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 42 of 76.
“We also discussed the need to continue to pursue opportunities to invest in low-carbon schemes.”
“Of the 14 projects supported to date, 13 are expected to achieve an energy performance certificate with an A or B rating. The fund also invested £50 million to support three energy-efficient office development projects during that time, which are estimated to have resulted in an annual CO2 saving of 771 tons. The Oakland aparthotel in Belfast has achieved WELL platinum building status, as it uses 100% renewable energy, is partly powered by on-roof solar panels and is heated with air-source heat pumps. It also sends zero waste to landfill. <BR /> <BR />I recently met the fund managers and was pleased to hear of their ongoing aim to seek opportunities to diversify the projects supported by looking at their geographical locations and the sectors involved.”
“That is an excellent example of an investment supported by the fund that will help to create high-quality jobs and encourage economic development on a more regionally balanced basis. <BR /> <BR />The fund's record to date has been very positive, given the level of funds invested, the jobs supported and the total value of developments supported. The investment fund remains open for applications, and I welcome further interest from those who seek to take forward suitable projects.”
“The overarching objectives of the Investment Fund are to address market failures; to accelerate and increase investment in private-sector-led development, infrastructure and low-carbon projects; to secure private-sector and/or public-sector leverage to achieve sustainable financial returns; to maximise the impact of public-sector intervention; and to deliver economic growth. <BR /> <BR />To date, the fund has provided just under £170 million of loans in support of 14 projects, which support over 5,100 jobs. Of those loans, £47 million has been repaid. Loans have been given to a range of sectors, including office developments, hotels, student accommodation and mixed-use developments. I recently visited the site of the new Dunluce Lodge hotel near Portrush.”
“The Member is right. One of the reasons why I am so concerned about the closure of the branch network is the impact on my constituency and constituents, particularly in rural areas. As I outlined in my response to Deborah, we have a limited ability to directly influence the decisions that banks take in their own commercial interest. <BR /> <BR />As I have said, it is my plan to reconvene the banking round table with key stakeholders in the autumn, bringing together the likes of the Financial Services Union, business bodies, consumer and community organisations, the Post Office, credit unions, Link, Cash Access UK and UK Finance, which is the banking industry representative body. My officials will set up that meeting in due course.”
“In the 2023-24 financial year, the programme helped almost 7,000 people with digital training, with 92 sessions taking place in libraries and community hubs in the Fermanagh and Omagh District Council area, for example. People can contact their local library to enrol on those courses.”
“It is vital that banks work proactively with customers to encourage digital and financial literacy. I pressed them on that when we met on 1 May. In addition, my Department has a small digital inclusion team to promote online services and to give people the skills, confidence, motivation and trust to navigate the online world. The Go ON NI programme provides free digital training sessions in libraries, community centres and hubs throughout the North. Those digital skills sessions introduce digital technology to people who are not familiar with going online and support people who want to improve their skills online. There is a particular focus on older people at times throughout the year, with specific events taking place on Safer Internet Day and during Positive Ageing Month and Get Online Week.”
“I am still concerned about the closure of branches, given the wider societal impact that the closures have on local communities, particularly for small businesses in rural areas that very much rely on their local branch. <BR /> <BR />Some work has been done by the Financial Conduct Authority on reviewing access to cash. It is due to publish recommendations in the autumn. From conversations that I have had with Cash Access UK and Link, I know that that guidance, when it comes, may help to improve some of the decisions around access to cash in rural areas and on banking hubs and where they are located.”
“As the Member will know, neither my Department nor the Assembly has any legislative authority in banking and finance, so the role that my Department can play in directly influencing the decisions of local banks, which, as she rightly said, are largely commercial, is somewhat limited. <BR /> <BR />I am deeply concerned about the impact that bank branch closures, which have been considerable over the past couple of years, have on our towns, villages and rural communities. I am therefore keen to use whatever influence I can, as Finance Minister, with the banks and the powers in London to press them to protect branches and services here.”
“I have been deeply concerned about the impact of branch closures for some time, which is why I called senior representatives from the local banks to attend a round-table meeting with me last month. I used that meeting to urge them to protect our local branch network and maintain access to cash and banking services, particularly for those in rural communities and vulnerable customers, such as those on low incomes and the elderly, who still rely heavily on physical banks rather than digital banking. I stressed to them that they have a responsibility to all their customers in impacted areas and emphasised the importance of quickly rolling out further banking hubs. I intend to hold a further round-table discussion in the autumn to follow up on those matters.”
