Caoimhe Archibald
East Londonderry · Sinn Féin · Northern Ireland
“Taken together, that points to a scheme that is operating effectively in its early stages, while, of course, remaining under review as further evidence becomes available. <BR /> <BR />I therefore commend to the Assembly the Statutory Parental Bereavement Pay (Employment and Earnings) (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2026.”
“I seek the Assembly's approval for the Statutory Parental Bereavement Pay (Employment and Earnings) (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2026. The statutory rule was made on 1 April and came into operation on 6 April. It is before the Assembly today under the confirmatory procedure.”
“The 2026 regulatory impact assessment estimates one-off employer familiarisation costs of up to £1·36 million, with wider HMRC implementation costs forecast at £1·5 million and annual systems maintenance costs of around £10,000. It may assist Members to note that early implementation has gone smoothly.”
“The amendment ensures the continued operation of those regulations and forms part of a wider package of legislative measures establishing statutory parental bereavement pay as an entitlement for bereaved parents.”
“The regulations before the Assembly today are a key part of that implementation and ensure the continued operation of the statutory parental bereavement pay framework. The policy objective is clear: to support bereaved working parents at a time of profound loss and provide a minimum standard of protection in law.”
“<BR /> <BR />The confirmatory procedure means that the regulations before the House today have come into operation before the Assembly debate has taken place and must then be approved by the Assembly within the relevant statutory period. In this case, the deadline for approval is 20 September 2026.”
The complete record
Every one of 3,774 lines we hold for Caoimhe Archibald, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 32 of 76.
“Yes is the short answer. I am deeply concerned that increasing insurance premiums are adding further financial pressure on households, businesses and communities. My officials and I have been engaging with the insurance sector and the regulatory authorities to identify what is behind the rises and what can be done to control them. It is suggested that increases are being driven by a number of factors, some of which are being experienced globally due to inflationary pressures in the industry, whilst others appear to be more specific to the market here. <BR /> <BR />I raised my concerns directly with the chief executive of the Financial Conduct Authority when we met on 20 November. I asked for stronger regulation in the North, especially of claims management companies, which are regulated in Britain but not here.”
“No Barnett consequentials are ring-fenced. It is for the Executive to decide how they spend their money, which is, obviously, an important aspect of having an Executive and Ministers locally. One of my concerns about the Barnett consequentials that we will get from the change in public-sector employers' National Insurance contributions — I am not alone in this; the Scottish Finance Minister has said it publicly too — is that they will not even cover our additional costs in respect of that. We are trying to get additional information to understand fully what the impact of the costs will be, and we continue that engagement with Treasury to communicate what the impact will be, because it will be significant.”
“That issue has been raised with me on a considerable number of occasions, as, I am sure, it has been raised with other Members. I have had correspondence from public-sector partners and community and voluntary organisations that deliver in partnership with or on behalf of government and from our business sector. <BR /> <BR />National Insurance contributions will have a significant impact. We are working through quantifying the costs relating to the public sector and those who work in partnership with us, and we have asked the third sector to share any information or evidence that it has. Officials have been engaging with Treasury, and we intend to progress that engagement in the coming days and weeks.”
“That matter has been raised with me on a number of occasions. Guidance for Departments on how to do that is already in place. One concern that I have about making regulations is that it may hinder Departments in coming forward with more innovative solutions for working together to tackle particular issues. As it stands, there is sufficient scope for Departments to work together, but I am happy to keep that under review.”
“We actively encourage the pooling of budgets as part of the budgetary process, and we did so for Budget 2025-26. I am not sure that we record every instance of that, but we encourage it. If the Member wishes to ask for further information, I would be happy for her to engage with officials on that.”
“I very much encourage that. As I said to Andy a few moments ago, it is important that, as one of the largest employers here, we ensure that we lead by example and set best practice. I actively encourage officials to look at how we can do exactly that.”
“I thank the Member for his question. I answered a question from his colleague a few minutes ago about HR and recruitment policies in respect of people with disabilities. I have had considerable engagement with my senior officials on HR and recruitment in support of people who already work for us. I actively encourage and proactively ask the Department to ensure that we remove barriers to people with disabilities in accessing employment in the Civil Service.”
