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 40 of 76.
“I have been consistent in highlighting the underinvestment in our public services and the fact that, with the new Government in place, after 14 years of austerity and chaos under the previous Tory Government, we need a change of approach. We need the prioritisation of investment in public services and in ordinary workers and families. Those who have the broadest shoulders — those who can afford the most — should pay the most. I have consistently put that message across to the British Government, and I did so to the Chancellor last week.”
“I agree with the Member's assessment of the Shared Prosperity Fund: it was not designed with the North in mind and certainly did not take on board the criticism or feedback that was provided on its structure, one of the most important aspects of which was that there was no section 75 consideration in the delivery of funds. We have continuously made the representation that there needs to be a more joined-up approach. We have consistently said that we should have control of the delivery of the funding streams, because we could then align them with our priorities and ensure that they fit with other Executive priorities and that we do not duplicate funding streams. We have made and I will continue to make that point. As I mentioned to Connie, I will meet the Minister responsible tomorrow.”
“The Member will be aware from his role in the Finance Committee that we do regular engagement through the Fiscal Council with the Scottish and Welsh Finance Ministers. Just last week, I had a conversation with the Scottish Finance Minister around the financial challenges facing us collectively at the minute. We have collaborated in the past and, I am sure, will collaborate again and have joint positions and jointly make the case on the replacement of EU funds and the post-2025 funding. It is really important that, where we can have a shared position — often we come from a similar perspective — we make those joint representations.”
“Collaboration is absolutely key to ensuring that any funding we get and the delivery of programmes with that funding aligns with our local priorities, learns the lessons of previous funding programmes, does not duplicate anything that we are already doing or any existing provision and ensures best value for money. In my view, the best way to do that is meaningful collaboration with the people who are delivering the programmes: the community and voluntary sector and other partners, including local government. Also, in preparation for the successor fund, my Department has already begun working on a cross-departmental basis and has been engaging with the community and voluntary sector to understand the lessons from the Shared Prosperity Fund and to be prepared for moving forward.”
“From memory, the European regional development fund (ERDF) and the European social fund (ESF) jointly provided the Executive with about £65 million per year. In comparison with that, the Shared Prosperity Fund provides an annual average of about £35 million. That leaves a real funding gap of about £30 million annually, and that is before inflation or anything else is taken into account. In my meetings with the British Government, as in all the representation that we have made previously, we will seek full replacement of funding that we used to get from EU sources, including an inflationary increase.”
“I will use this opportunity to once again press for urgent clarity on future funding, asking that sufficient funding is provided and that there is a meaningful decision-making role for the Executive.”
“The future of the Shared Prosperity Fund beyond March 2025 is of immediate concern and is something that I have been pressing the British Government for progress on. I wrote to Angela Rayner MP as soon as she was appointed Secretary of State, highlighting the lack of information on a successor programme and the impact that this uncertainty is having on our community and voluntary sector. I asked that she deliver on the Labour Party manifesto commitment for greater devolved decision-making. I have also written to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury to raise my concerns on this issue. <BR /> <BR />Tomorrow, I will be meeting Minister Alex Norris, who is responsible for future funding in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government.”
“I do not think that that is how you should do business, and I would expect better. <BR /> <BR />I am continuing to press that all those deals go ahead as planned and that the pause on the funding commitment is lifted.”
“I thank the Member for his question and for his support in this matter. As I set out, I laid out our shock at the news that we had received just the day before; the considerable time, effort and commitment that had been put in by deal partners right across the North; and the consequences that such a decision would have and how negatively it would be received. <BR /> <BR />I cannot answer as to whether she had previously been aware. I assume that she was, because we had, obviously, engaged at official level in advance of travelling to London, but she advised that I should engage with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, which I did immediately. He would have had an email in his inbox before I arrived back to Belfast. I had, as I said, requested an urgent call, and I have not yet had that call, which is really disappointing.”