“In the funding allocations that were made yesterday, there was an additional £23·9 million as a direct result of the signing of the interim fiscal framework to the spring statement announcement from the Treasury back in March, and additional funding applied to other Barnett consequentials that we anticipate from Westminster Main Estimates.”
“Following agreement on the interim fiscal framework on 22 May, the needs-based factor of 24% will apply from 2024-25 to all new Barnett consequentials arising since the Executive were restored in February. It will apply when the Executive's funding relative to British government spending in England falls below its relative need of 124%. The funding provided by the financial package that accompanied the restoration will be exempt from that calculation, meaning that it will apply in both 2024-25 and 2025-26.”
“There was also an urgent need to provide funding certainty to Departments and to those who deliver services, public-sector workers, those who rely on public services, including people who are on waiting lists, and all those education workers about whom I have just spoken. Even a short delay would have presented risks. Knowing that funding was available, I could not stand by while Departments took potentially damaging decisions that might be avoided once additional allocations were confirmed. Proceeding as we have has also allowed for proper Assembly engagement without the House needing to be recalled during recess.”
“In addition to that, £43·7 million was provided to the Department of Education for the Education Authority (EA) pay and grading review, allowing staff — classroom assistants, school bus drivers and school cooks — some of whom are amongst the lowest paid in the sector but play a vital role in supporting children and young people, to move on to the new pay scales from the start of this financial year. <BR /> <BR />I considered carefully whether the June monitoring round should proceed during the pre-election period. My view is that the process represents the normal and routine business of the Executive.”
“At the time that the question was submitted, there was no clarity on the timescale for the June monitoring round. I am pleased to say that the Executive have now agreed my recommendations on the June monitoring round, allocating £213·1 million of resource and £57·5 million of capital to Departments. That included £122 million to the Department of Health, £35 million for the Department of Justice and £29·5 million for the Department of Education. It also provided £20 million of capital DEL to the Department for Communities for social housing.”
“Some of the rate reliefs that the Member referred to have been considered as part of the rating consultation, so we will consider those in the next steps from the report, which I know the Member, as Chair of the Finance Committee, will have had sight of. It is important that we look at how we can best align what we are trying to achieve through our rating system with the economic vision that the Executive have set. I will work with my counterparts the Economy Minister and Communities Minister, because there are cross-departmental interests there. My officials will engage with Department for the Economy officials on how we can best ensure that what we are trying to achieve aligns.”
“That includes 57% of pubs getting some form of rate support, with 65% of the hospitality sector as a whole in receipt of support via the small business rate relief scheme. Over 63% of retailers get some form of support, with 80% of that support provided to small retail properties with a net annual value (NAV) of £15,000 or less. Almost 30,000 businesses from our tax base of just under 75,000 businesses get small business rate relief, and 4,474 manufacturers pay the lowest business rates in these islands, getting 70% off their rates by virtue of industrial derating tax relief, which is unique to this jurisdiction.”
“Since taking up post in February, I have already secured holding the regional rate increase to the inflationary rate as opposed to the 15% increase that was being pushed by the Secretary of State. I have reinstated the back in business scheme to incentivise the use of empty units in our towns and cities, and I have restored the rural ATM scheme. My Department has also renewed the small business rate relief scheme for 2024-25 and has delivered on its commitment to more frequent and regular revaluations by setting the valuation date in legislation for Reval2026. That was just the work of our first 100 days as an Executive. <BR /> <BR />Around 75% of non-domestic ratepayers occupying property here get some form of rate support.”
“The consultation that was undertaken earlier this year in relation to the rating measures was focused on revenue raising, so the focus of it was quite specific in the questions that it was asking about particular reliefs. My officials have briefed the Finance Committee on the responses received. I plan to publish that report in due course after the election, and I plan to make a statement to the Assembly to outline my approach to taking forward any recommendations on the rating system in the short and medium term as I continue to assess how we can best make that system work to meet our local needs.”
“The Ulster University economic policy centre work is under way. Initial desk research has been conducted, and the lead researcher is currently conducting interviews with relevant stakeholders. This is a specific piece of research to assess the economic impact of the differential poundages across our 11 councils, in line with the centre’s research priorities and considering the merits or otherwise of a uniform business rate in this context. The report is due to complete in the autumn. In tandem with this, the Member will be aware of my desire to strategically align our rating system with the Executive’s priorities for government. Rates are our only devolved tax currently, contributing £1·5 billion to public services, so it makes sense for it to align with the Executive's strategy.”