“I do not want to answer on behalf of the Agriculture Minister and will try to resist that, but I am sure he would not intend to detrimentally impact farmers. The cases for particular schemes that are developed by any Department — in this case, the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs — is a matter for that Department. Only in an instance where a business case is above a certain threshold would it come to the Department of Finance for consideration.”
“First and foremost, it is for the Agriculture Minister to develop business cases for those programmes. Obviously, they would also have to go through the normal processes of ensuring value for money in departmental spend.”
“It is certainly work that the Executive will continue to progress, and I, as Finance Minister, will continue to progress the negotiations with Treasury around our future fiscal framework.”
“Again, to reflect, it was simply a case that it is money that is being accrued this year, and that is why it was included. <BR /> <BR />In relation to the broader issues that the Member has raised about rates and fiscal powers, the fiscal powers piece, in particular, is part of the discussions around our future fiscal framework. In relation to issues of income generation, the Member is aware that it is included in the Budget sustainability plan and that the Executive have committed to regular strategic consideration of our income generation measures. The Member will also appreciate that we are working to tight time frames in the development of our Budget for 2025-26, so it was not possible to include that consideration in time for that.”
“I am not sure that I would characterise it as "surreal". The Member will understand that the annex to the Budget suitability plan — we discussed it at length in Committee last week — was a requirement under the financial package for raising the £113 million of revenue over two years. Any revenue that has been raised this year or is projected to be raised next year is included in that annex. That is why it is reflected.”
“I raised the issue with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury in person, as well as in writing. Off the top of my head, I cannot recall the response, but I am happy to correspond with the Member.”
“Are you referring to my engagement with the Treasury?”
“Following the Chancellor's Budget, the AERA Minister wrote to me, setting out his concerns and requesting that the resource departmental expenditure limit (DEL) that was previously earmarked by Treasury be treated as Executive earmarked funding. I appreciate the uncertainty that the Budget announcement created, and I am keen to see appropriate funding be made available to the farming and fisheries communities. As I said to the Member who asked the previous question, I am therefore supportive of the funding for agriculture and fisheries that had previously been earmarked by the British Government being similarly earmarked by the Executive in the 2025-26 Budget. Ultimately, that will be a decision for Executive colleagues, however.”
“I met the AERA Minister in advance of the Budget announcement to discuss the importance of ensuring that adequate agriculture support funding is made available to farmers and land managers in the North. I also discussed the issue with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury and wrote to him to request clarity on the future of the ring-fenced agriculture support funding, as well as to request that consideration be given to uplifting any allocation for inflation. Unfortunately, an uplift was not included in the Budget settlement that the British Chancellor announced, and the agriculture support funding is no longer earmarked by Treasury.”
“I thank the Member for her question. In short, yes. I appreciate the uncertainty that the Chancellor's decision to remove the ring-fenced element of that important funding has created. It is also disappointing that the amount included in the Executive's baseline did not include an inflationary uplift. I am keen to see appropriate funding be made available to the farming and fisheries communities. I am therefore very supportive of ring-fencing that agriculture funding, and I will be proposing that when presenting a draft Budget for 2025-26 to the Executive. Ultimately, however, it will be a decision for the Executive as a whole to take.”
“The British Chancellor announced the Executive's funding envelope for 2025-26 in the autumn Budget on 30 October. The settlement for future years will be announced in spring 2025. I am engaging with Executive colleagues on our approach to the 2025-26 Budget and have been working at pace to develop proposals. It is my intention, subject to Executive agreement, to publish a draft Budget early this month to allow time for a full public consultation to be held before a final Budget is agreed by the Executive prior to the start of the new financial year.”
“As an Executive, we are in some respects a Treasury conduit for making representations and ensuring that regulations that are being implemented by it and the FCA are fit for purpose for our people and our communities. That is something that I am committed to trying to achieve.”