“It is crucial that all deals continue as planned. <BR /> <BR />I will continue to impress upon the Chief Secretary to the Treasury that the British Government must honour their commitments and pledges made to the city and growth deals, which will be transformative for our cities, towns and regions, bringing hope and prosperity right across the North for our citizens, communities, businesses and future generations.”
“The lack of information to and formal communication with Departments and deal partners is totally unacceptable, and it is not how I would expect people to do business. If the British Government are serious about resetting relationships, they must seriously reflect on this shambolic episode and put an end to this appalling behaviour. It is completely unfair that Causeway Coast and Glens and Mid South West growth deals would have to wait until the spending review for clarity. <BR /> <BR />The British Government must immediately lift the pause on the Causeway Coast and Glens and Mid South West growth deals. It is time for them to have a reset on their reset. Those city and growth deals will be game changers for our cities and towns and a catalyst to boost economic development and create good jobs.”
“<BR /> <BR />While some level of common sense has prevailed, we are now faced with the incomprehensible decision to treat the deals differently. I am clear that there can be no disparity of approach. The approach that has been taken could undermine the momentum and confidence of deal partners in the Causeway Coast and Glens and Mid South West growth deals, who have put so much time and effort into developing the many projects. I spoke to the chief executives of those councils this morning and assured them that I continue to press for the immediate reversal of the pause in the funding commitments to those deals. <BR /> <BR />I am very frustrated and angry about the British Government's handling of the matter.”
“That reprehensible decision came less than a week before the scheduled signing of the Derry City and Strabane deal. The Derry City and Strabane deal-signing event was called off shortly afterwards. Thankfully, common sense prevailed, with the British Government coming to the right decision late on Saturday evening, which has now enabled the Derry City and Strabane District Council deal-signing to go ahead as planned on Wednesday. From speaking with the council's chief executive on Saturday night, I know that the reinstatement of the deal signing has come as a huge relief to the council and deal partners, who have invested significant time and effort in preparing for that important milestone, which will allow funding to begin to flow to the cutting-edge projects and bring real change to the region.”
“The Chancellor advised that I should engage with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury on the matter. I wrote to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury that evening to ask for an urgent call, the courtesy of which has still not been extended to me. I had hoped that the British Government would provide space for proper political engagement to get a positive outcome and a commitment to proceed with city and growth deals, honouring the pledges that have been made for some years. Those pledges have included official announcements, financial profiling and British Government Ministers signing different deal documentation for three of the four deals so far — what are known as "heads of terms" and deal signing. <BR /> <BR />On Friday afternoon, the NIO informed representatives from the four deals of the decision to pause the funding commitments.”
“I immediately informed my Executive colleagues and took action to raise the matter with the British Government. During a meeting with the Chancellor in London on Thursday, the First Minister, the deputy First Minister and I outlined our shock and laid out the dire consequences that such a decision would have, urging a reconsideration. We conveyed the considerable time, effort, commitment and enthusiasm that have gone into the deals for years and advised that plans and contracts have already been put in place at significant cost to councils, project promoters, the Civil Service and Whitehall Departments. <BR /> <BR />We also made clear that such a short-sighted decision could risk private-sector confidence in the investment, the securing of which has been a key objective of the deals.”
“Councils and deal partners then added significant funding to the overall investment, which is seen as a catalyst for local economic growth. <BR /> <BR />Over 60 projects are being developed that will be delivered across the four deals, covering every council area. That substantial capital investment and the numerous projects that are in development will be truly transformative for local regions and the North as a whole. The projects range from cutting-edge innovation centres and research facilities to digital transformation projects alongside developments in local infrastructure, exciting tourism offerings and the regeneration of local cities and towns. <BR /> <BR />We became aware of the British Government's decision to pause their funding commitments until the spending review only when officials were informed on Wednesday.”