“The interim board may also take advice from subject matter experts to inform its decisions and/or ask to meet Departments to discuss and understand their proposals better.”
“The letter from the interim transformation board to Departments requested that proposals aim to meet some or all of the following objectives: to increase financial sustainability of public services; to transform the model of delivery of public services to improve effectiveness and efficiency, to meet increased demands and improve outcomes for citizens; and to ensure prevention or cost savings through early intervention. Further guidance was provided through the pro forma that Departments were asked to complete. Large-scale proposals of £10 million or more that pass an initial sift will undergo an additional process for application and assessment, given the higher levels of transformation investment sought.”
“We have established the board with three permanent members, but we may look at the mechanism for bringing in independent experts who are able to provide specific advice on particular projects.”
“The board has been established on an interim basis to allow us to make progress with the funding for this financial year. We did not want to be in a position in which we were not able to receive proposals and thus not spend the £47 million, which would potentially have put us in the position of losing some of the money or having to ask for it to be re-profiled. We will seek to put the board on a firm and permanent footing. I anticipate that, once the board has completed its work on developing them, the terms of reference will come to the Executive. I imagine that that will happen over the summer months. Come the autumn, we will look at the membership more widely and the terms of reference.”
“While the funding will in no way tackle the magnitude of issues in hand, I am committed to using it as effectively as possible to develop and implement a model of delivery that will stimulate the wider transformation of public services.”
“The interim board has been working at pace and, supported by my officials, issued a call for transformation proposals on 31 May. Those have now been received, and I am pleased to report that all Departments have submitted proposals. <BR /> <BR />The interim board is currently assessing proposals to determine which are genuinely transformative and how projects could be prioritised to make the most effective use of the funding available. It will then make its recommendations to me on that basis. Work is ongoing separately to develop the terms of reference for the board. <BR /> <BR />Once all of that is completed, I will bring recommendations to the Executive for agreement.”
“Public services across many sectors are in critical need of investment to ensure the quality and efficiency of service that citizens quite rightly expect. Transformation is also essential if the Executive are to put their finances on a more sustainable footing. <BR /> <BR />The financial package for the restored Executive includes £235 million of ring-fenced funding for public-sector transformation. That will provide £47 million each year over a five-year period. On 9 May, the Executive agreed my proposed approach for making quick progress on the use of that important funding. <BR /> <BR />I have now established and appointed members to an interim public-sector transformation board chaired by the head of the Civil Service, Jayne Brady.”
“I am happy to deal with any points of principle or detail of the Budget (No. 2) Bill that Members may wish to raise.”
“For some of those items' expenditure, the amount involved is greater than what the Assembly would normally be asked to approve or is over a longer period. That is mainly due to the absence of an Assembly, which prevented the legislation being taken forward in the normal way. I expect that to begin to be addressed in the coming months. <BR /> <BR />The numbers contained in the Budget Bill are significant. I am sure that Members will agree that it is not an easy task to translate those figures into the delivery of public services on the ground. The reality is that this crucial piece of legislation is required to ensure that all the day-to-day public services that we all rely on continue to be delivered to our citizens for the remainder of this financial year. On that note, I will conclude.”
“That is a normal safeguard to allow the efficient management of the Consolidated Fund and does not authorise any additional expenditure. The Bill will also authorise Excesses for prior years for the purposes that are specified in schedules 2 and 3. <BR /> <BR />I draw the House's attention to the fact that, although the vast majority of expenditure by all Departments is done on the authority of statutory powers that are provided through legislation by the Assembly, there are some usually small functions that may, from time to time, be done on the sole authority of the Budget Act. Table 5 of the Main Estimates 2024-25 document sets out a summary of expenditure that rests on the sole authority of the Budget Act.”
“Copies of the Bill and the explanatory and financial memorandum have been made available to Members today, and the Main Estimates 2024-25 and Statement of Excesses for years between 2016 and 2023 were laid in the Assembly on 19 June. <BR /> <BR />The Bill will authorise the issue of £25,255,627,000 from the Consolidated Fund and the use of further resources totalling £28,772,794,000 by the Departments and certain other bodies listed in schedule 1 to the Bill in the year ending 31 March 2025 — this financial year. The cash and resources are to be spent and used on the services that are listed in column 1 of each schedule. <BR /> <BR />The Budget (No. 2) Bill will authorise temporary borrowing by the Department of Finance for 2024-25 of up to £12,627,814,000 to be repaid no later than 31 March 2025.”
