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 35 of 76.
“<BR /> <BR />I can say that this is a transition year, and for that post-2026 funding, I would fully expect a co-designed programme, focusing on our priorities and delivered through the Executive, to achieve positive outcomes for our citizens. No less than co-design is acceptable in relation to that, and I will continue to impress that upon British Ministers.”
“The allocation to the Executive for next year in relation to the Shared Prosperity Fund is, as yet, unknown, but the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government advises that it will provide that information soon to give certainty to groups and projects that may be facing funding cliff edges at the end of 2024-25. Of course, we had continually made the case that we needed to have that certainty for those groups as soon as possible. <BR /> <BR />I understand that this a discrete pot of funding for the 2025-26 year, and a revised Shared Prosperity Fund perspective is being developed beyond that. I recognise that the £900 million represents a 40% reduction in the Shared Prosperity Fund from 2024-25, and that is, obviously, not what the groups out there or I want to hear.”
“No. As I said yesterday, when I made my statement on the Budget, I was disappointed that neither of those things was addressed in the British Chancellor's Budget, last Wednesday. That indicates the impact of bad decisions that are taken in Westminster on people here. Obviously, with the continuing challenges to the Executive's Budget, it is not possible for the Executive to mitigate every such bad decision. I would implore the Chancellor to look again at some of those issues, and, hopefully, we will see some additional work, particularly in relation to the two-child cap.”
“As I indicated yesterday, the changes to rate relief in England for retail, hospitality and leisure have led to a reduction in our Barnett consequential for this year, along with some other rate reliefs of about £80 million that were removed or changed. As the Member is aware, we still face significant issues in relation to our own Budgets, including that for this financial year and into next year. <BR /> <BR />I have recognised and do recognise the many challenges facing businesses. I recognise that the increases in National Insurance, the real living wage and national minimum wage will put additional challenges on our businesses, so I am keen to work with businesses, and I will be looking at how we can work together to address some of those challenges.”
“With the funding envelope for 2025-26 announced, it is my intention, subject to agreement, to publish a draft Budget by early December to allow for the full 12-week consultation before a final Budget is agreed by the Executive prior to the start of the new financial year.”
“— this draft Budget will be for one year only. Going forward, I intend to move to multi-year Budgets where multi-year spending review settlements allow.”
“In addition, the Executive will receive Barnett consequentials for 2025-26 of £600·9 million resource DEL and £270·8 million capital DEL, with a reduction of £4·6 million in financial transactions capital. Including the restoration package, the Executive will receive a further £668·7 million resource DEL and £91·6 million capital DEL of non-Barnett funding. <BR /> <BR />I intend to bring proposals for a draft Budget to the Executive in the near future. Unfortunately, as the Chancellor’s announcement covered only 2025-26 —”
“That level of in-year funding is unprecedented, outside of COVID, and reflects the extent of the impact on public services of 14 years of Tory austerity. While that funding is welcome and will go some way towards meeting current in-year pressures, significant challenges remain for the Executive. I will bring forward proposals on the allocation of the available resource and capital DEL for 2024-25 as part of the October monitoring round. <BR /> <BR />For 2025-26, the Treasury has confirmed £609·3 million of resource DEL Barnett consequentials allocated in the autumn Budget for 2024-25, which will be baselined in 2025-26, but that approach has not been taken for the autumn Budget capital DEL consequentials.”
“Mr Speaker, with your permission, I will answer questions 4 and 5 together. <BR /> <BR />In the autumn Budget announced on 30 October, the British Chancellor set out the Executive's final funding envelope for 2024-25 and the funding envelope for the first phase of the spending review for 2025-26. For 2024-25, the Executive will receive Barnett consequentials of £609·3 million resource departmental expenditure limit (DEL) and £30·4 million capital DEL, which is above the Westminster Main Estimates position. When added to the £308·9 million of additional Barnett consequential received from the spring Budget and Westminster Main Estimates, which was allocated in June monitoring, that makes a total of £918·2 million additional resource DEL funding in 2024-25.”
“A disposal process is undertaken in relation to any surplus buildings. That is something that I am keen to look at, review and make sure is fit for purpose, including in relation to community asset transfer. Therefore, I will be open to any conversations about how we can best utilise the buildings that we have, pass them on and ensure that we get value for money for them and that they are used for the purposes that are most needed in our communities.”
“Decisions about where Civil Service staff need to be located to perform their work duties are for Departments to consider. Individual Departments determine the number, type and grade of posts at each location.”