“I know that the Member will be aware that we have very limited banking powers and that the majority of such powers are reserved. That is one of the reasons that we hosted the round table: to get an understanding of the issues. I have received lots of correspondence and representations from Members about access to cash, particularly in rural areas, and we have strongly conveyed that message to the FCA and, through my officials, to the British Treasury. The round table offered an opportunity for those issues to be aired. It was good to have the chief executive of the FCA in attendance this time to hear specifically about the local issues. He found it very useful, and he reflected that.”
“I thank the Member for her question; I was not aware that a banking hub was opening in Newcastle this week. The issue of 24-hour access to cash was raised as part of the discussion and was put forward very strongly by some of the representatives in attendance, including those from the community and voluntary sector. It is fair to say that the new rules that have been put in place by the FCA only came into effect in September, so there has not been a lot of time to assess their effectiveness yet. As I have set out already, it is really important that people understand the ability that they have now to ask for assessments around access to cash and 24-hour access to cash and to ensure that that is available for communities. If the Member wants to write to me, I will be happy to get officials to provide some additional information on that.”
“The Treasury will also be asked how non-profit businesses such as charities can be treated fairly under its regulatory regime. That is particularly important when local bank branches close and understanding of different business models for the voluntary and community sector is lost.”
“A range of issues will be raised in the summary report to which we will ask the Treasury to formally respond. That includes the need to ensure that local issues are reflected in its new national financial inclusion strategy, given our relatively higher levels of vulnerability here. As the new access-to-cash rules do not cover financial advice, I am also keen to understand its plan in that regard to ensure that communities can still receive that vital service, which is so important for our most vulnerable people. Communities here also need to be made aware of the new rules and how they can submit assessment requests, especially where access to cash is already limited. I am keen to understand what the Treasury is doing to ensure that these new rules are effectively communicated here in the North.”
“I also intend to visit one of the local banking hubs early in the new year to better understand the services that they offer, especially for the most vulnerable people in society. I will continue to engage with stakeholders, including by hosting an annual banking round table, to ensure that any local issues are brought to the sector and relevant authorities in Britain.”
“I thank the Member. I hosted a banking round table on 20 November with a wide range of representatives from the banking industry, the Financial Services Union, credit unions, the Post Office, business bodies and the community and voluntary sector. That provided an important platform to discuss key concerns and issues around access to cash and local banking services. I also invited the chief executive of the Financial Conduct Authority to the round table to hear the views of local stakeholders first-hand and to update attendees on the new rules that came into effect in September in relation to access to cash. My officials will monitor the impact of the new rules locally and will send a summary report setting out the key issues identified at the round table to the British Treasury and the regulatory authorities for a formal response.”
“Yes. I thank the Member for his important question. I have discussed with officials at the highest level the issue of HR and recruitment and support for our existing staff. It is really important that the Civil Service, as one of the biggest employers in the North, leads the way and sets an example on issues including inclusion and accessibility for people with disabilities. I have actively encouraged that, and we are looking at our policies on how we support current workers and also at removing the barriers to employment. I am happy for my officials to write to the Member about some of the work that is being done to set that out for him.”
“I thank the Member for his question. I will push back a little bit on his characterisation of how the posts are filled. Proper process is followed. The Civil Service continues to work to reduce the number of temporary promotions by filling vacancies, just as he said, where possible, on a permanent basis through external recruitment competitions. As I mentioned in my opening answer, recent budget pressures have resulted in recruitment activity being curtailed, and that has had an impact on the use of temporary promotions.”
“I thank the Member for his question. As I set out in my original answer, there is policy in place that temporary promotions are guided by, and an individual's suitability will be assessed under that policy in reference to the selection criteria for temporary promotion. In all circumstances, if an individual is selected, they must be deemed fit for promotion by their line manager. The career opportunities and promotion policy, under which temporary promotions fall, is being reviewed as part of a wider review of recruitment policies, but I must say that temporary promotions are still likely to be required as a temporary staffing solution in certain situations.”
“Some staff may have been temporarily promoted more than once during that time period. As of the end of October 2024, the majority of temporary promotions, which is 76%, in the Civil Service were due to vacant posts and/or resulting backfill. The Civil Service continues to work to reduce the number of temporary promotions by filling vacancies, where possible, on a permanent basis through external recruitment competitions. Budget pressures have resulted in recruitment activity for the Civil Service being curtailed, which has impacted on the use of temporary promotions.”