“The Assembly's agreement of the Executive's final Budget for 2024-25 on 28 May 2024 allows me to bring the Budget (No. 2) Bill to the Assembly to seek legislative authority for the expenditure of the Departments and other bodies for the remainder of the financial year. <BR /> <BR />Standing Order 32 directs that the Second Stage debate should be confined to the general principles of the Bill, and I shall endeavour to keep to that direction. The Bill will give effect to the Main Estimates for 2024-25 and authorise the cash and use of resources on services to allow Departments and other public bodies to operate for the remainder of the financial year. The Bill will also regularise expenditure identified by the Public Accounts Committee and will authorise cash and use of resources over the years identified in its published report.”
“This Second Stage debate follows the Assembly's approval yesterday of the Supply resolution for the expenditure plans of Departments and other public bodies, as detailed in the Main Estimates 2024-25, and its approval of the Supply resolution for the Statement of Excesses for years between 2016 and 2023 to regularise prior expenditure. Accelerated passage of the Budget (No. 2) Bill is necessary to ensure that Royal Assent is obtained before any Departments reach the cash limits for 2023-24 set in the Vote on Account, which the Assembly agreed earlier in the year. I am grateful to the Finance Committee for confirming that, in line with Standing Order 42, the Bill can proceed under accelerated passage, and I thank the Committee for its support.”
“I beg to introduce the Budget (No. 2) Bill [NIA 06/22-27], which is a Bill to authorise the use for the public service of certain resources for the year ending 31 March 2025 (including income); to authorise the issue out of the Consolidated Fund of certain sums for the service of that year; to authorise the use of those sums for specified purposes; to authorise the Department of Finance to borrow on the credit of those sums; to authorise the use for the public service of excess resources for the years ending 31 March 2021, 2022 and 2023; to authorise the issue out of the Consolidated Fund of certain excess sums for the service of the years ending 31 March 2017 and 2019; and to authorise the use of those sums for specified purposes.”
“I, therefore, commend the Statement of Excesses for 2016-17, 2018-19, 2020-21, 2021-22 and 2022-23, and I ask that Members also support that motion.”
“We will seek to do that very quickly, once the new Government are in place after the election on Thursday. <BR /> <BR />I will draw my remarks to a close. I thank Members for their patience. Assembly approval of the motion today on the Main Estimates for 2024-25 is a crucial stage in securing the public expenditure that enables Departments to continue to deliver services during the 2024-25 financial year. Failure to pass this Supply resolution would put at risk the continuation of public services for the remainder of the financial year. I, therefore, commend the Main Estimates 2024-25 to the Assembly, and I ask Members to support the motion. <BR /> <BR />In addition, Assembly approval of the Statement of Excesses is required to regularise Excess that has been incurred.”
“Well, you can try. <BR /> <BR />Patsy made some comments about Lough Neagh. It is important that we see the publication of the plan for Lough Neagh as soon as possible. I am pleased that we were able to allocate some money to Lough Neagh: in capital, which was allocated in the Budget but confirmed in June monitoring; and in the £1·5 million of resource that we have allocated and ring-fenced specifically for the environmental improvement plan to deliver actions relating to Lough Neagh. <BR /> <BR />Sinéad McLaughlin made some comments about the need for us to have a Programme for Government that improves outcomes. Of course, I concur with Sinéad's comments in that regard. Nicola Brogan referenced the need to progress the negotiations on the fiscal framework.”
“The Finance Committee was briefed by my officials in the past two weeks; it indicated that it was content for us to proceed on the basis that we have. It is reasonable to anticipate not only that the Westminster Main Estimates will move forward but that additional funding may be provided to Westminster Departments, and that we will receive additional Barnett moneys in-year. That is a reasonable assumption in respect of the additional funding. <BR /> <BR />The Member set out his concerns about June monitoring shortly after he pressed for additional funding for the Department of Health. You cannot have it both ways in respect of making the case for additional funding and then criticising us when we move ahead to deliver that funding.”
“We had an indication from Treasury that £185 million of Barnett consequentials would come across from Westminster's Main Estimates. We also had additional funding of £41 million in Barnett consequentials that came very late in the previous financial year, and additional money that came across because of the 24% level of need that was applied to the spring statement. That brought us to the total that we were able to allocate. I do not believe that there will be a rolling back from Treasury on Westminster's Main Estimates. I do not see how Departments' pressures will have disappeared during the six weeks since Treasury indicated that to us. Whitehall Departments face similar pressures, particularly in respect of increased pension contributions.”