“Six Connect2 hubs were opened in August 2022, allowing staff to work remotely at six regional locations — Ballykelly, Ballymena, Bangor, Craigavon, Downpatrick and Omagh — as an occasional alternative to working from home or in their designated workplace. The Civil Service has also implemented a hybrid working policy, which helps to support regional balance by affording its workforce more choice around its working location, allowing a mix of workplace, home and remote working. <BR /> <BR />As a major employer, the Civil Service recognises the potential benefits of hybrid working in contributing to regional balance. Therefore, hybrid working is available, where possible, for all employment opportunities offered by the Civil Service.”
“Civil Service staff are posted in accommodation across the North in the Department of Finance's office estate and in buildings owned or leased by other Departments.”
“I have not had any direct correspondence on that issue from the Minister for Communities. Obviously, we are committed to ensuring regional balance in our office estate. I am happy to engage with the Minister or anyone else on that basis.”
“My Department is assessing its entire accommodation requirements as part of the NICS estate strategy, which includes its plans up to 2035.The implementation of the hybrid working policy in 2021 has significantly changed how the Civil Service uses its estate and has provided opportunities to progress a leaner, greener and more modern estate suited to the needs of the Civil Service in delivering today’s public services. <BR /> <BR />It is important that we have a modern, fit-for-purpose and right-sized office estate that is a welcoming environment for people to work in collaboratively. County Hall, Coleraine is currently underoccupied. A review of accommodation needs in that area will therefore be undertaken over the next 24 months. That will be carried out in consultation with the Departments that occupy the building.”
“The Economy Minister leads on engaging with those organisations on their budgetary requirements. That will inform the bids that he makes in relation to the Budget and any monitoring rounds that are undertaken. The decisions that he makes on how funding flows from his Department will be a matter for him.”
“I imagine that it will be for the Executive Office to determine the engagement with the relevant Committees.”
“The responsibilities of the post include coordinating the NICS management of potential or material regulatory divergence stemming from compliance with the Windsor framework; leading on the administration and maintenance of the Executive Office's EU law information tracking system; coordinating NICS engagement with the British Government's post-EU exit common frameworks programme; coordinating engagement with the British Government on retained EU law and their implementing legislation programme; representing NICS on those issues with British Government, Scottish Government and Welsh Government colleagues; providing high-quality and timely briefing to Ministers and officials; and leading a small team operating in a fast-paced, high-profile policy portfolio.”
“As I outlined in response to Mr Gaston, a process took place between the Executive Office and NICS HR in my Department to understand the role that the individual would be required to undertake and the responsibility of the post. As part of the process, engagement was had with trade union side on the role, prior to the competition being launched.”
“The Executive Office submitted the vacancy to NICS HR. It will have included the role and responsibilities of the post in the funding and headcount form that it is required to complete. Further discussions then took place between HR and the Executive Office to finalise and agree the post, including its roles and responsibilities, prior to the competition being advertised, and trade unions were consulted on it. Full details of the post's responsibilities and roles will be included in the HR candidate booklet.”
“My officials are conducting the recruitment exercise on behalf of the Executive Office. My departmental HR officials worked with officials from the Executive Office on the design of a competition for the post of head of regulatory divergence co-ordination at grade 7 level. Details of the role are set out in the candidate information booklet, and the post was advertised on Monday 7 October on the NICS recruitment website.”
“The board was set up on an interim basis while we considered interim terms of reference. That work is ongoing, and I hope to see progress on it shortly. The transformation funding is structured on the basis of £47 million each year over five years. There will be further opportunities for Departments to bid for that. I would like it to be an iterative process so that, after bids have been developed, people can get feedback and develop them further. That is the approach that I have encouraged the transformation board to take so that there is collaboration and cooperation with Departments to inform the best possible bids.”
“While we all know that the £235 million of funding that we have over five years for transformation will in no way tackle the magnitude of the issues at hand, it can be significant in helping to develop and implement a model of delivery that will also help to stimulate wider transformation of public services.”
“I have raised directly with the chair the fact that I would like further consideration of how the programme can be widened. The interim board has adapted its methods during the process. For example, it has placed importance on the qualitative assessment of proposals. It is undertaking a landscape review for digital proposals and is bringing in additional expertise. It has engaged directly and in person with Departments to test, probe and help strengthen proposals to ensure that the strongest possible proposals come back for consideration. <BR /> <BR />I understand that feedback from Departments has been positive and that they have enjoyed the challenge of pitching for funding in that way, with a view to getting access to much-needed additional funding to help deliver public services.”
“It is my ambition that this approach to transformation will help to drive innovative thinking in Departments to help our services become more sustainable and efficient. That is why the public-sector transformation board encouraged Departments to bring forward more novel proposals and outlined in its initial call that the risk of failure should not become a blocker to creative and innovative thinking. <BR /> <BR />I want to maximise the opportunities for the funding. I meet and correspond regularly with the chair of the interim board, Jayne Brady, on the progress of the programme. I encouraged the interim board to be flexible in its approach and to reflect back to ensure that the transformation programme can adapt for future rounds of transformation funding.”