“While I welcome that move, the pause must be lifted immediately on the Causeway Coast and Glens growth deal and the Mid South West growth deal. <BR /> <BR />As Members will be aware, there are four city and growth deals: the Belfast region city deal; the Derry City and Strabane District Council city deal; the Causeway Coast and Glens growth deal; and the Mid South West growth deal. The growth deals initiative is a package of capital investment of some £1·7 billion from the Executive, the British Government, councils and deal partners. The British Government pledged £617 million for four deals across the North on the basis that the Executive would match fund that investment. We have done that and have added another £100 million to the pot, making it a £717 million contribution.”
“Thank you for the opportunity to provide the Chamber with an update on the deplorable decision by the British Government to pause their funding commitments to the city and growth deals until the spending review. Members will have heard by now that, on Saturday evening, the Secretary of State, Hilary Benn, confirmed that the signing of the Derry City and Strabane District Council city deal will go ahead. I am aware, and thankful, that other Members had been making representations to reverse the previous ill-considered move, and I am glad to confirm that the deal-signing event is back on and will take place this Wednesday morning in the Guildhall. The Secretary of State also confirmed, late last night, that, following communication with Treasury, nothing has changed on the status of the Belfast region city deal.”
“I plan to bring a refreshed public procurement policy statement to the Executive that will include a requirement for public bodies to report on their prompt payment performance. That additional transparency will improve accountability and maintain the appropriate level of scrutiny and focus on this important matter. <BR /> <BR />In my role as Finance Minister, I will continue to advocate for the prompt payment of our small and medium-sized enterprises for the goods and services that they provide and for central government to lead by example.”
“The data supporting that does not relate exclusively to the public sector, and I urge all private-sector businesses to also promptly pay their suppliers, particularly those that are in their supply chains. I suggest that resources be concentrated on improving the current 10-day target, with the aim of moving to a five-day target when that has been achieved, depending on transaction and resource implications. <BR /> <BR />I also call on all sectors, public and private, to recognise the challenges that businesses face and the importance of cash flow to them and their employees and to immediately address any shortfall in the prompt payment to their suppliers. I strongly believe that payment performance in the public sector will improve only if we strengthen the monitoring of prompt payment targets.”
“In addition, my officials have been engaging with the Federation of Small Businesses to share learning and discuss prompt payment performance and reporting. I will meet the federation tomorrow, as Mr Honeyford mentioned, to discuss how best we drive up performance and improve reporting across the public sector. <BR /> <BR />It is important that there is transparency around prompt payment performance and reporting on the reasons for delay. The motion references:”
“That strong record of prompt payment has been maintained throughout this year, and I am committed to ensuring that central government leads by example and continues to drive up performance. <BR /> <BR />Unfortunately, the level of performance across the public sector varies greatly, with a number of areas requiring immediate attention to improve their performance. I strongly urge all public- and private-sector organisations to adhere to that best practice and, where their performance falls short, to take immediate action to make the necessary improvements. <BR /> <BR />I am meeting the local government partnership panel next week and have already requested that prompt payment performance be a key matter for discussion.”
“I add that, while the Executive have no authority over councils, I encourage the Minister for Communities to work with council networks to improve the payment practices in that area, given the number of microbusinesses that provide goods and services to councils. <BR /> <BR />Where my Department's responsibilities are concerned, the Finance Shared Services provide transactional processing and reporting, including making payments to suppliers on behalf of central government. In the previous financial year, the Finance Shared Services processed over 807,000 payments totalling approximately £4 billion. During that year, 91% of valid invoices were paid within 10 days of receipt and 97% of valid invoices were paid within 30 days.”
