in the case of temporary recruitment for Civil Service posts a recruitment process is required. I would certainly be interested in the Member's views, if that is something he has considered, and urge the Committee to look at that aspect of special advisers' employment.”
“Due to the nature of the work, many of them have then become members of the party, but if I am recruiting a researcher, I see no reason why that researcher has to be a member of the Green Party. Equally, I see no reason why special advisers should be appointed solely from within the pool of a political party and appointed without interview and merit criteria set and without that being done transparently. Possibly, Ministers do that: I do not know. Possibly, when they are appointing people, they set the criteria for what they are looking for; but it is not transparent and public money is being used to pay the wages of special advisers. It is a public role, and it is to serve the public good through advising the Minister on public policy.”
“Many professions require secrecy and require staff to access confidential information, whether they are workers in the health service with access to people's medical records, people in the justice system with access to criminal records, or those who work in banks with access to people's financial records. Processes are in place to ensure confidentiality, propriety and probity. Whilst those standards would be required in any special advisers recruited, I do not think that there is an argument to say that recruitment cannot be done with openness, transparency and accountability. <BR /> <BR />I use my own recruitment of staff as an example. I recruit openly and have recruited a number of staff from outside the pool of Green Party membership.”
“Somehow, he made an argument that, "No, this is politics; you cannot recruit people from outside; you could not possibly have a DUP SpAd who was not a member of the DUP." That type of attitude feeds into the perception out there, which is that the political class believes itself to be a class apart and that, somehow, what we do is so different from any other profession, that it is right that we should be able to get around recruitment rules and legislation and can have something different for ourselves because we are different, and what we do is different here, and we run government, which is special. <BR /> <BR />I question that logic.”
“In bringing the pay and code of conduct into line with that of senior civil servants, I think that the recruitment method also needs to be brought into line with that of senior civil servants. I made that point during the passage of the previous SpAd Bill. <BR /> <BR />No one is sadder than me that Mr Sammy Wilson is no longer a Member of the House.”
“Whilst four seems to me to be a sensible proposal, others seem to think that there needs to be more flexibility, and, of course, we need to have regard to the proposed changes in the number of Departments and the structure of the Assembly. However, under our current structures, a reduction from eight to four certainly seems to be a worthwhile proposal to consider, and I look forward to seeing what evidence comes out during the Committee Stage. <BR /> <BR />This is the second private Member's Bill on special advisers to come forward from Mr Allister. With his first Bill, I made a point about the recruitment of special advisers, and I will make it again now. Many have made the point that they are appointed by Ministers; and that appointment process should be examined as part of the scrutiny of the Bill.”
“I think that we can, and should, take evidence from elsewhere and base our salaries here on those findings. <BR /> <BR />Reference was made to the number of SpAds within OFMDFM. Mr Allister has said that he is not wedded to the formula suggested, and others have said that there may need to be more flexibility at the Committee Stage should the Bill pass today, and I hope that it will. The Committee can take time to tease those issues out. <BR /> <BR />It seems to me to be hard to justify having eight SpAds within the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister. Due to the nature of that role, we do have two joint Ministers and not one, as Mr McCallister pointed out yesterday, and the junior Ministers that go with that., but to justify a total of eight SpAds seems difficult.”
“As an MLA, I am subject to the code of conduct; I am subject to independent investigation. The same should be true for Ministers and their special advisers. <BR /> <BR />I think that the sponsor of the Bill will find much sympathy with the cap on pay among the wider public. I am wary that, somehow, there is always an attack on high pay and we have to look at whether it is justified, but a pay cap of £75,000 would certainly not make victims of special advisers. I think that that is a fair cap. Mr Allister referred to other jurisdictions and the salaries paid there. I do not think that there is an argument to be made that, somehow, special advisers are required to work at a higher level here than in other jurisdictions, or that their job is somehow more onerous.”
“Again, speaking to Mr McCallister's Bill yesterday, I expressed my concern about the lack of accountability for Ministers. Where there are perceived breaches of the code of conduct for Ministers, and this extends to SpAds, there is no formal mechanism for investigation. These people are paid through the public purse, and the public should, and do, rightly expect there to be transparency and accountability. Unfortunately, in the case that Mr Allister referred to, that accountability was not there. Accountability to your own party and to your own Minister is not sufficient. There must be independent investigation and adjudication, and that element of the Bill is very welcome. <BR /> <BR />In the Assembly, we cannot set the standards for society and somehow expect those standards to not apply to us.”
“I welcome the Bill. To reiterate a point I made yesterday; it is good to see private Member's Bills coming forward in the absence of legislation coming from the Executive. For a number of weeks, sessions were finishing at 3.30pm, after ministerial questions. However, due to the debate on Mr McCallister's private Member's Bill yesterday, we had a full plenary session, and I anticipate that that will be the case again today due to this business. It is to be welcomed that, whilst the Executive may be failing, the Assembly and the Back-Benchers are showing leadership and ensuring that the House continues to do the work that we are paid to do. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the Bill and, in particular, the proposal to bring SpAds under the code of conduct for civil servants.”
“That said, we can never use the current structures as an excuse for poor governance, but it is clear that those structures make it more challenging. The structures allow for the dysfunction that is displayed when one Minister takes another to court and, in that regard, they need reform. There is no excuse for the poor record of this Executive. I think that we have an opportunity to improve the vehicle through which we provide governance in Northern Ireland. In that regard, I welcome the Bill, I commend the sponsor, Mr McCallister, and I look forward to it passing through its various stages in the Assembly.”