“I will then receive advice on how the bids have progressed and take proposals to the Executive.”
“The role of the interim board, as agreed by the Executive, is to filter proposals that have been put forward by Departments. It moves forward those that it considers transformative and removes those that are not. <BR />That is the basis on which officials provide advice to Ministers on a range of issues. The final decision on which projects will be selected will be made by the Executive following a recommendation from me, as Finance Minister. The Executive will make their final decision on the basis of the shortlist of transformative proposals that is put forward. <BR /> <BR />I know that officials updated the Committee recently on the transformation board and indicated that a stage 2 process had been conducted. I understand that the transformation board will meet later this week.”
“Eleven of those have moved to a stage 2 assessment, and 18 are in a digital landscape review. At this point, a number of proposals are no longer moving forward. The board's role, clearly, is to assess whether the proposals are transformative and provide advice to me on that basis, and that is in keeping with the approach that was agreed by the Executive.”
“The Executive will decide which proposals are to be funded on the basis of my recommendations. The role of the board is to provide advice to inform those decisions, not to take the decisions. The board is working under a clear direction and criteria set and agreed by the Executive to assess and determine what proposals are, in fact, transformational. It will then, of course, be for the Executive to decide which of those go forward for funding. <BR />The head of the Civil Service, in her role as chair of the interim board, has kept me updated, and I have met her on a number of occasions. She advised me of the approach to proposals that were being taken forward, and, as the Member said, 29 of the 47 proposals were considered to be transformational and were moved forward to the next stage.”
“I have shared the draft terms of reference with my Executive colleagues for their consideration, before I engage with the British Secretary of State to agree the details, after which, of course, I will update the Finance Committee and the Assembly.”
“<BR /> <BR />The terms of reference for the interim board are a matter for negotiation with the British Government. Once agreed, the terms of reference will confirm the membership of the board going forward, and I am clear that they must respect devolved decision-making on transformation. There have, unfortunately, been delays in reaching an agreement on the terms of reference, in part because of the change in the British Government. However, my officials have repeatedly pushed to have the issue resolved, and I am pleased to report that I have now considered draft terms of reference provided by my officials, following engagement with their NIO counterparts.”
“Mr Speaker, with your permission, I will group questions 1 and 15. <BR /> <BR />As the Member will be aware, I have already established and appointed members to the interim public-sector transformation board. That followed cross-party Executive agreement to my proposal for the transformation programme and the interim board on 9 May. That was necessary in order to deploy the £235 million of ring-fenced funding contained in the Executive’s financial package. The interim public-sector transformation board, chaired by Jayne Brady, the head of the Civil Service, held its first meeting on 21 May and has made significant progress in its work since that time. The interim board is a non-statutory body whose role is to provide recommendations to me as Finance Minister on proposals that it considers to be transformative.”
“As I mentioned to Mr Gaston about the work that is being undertaken to support the negotiations on our level of need, one of the elements of that work is the really important role that farms and agri-food businesses in the North play in delivering food security not only for us but for people across Britain. That has to be part of those discussions. That work is ongoing.”
“My officials are engaging with Treasury officials to get a greater understanding of exactly who and how many farms here will be impacted and answers to all the questions that you have posed.”
“As I have responded to others, we do not have the full detail or a full understanding of that.”
“I have proposals for a more strategic approach to our rating system with the Executive at the minute, and those would ensure that our rating system is fair, progressive and equitable. It is important that our rating system supports our economic vision, creating an economic environment that supports businesses to start up, grow and thrive, thus creating jobs. It is important that we ensure that all the reliefs that are in place meet the policy objective that they were put in place to meet and that they continue to achieve that. I want to look at that strategically over the next number of years. It is for the Executive to take a position on that, and I cannot pre-empt what they will say about any particular proposed measures. It is a really important piece of work, but I require the cooperation of my Executive colleagues to take it forward.”
“The changes to the fiscal rules allow the British Government to borrow for capital investment in a different way. Essentially, we will have to wait to see what additional money they decide to invest in capital infrastructure. I am hopeful of there being additional investment. We have a little bit of additional capital funding for the next financial year: £270 million more than we anticipated. That is welcome but does not go very far to address the huge pressures in our waste water infrastructure and the need to build more social homes. We need to see the outworkings of those changes and where that investment is targeted.”
“I did not catch the start of the Member's question, but I understand that he is asking about discussions about our level of need. The interim fiscal framework that I signed off on behalf of the Executive in May codified the level of need as being 124%. That was based on the work of the Fiscal Council, which identified a range of levels of need, of which 124% was somewhere in the middle. The Executive have clearly articulated that we believe our level of need to be above 124%. As part of the final fiscal framework negotiations, we continue to pursue the evidence base needed to support the fact that there is a higher level of need than has currently been agreed. That work is ongoing, and my Department is working with other Departments to provide the additional evidence that it will use to negotiate with Treasury.”