“With the Speaker's permission, I will answer questions 5 and 10 together. <BR /> <BR />The career opportunities and promotion policy sets out the arrangements for temporary promotions in the Civil Service, including the circumstances in which they may be considered, eligibility requirements and the selection processes. Temporary promotions are designed primarily to meet business needs and can be required for several different reasons, such as covering sick absence or maternity leave; for special exercises that are time-bound projects; and to temporarily fill substantive posts that are vacant for reasons such as resignation and promotion. <BR /> <BR />Based on information from our HR services provider, over the past 10 years, the average duration of temporary promotion was 317 calendar days.”
“I am not over the detail of why the contract was not taken forward between the EA and Fujitsu. As the Member will be aware, public procurement here is regulated through the UK's Public Contracts Regulations 2015. My Department conducted a robust and vigorous procurement process that resulted in Fujitsu being the preferred bidder to deliver our new land registration IT solution.”
“The Department is currently finalising contract terms with Fujitsu for the provision of the new IT land registration solution, which will transform Land Registry's services. The new IT solution will implement a range of new services via digital channels, and customers will be able to submit applications online. Many manual processes will be automated, which will result in an improved quality of service, increased workforce productivity and value for money. It is anticipated that the contract will be signed in January 2025, with the implementation phase of the new solution commencing in April 2025.”
“The Member might be aware of the NI Investment Fund, which uses FTC on behalf of the Executive to support private-sector investment. One of the themes under which developers can access that funding is decarbonisation, which is one in respect of which we would encourage more interest from private developers, because there has been limited interest in it to date. We are keen to encourage more projects to be taken forward under that banner. If the Member wants to engage further with officials, I would be happy for him to do so.”
“The Committee has received or will receive correspondence giving further detail about the National Wealth Fund and GB Energy. I had not specifically asked my officials to engage with Andy Burnham, but, as you will appreciate, they have regular engagement with Treasury to understand the outworkings of those funds and any plans that Treasury has to utilise the funds to positively impact on here as well.”
“I will correct the point: we do not hand the money back; as I said in the previous answer, it is used to offset future liabilities. It is not, obviously, our preferred option for using the money, and we would much prefer it if Departments could identify projects. As I have said, I have actively encouraged bids in all my engagements with Ministers, and that has resulted in a significant uplift in the bids that have been made this year. The Member has made particular suggestions of his own and has had correspondence from my Department about those. I am happy to proactively engage with Ministers to identify ways to better utilise FTC. It is an important revenue stream that has supported development in line with the principles set out by the Executive.”
“I am pleased that, following our continued engagement, the level of FTC bids by Departments for Budget 2025-26 is up on previous years; however, we must still consider all feasible options to use the funding most effectively.”
“Financial transactions capital can be used only to provide loans to or equity investment in the private sector. The funding is ring-fenced for that purpose and cannot be used for anything else. It is therefore more challenging for Departments to identify suitable projects that advance the Executive’s policy aspirations and fulfil the criteria of a loan or equity investment. <BR /> <BR />I have consistently encouraged Departments to consider how they can use the funding. My Department has agreed with Treasury that any FTC underspends not carried forward under the Budget exchange scheme may be used to offset the required repayment of 80% of FTC allocations, thereby using that funding to reduce future liabilities.”
“I did not catch the first part of the Member's question, but I think that I got the gist of it. As I outlined to Mr Durkan, rating relief is provided to businesses on the basis of a statutory framework. Some of those issues are included in our social value procurement framework for other government services.”
“That is determined by established case law and a long-standing statutory framework that supports the stability of our tax base, which is used to fund central and local government services. The Member will appreciate that it is important to have that statutory framework and consider every case against it, because there are a lot of demands on LPS to make support available to businesses in difficult circumstances. There has to be that framework within which the issue is considered.”
“I know that the Member has raised that issue with me previously. I am sympathetic to businesses that are being impacted by works that are beyond their control. The Member is aware that rate relief is available through the hardship scheme for businesses that suffer from impacts that are beyond their control. The award of further relief for specific purposes would mean less money to spend on public services. As has been mentioned, rates are our only revenue generator. They fund our public services, so the choice would be to have less money to give out or to put up rates bills for other homes and businesses. <BR /> <BR />Under the rating and valuation system, every case is assessed by LPS on its merits, by considering the impact of the work on the net annual value (NAV) of the property.”