“I am pleased to confirm that the current public contract regulations, which apply to all public bodies here, including councils, already require that payments to contractors be made no later than 30 days from receipt of a valid undisputed invoice. Those regulations also require contractors to pay their subcontractors within 30 days and that those requirements be in all further subcontracts in the supply chain. The new procurement regulations, which are due to come into force shortly, also incorporate those requirements. <BR /> <BR />The Executive have a prompt payment target whereby Departments aim to pay valid and undisputed invoices within 10 days of receipt and no later than 30 days. I encourage all Ministers to require their non-departmental public bodies to implement that policy.”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak to the motion as it shines a light on an incredibly important matter. Small and microbusinesses, as many Members have reflected, are the heart of our local economy. It is, therefore, incumbent on all of us to do what we can to support those businesses. I also fully recognise the difficulties that are caused by delays in promptly paying suppliers, particularly for small businesses and microbusinesses that play an important part in supporting the local economy. Many small businesses, as has been reflected, have a limited cash flow, and undue delays in paying invoices can have a devastating impact on the survival of those businesses and their employees.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.”
“In the interim, however, we must face up to the challenges, strive to live within our budgets and avoid a scenario in 2025-26 of having to pay back any overspend from this year along with a further £559 million from previous years. We must do that by taking the responsible decisions that are needed in order to achieve financial balance this year. <BR /> <BR />I call on Members to support Ministers and to work in partnership with us to navigate the challenges ahead, recognising that we cannot do everything that we would want to do. It will not be easy, but it is the right thing to do to help us deliver change in the longer term.”
“<BR /> <BR />Finally, the motion calls on the British Government to depart from their austerity policy and implement different fiscal rules or different taxation systems. I absolutely agree with the wider call to change the approach to austerity and to implement more progressive taxation systems. The new British Government have choices to make about how they spend their money and how they raise their money and who will shoulder the burden. Those who can afford most should pay most. Investing in public services and supporting ordinary workers and families should be the priorities. My Department and I will continue to engage with the Treasury and the British Government on securing a final fiscal framework that provides certainty on finances in the longer term.”
“I confirm to the leader of the Opposition that it is also my intention to align with the spending review announced by the British Government, one year in October and then in spring in the following two years. <BR /> <BR />The publication of the sustainability plan is a stepping stone to the Executive's larger ambition of securing and maintaining sustainable Budgets. It is the first stage in a process that will set the Executive's finances on a more stable trajectory. The path to sustainable finances is not straightforward and will require decisions that will impact on the public services that the Executive deliver. With some six months of the current financial year already having passed, achieving fiscal balance in 2024-25 will prove challenging, but, as I have outlined, not delivering a balanced Budget is simply not an option.”
“I have a lot to get through, sorry. <BR /> <BR />We will examine those options as part of the considerations for our final fiscal framework. That will be detailed work, and it will take time to deliver. <BR /> <BR />Work is also ongoing on developing the Budget sustainability plan. As Treasury was unable to engage formally with us during the pre-election period and given the need to secure formal Executive agreement for the plan, I have agreed a short extension with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury. There is an inherent challenge in presenting a Budget sustainability plan with the current level of overcommitment that I have outlined, but we must strive to bridge the gap. I intend to publish the plan at the end of September, subject, of course, to securing Executive agreement in the next couple of weeks.”
“Further work is also being progressed by the new fiscal team established in my Department on how we can enhance our financial management tools, such as increasing our level of borrowing and taking greater control of fiscal levers through additional fiscal devolution.”
“<BR /> <BR />I believe that spending on public services by the British Government is too low and that there are unique characteristics that may push our overall level of need above 124%. Members should also recognise the Fiscal Council's assertion that 124% is a reasonable estimate and that socio-economic data would not necessarily support an increase in the need calculation. However, I am focusing on ensuring that we have the evidence base in place to negotiate for a higher needs-based factor in future. My officials are working to build on the robust, independent evidence base that we already have for our level of relative need, thanks to the Fiscal Council. That work includes working with independent experts and other Departments.”
“It is already making a difference, with an additional £60 million being provided so far this year, and it will result in further additional funding for the Executive this year and in the years to come. Importantly, it recognises that, until budgets are confirmed at the spending review, the Executive will continue to plan on the assumption that they will be funded at or above the 124% level of relative need in future financial years. It also includes a firm commitment from the British Government to review the Executive's funding, including concerns about the 2026-27 funding, as well as considering a review of our level of need if multiple independent and credible sources provide evidence that our relative need is different from 124%.”