“As the Member will be aware, Casement Park is an Executive flagship project, and it will be delivered. We need the British Government to honour their commitment to providing a funding element towards it. I will be working with my Executive colleagues in the immediate time ahead to ensure that we make progress on the delivery of Casement Park.”
“I am sure that the Department of Health is reflected in those bids, and I am happy to work with the Health Minister on addressing the Programme for Government priorities, which include tackling waiting lists.”
“In my remarks, I recognised that there is additional funding for the Executive, but I have to emphasise that the Executive will still be in a challenging position when trying to meet the pressures that they are facing this year and in future years. We still have further work to do on our funding arrangements post 2026-27. I would therefore not get overly excited about our being flush with cash. We certainly have additional funding, and it is very welcome, but there are still many challenges facing the Executive. <BR /> <BR />There is, of course, already a ring-fenced budget for transformation. We have a £235 million pot that was part of the financial package that accompanied the restoration of the Executive. I appointed an interim public-sector transformation board, which is currently assessing bids that have come in from all Departments.”
“My officials will continue to engage with Treasury and with DAERA colleagues to get a better understanding of what the change means and what options will be available to farmers who may be impacted on by it. We need to understand how the allowances that will be available compare to the typical value of farms here, which are passed down from generation to generation, what the resulting tax bills may look like and how the payment of those bills can be managed or profiled. In the first instance, however, we need to get a better understanding of what the impact is, how many farms are likely to be impacted on and who the people affected are.”
“As I said in my statement, and as has been widely reported on in the days since the Budget statement, Treasury has indicated that it will impact on only 500 agricultural estates across Britain and the North. It has argued that it will ensure that small family farms are protected. We need to see the proof of that, and we need to understand the basis for those figures. My officials have already been in contact with Treasury counterparts to try to get an understanding of them. They have not been able to provide us with specific figures for how many farms will potentially face a higher bill locally. <BR /> <BR />I have spoken to the AERA Minister about agricultural property relief as well, however, and I am clear that the changes cannot jeopardise our small family farms.”
“I am committed to working with the Agriculture Minister on that issue, and, indeed, I have already spoken to him about it.”
“In advance of the Budget statement, I had worked with the AERA Minister to press upon Treasury the need for that funding: for it to continue to be ring-fenced and for an inflationary uplift, given that there had been no inflationary uplift over the previous couple of years. Unfortunately, the amount that has been baselined does not include an inflationary uplift, in the first instance. That means that there will be further pressure on the Executive's resources. However, the baselining of those funds means that it will now be for the Executive to decide how much funding DAERA will receive. That will, obviously, be weighed against other competing priorities. All of us in the Assembly will, however, recognise the importance of our agri-food and farming sectors and the need for them to be properly supported.”
“I heard some of the commentary over the weekend in relation to GP surgeries, as well. I would be happy to work with the Health Minister on anything that he would be looking at to support them.”
“The Executive committed their funding allocation in relation to the city and growth deals when the funding from the British Government was under question. In recent weeks, I brought a proposal to the Executive to reaffirm our commitment to our proportion of that funding, and the Executive unanimously agreed that. <BR /> <BR />Clearly, there are many challenges facing the Executive in our capital budget, as with our resource budget, and so it will be for the Executive to collectively prioritise the capital projects that they wish to take forward. However, as I said, our commitment to the city and growth deals projects has been affirmed.”
“The Executive, collectively, are looking at the issue of our waste water infrastructure and how we are able to invest in it.”
“I agree with the Member. There is unanimity across the Executive on the need for additional funding for our waste water infrastructure. Obviously, the amount of additional funding that we have this year will not go a very long way towards meeting that. The Executive will have to take decisions on how to allocate the capital that they have for this year in October monitoring and into our Budget-setting process for next year. As I said in response to Dr Aiken, we will look to the Programme for Government to guide us on where we prioritise our funding. It is really important for a number of its key targets that our waste water infrastructure underpins their delivery. <BR /> <BR />I have worked and will work with Executive colleagues. I have met, specifically, the Infrastructure Minister in relation to what he is proposing to bring forward.”
“The Member raises an important point. As I mentioned in my statement, I believe those costs to be unaffordable to the Executive, particularly when you put them in the context of the projected overcommitments for this year that sit beside the funding that we are now receiving. There is no way that we can manage those costs. I have raised that at every opportunity in my engagement with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury and with the Chancellor. Clearly, as an Executive, we would want to negotiate a reserve claim to settle those issues, because, to me, that is the only way that we can take that forward.”