“I am not alone in holding the view that such important matters should be discussed collectively by the Executive, as evidenced by the cross-party letter that asked for my paper to be tabled. It is important to have Executive discussion, if not agreement, on the general direction of policy prior to engaging in further supplementary consultation.”
“I first circulated my proposals for consideration by the Executive on 10 October. The proposals included details on a potential consultation on certain rating policy measures. I subsequently asked that my paper be considered at four meetings of the Executive: on 17 October, 7 November, 11 November and 21 November. I also wrote to colleagues to outline the potential implications that not tabling the paper may have for the implementation of any changes in April 2025. <BR /> <BR />It is regrettable that, despite having cross-party support — from my party colleagues and colleagues from the Alliance and the UUP — the paper has not been tabled for discussion at the Executive.”
“As I have said on a number of occasions, I have brought forward proposals to the Executive on my approach to taking a more strategic look at the rating system in the short, medium and longer term. I hope to communicate to Members on that in more detail in the near future.”
“I am always willing to listen to business organisations' or other Members' suggestions in respect of that.”
“I have had significant engagement with businesses, as the Member will appreciate. I understand that they face a range of issues, a lot of which are outwith our control and are because of decisions that have been made by the British Government as recently as the Budget statement. Like, I am sure, other Members, I have had significant correspondence on some of those issues. The fact remains that 70% of non-domestic ratepayers here receive some form of support, and our finances for providing additional support are limited. <BR /> <BR />I will always commit to engaging with the sector in order to understand the challenges that it faces and to see whether, as an Executive, we can take actions to support it. Of course, the rating system may not be the most appropriate approach to providing that support.”
“There needs to be a clear economic rationale for additional support. The rating system is our sole devolved tax lever and is there to generate income for the Executive and councils. The Member will be aware of the wider funding challenges being faced across Executive Departments. However, I plan to meet representatives of the sector along with other sectors in the coming days to discuss the issues that they face and how we can work together.”
“Sixty-five per cent of the hospitality sector as a whole is already in receipt of support via the small business rate relief scheme. While calls for ever-increasing rate support are prominent, the Member will appreciate that similarly vocal views on how that additional support should be funded are harder to solicit. As the Member will know, England is phasing out that measure, and the reduction in retail, hospitality and leisure rate relief from 75% to 40% means that the cost of support is lower in 2025-26. The Executive have therefore received a reduction of £58·2 million in 2025-26 in relation to business rates. <BR /> <BR />Every pound that we, as an Executive, spend on rate relief means reduced revenue for vital public services or higher rates bills for homes and businesses.”
“In any event, it is a much more difficult and protracted process than tabling a motion for debate in the Assembly. <BR /> <BR />Although the council's assessment seems to be that it would be for the Communities Minister and the council to take forward that complex work, I am of course willing to do whatever I can, through my ministerial portfolio or as a member of the Executive, to facilitate and assist that consideration. We all want our town centres and shopping areas to thrive. As I have highlighted throughout my response, addressing the issue of long-term derelict properties is multifaceted, requires partnership working from all involved and must be done in consultation and agreement with local communities. I am happy to play my part in conjunction with Executive and other colleagues to take forward that work.”
“As I highlighted in my earlier comments, I suspect that the party that tabled the motion is somewhat misguided in its attempts to lay responsibility for the Tribeca situation on me, as Finance Minister. I understand and support the rating point that was made on revenue potential, but the rating system serves to assess and bill the built environment that is there, not that which is intended. Like the rest of the Executive, I am eager to see regeneration in the area, not least because of the anticipated revenue from rates. Since day 1 as Minister, I have spoken about how I want to realise tax-based growth here for that very reason. The vesting action that the Member advocates is for the council and the Department for Communities to take, but it would no doubt prove a difficult matter and one of cross-cutting legal complexity.”
“section 97(1) of the Local Government Act 1972,”