“We are committed to delivering positive change and playing our part in making our finances sustainable. We will look at all options to deliver efficiencies, generate revenue, enhance borrowing powers and examine fiscal devolution. Financial sustainability will require collaborative working as well as innovation and efficiency in the delivery of services. <BR /> <BR />I agree that, in the longer term, we must seek a funding arrangement that provides appropriate levels of funding and fiscal responsibility. I was pleased to sign an interim fiscal framework on behalf of the Executive in May this year, which was an early and significant milestone as we work towards putting our finances on a more sustainable footing.”
“Collectively, we must ensure that a balanced Budget is delivered. I am meeting individual Ministers to discuss the budgetary challenges, and collectively, as an Executive, we will need to chart a way forward. I will continue to make the case to the British Government that more funding is needed for public services to support our workers, families and businesses and will raise that at a meeting with the Chancellor later this week. <BR /> <BR />Difficult times require courageous leadership. Last week, the Executive agreed the draft Programme for Government (PFG), demonstrating our determination to deliver for people. The draft PFG sets out our immediate priorities and will guide where we invest our funding. One of its priorities is the reform and transformation of our public services.”
“I have a lot to get through. <BR /> <BR />Not doing so would have grave consequences for future funding. Any overspend would come off next year's Budget. Even more concerningly, the Treasury has been explicit that not living within budget would result in the Executive having to repay the £559 million that the Treasury had agreed to write off, making an already difficult financial situation even worse. <BR /> <BR />Along with my Executive colleagues, I will continue to make the case for adequate funding of our public services, but I remain hugely concerned that the ramifications of not living within budget this year would represent a potentially disastrous outcome for the Executive and our public services. At the Executive meeting last week, I outlined to my ministerial colleagues the need for urgent action to be taken.”
“While that will fall short of the overcommitment that Departments are currently reporting, it will go a significant way towards addressing the pressures. However, all Ministers will have to play their part by living within their budget once the funding is provided.”
“I have been clear with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury that our public-sector workers are critical to service delivery and that it is crucial that the Executive have sufficient funds available to enable them to meet the cost of public-sector pay awards. <BR /> <BR />We know that there will be further Barnett consequentials this year because of allocations in England, but we will only get full certainty on our share towards the end of the year. I am not willing to delay until then and see services deteriorate further while we wait, so I will bring proposals to the Executive to increase departmental budgets by our latest assessment of what our Barnett share will be for the rest of the year. It is expected that that will allow the allocation of around £500 million.”
“I commissioned an urgent exercise over the summer to get a clear picture of the current financial position, and, unfortunately, despite the efforts of many Ministers to manage their budgets, it is clear that it is extremely challenging. I have said many times that the demands on our finances far outstrip the funding available. Departments are currently reporting £767 million of pressures above their budget. The greatest pressures are in Health, Education and Justice, which together account for almost 90% of the total pressure. Some 55% of the total pressure comes from public-sector pay, based upon pay body recommendations.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Executive are committed to speaking with one voice and will continue to make the case for additional funding for public services, but the reality is, with the Prime Minister and Chancellor at pains to warn of a painful Budget coming in October, there is little hope of additional funding being provided outside of Barnett consequentials, and the Barnett formula will not deliver the additional funding that we need. It is also clear that the previous Government's failure to raise budgets to take account of inflation has greatly contributed to the pressure on our public services. <BR /> <BR />Members will be well familiar with Ministers speaking to the difficulties of their budgets.”
“I welcome the opportunity to provide an update to the Assembly on our budgetary outlook. <BR /> <BR />It is no secret that the Executive are facing significant budgetary challenges. Since taking up office, I have been consistently clear about the scale of those challenges and also consistent in calling out the underfunding of our public services and the damage caused by 14 years of austerity under the Tories. I have made the case to the new British Government, as I did to the previous Government, that we need to see a change of approach that prioritises investment in public services and public-sector workers.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-Leas-Cheann Comhairle.”
“It will require significant work from us once we have an understanding of what the Chancellor will announce. I and my Department stand ready to lead on that work and to collaboratively design, develop and deliver a meaningful programme of funding. I hope that our community and voluntary sector will soon have the certainty that it so urgently needs and deserves. Therefore, I support the motion.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is essential that any plans associated with the Shared Prosperity Fund are set out, at the latest, in the Chancellor's Budget at the end of October. To achieve that, I intend to raise concerns about successor funding directly with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, as well as with Minister Norris. Failure to provide that clarity would create yet another avoidable cliff edge for the sector. That would lead to protective notices being issued, result in a loss of capacity and impact the continuing viability of our vital community and voluntary sector. <BR /> <BR />As the motion rightly says, certainty is now required. I will continue to press for urgent clarity and a meaningful devolved role in decision-making and delivery.”
“<BR /> <BR />I wrote to Angela Rayner, on her appointment as Secretary of State, about this matter. In particular, I pressed for urgent clarity and for her to make good on the manifesto commitment to greater devolved decision-making. I will also meet Minister Norris, who has responsibility for future funding in Angela Rayner's team, next week on 17 September. I intend to press the vital importance of sufficient funding being provided; that it is provided at the right time to prevent another funding cliff edge through appropriate simplified local structures; and that it is provided in a way that minimises bureaucracy, that is aligned to our Programme for Government, that allows a meaningful decision-making role for our Executive in line with the Labour manifesto commitment and that respects local needs and differences.”
“With the Shared Prosperity Fund due to close at the end of this financial year and a new Government in London, there is an opportunity to do something better. The new Government made a manifesto commitment to restore control over the funds to devolved Governments. That is a welcome position, and I look forward to working with the Labour Government, Executive colleagues, the Assembly and our wider community on how that will operate in practice. The position on the replacement adopted by the previous Executive remains valuable. However, my officials are working with all the other Executive Departments to draft a document outlining the North's requirements from future funds. That will be brought to the Executive for consideration in the near future.”
“At times, its delivery here has lacked an understanding of the North, as it has sought to apply an English template to a place with a different structure of government and different needs. It was simply inadequate, unsuitable and late, and, frankly, it has scarred our community and voluntary sector.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Shared Prosperity Fund operates with a reduced scope, creating gaps in provision. It is operated directly from Whitehall according to priorities set by the British Government, with no decision-making role for our Executive, nor was it subjected to our section 75 equality scrutiny.”
“That called for a full replacement of the funding that we derived from EU sources, local delivery of funding using existing structures and full compliance with our unique system of government, including section 75 considerations. <BR /> <BR />The British Government's long-promised and much-delayed replacement for those funds — the Shared Prosperity Fund — fell well short of that position. The delays in launching the fund resulted in the community and voluntary sector here dealing with annual funding cliff edges with a significant impact on the capacity and, at times, even the very viability of the sector. It has delivered significantly less than the equivalent EU funds, with an average of just £35 million per annum across the three-year period in comparison with the £65 million from ESF and ERDF across seven years.”
“<BR /> <BR />Over the seven-year period from 2014 to 2020, those two funds invested an average of around £65 million per year in the North. We had to adhere to some EU requirements on how the money was spent, but, ultimately, it was invested locally in harmony with other programmes. As such, it was aligned with our priorities and objectives. While there were criticisms of how those funds operated, particularly the bureaucracy attached to them, the investment was significant and the results clear. <BR /> <BR />I and my predecessor, Conor Murphy, have been engaged on this issue since 2020, while activity in my Department has been ongoing since the Brexit referendum. The previous Executive took the position in 2020 on the replacement of the ESF and ERDF programmes.”