“We have tried to alleviate some of those relating to Communities in Transition and the central good relations fund in the June monitoring round. <BR /> <BR />Dr Aiken raised a number of points. He highlighted concerns around how June monitoring could proceed without certainty over the funding. It was important that we made those allocations, including the £122 million to the Department of Health, in June monitoring. Dr Aiken compared the figures for the end of the year with those for the start of the year for the past two financial years and indicated that, in his analysis, there was a shortfall of £187 million. However, in June monitoring alone, the Department of Health received an uplift of over £165 million. That shows that you cannot compare the end of a year with the start of a year. We will return to that at different points.”
“Mr Frew also mentioned the need for transformation of our public services, with which, I think, we all concur. He will be aware that we have established the public sector transformation board, which has received and is considering bids. We are in a position to allocate up to £47 million per year over the next five years. Hopefully, that will instil some innovative thinking and produce transformation projects that will make progress on the issue. Obviously, Mr Frew and I disagree on the devolution of fiscal powers, but I am sure that we can get into that debate in more detail at another point. <BR /> <BR />Paula Bradshaw referred to the Executive Office's challenges. We are probably all well versed in the challenges across the Departments.”
“That is a more meaningful comparator of a Department's ability to fund day-to-day services. <BR /> <BR />Eóin spoke about the sole authority of the Budget Act. I expect that that will begin to be addressed in coming months. Obviously, the absence of an Executive and an Assembly prevented the Assembly from legislating for some of those functions in the normal way. <BR /> <BR />Mr Frew and, I think, Diane Forsythe, referenced the pending cliff edge at the end of the 2025-26 financial year. Thankfully, in the interim fiscal framework that we agreed with the Treasury just before the general election was called, there was a commitment that we could plan on the assurance that we would be funded at or above the 124% level of need. We will want to firm that up with the Treasury in our negotiations on a final fiscal framework.”
“<BR /> <BR />Mr Elliott raised issues relating to the budget for the Department for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs. He indicated that it was lower this year than it was last year. Mr Elliott compared the net resources required, which include both annually managed expenditure (AME), which is outside the Executive's control, and ring-fenced non-cash items such as depreciation. It is not appropriate to compare those two figures. Within the 2023-24 figure, for example, is an AME provision of some £118 million, the majority of which relates to a requirement for remediation works at an illegal waste site by the Environment Agency. DAERA's non-ring-fenced resource DEL opening budget is, in fact, 6·1% higher than the non-ring-fenced opening budget for 2023-24, when earmarked items are removed.”
“Ms Forsythe noted that the Department of Finance did not commission Estimates memoranda from Departments. The purpose of the memorandum was to provide users of the Estimates with greater understanding of the information in them. However, given the review of financial processes and the increased detail and clarity now included in the Estimates, including on contingent liabilities, items relying on the sole authority of the Budget Act and so on, it was felt that the production of a separate Estimates memorandum would no longer be needed and, indeed, would represent duplication. However, if the Committee would find a memorandum helpful for its scrutiny of Departments' spending proposals, officials would be happy to commission such a document.”
“It was important to give Departments certainty to plan. It was also important to give certainty to the people who rely on the services that are delivered by those Departments and to the workers who deliver those services, whether in our schools, our hospitals or our universities. I considered the guidance, and I was satisfied that we could continue to act.”
“Knowing that funding was available for allocation, I could not stand by while Departments took decisions with potentially adverse impacts on services that could have been avoided if additional allocations had been agreed.”
“<BR /> <BR />The leader of the Opposition again made clear his view on agreeing the June monitoring round, which is, I reiterate, a view that I do not accept or agree with. Having considered the pre-election guidance, my clear view and that of my Department is, as the Member well knows, having had briefings from my most senior officials in the previous two Finance Committee meetings, that June monitoring is normal, routine Executive business — it happens every year — and that this Westminster election should not prevent business being done in the Assembly and the Executive. Given the financial pressures facing Departments, it was essential that they be provided with clarity on any additional funding as soon as possible.”
“As the Member is well aware, I am tied to the period of the Treasury spending review. I have expressed my desire and the need for a multi-year spending review to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury and to the shadow Secretary of State. The prioritisation of funding should be driven by an agreed Programme for Government, but, as with many things, it is important to get that right rather than to just do it quickly. To be clear, neither a multi-year Budget nor a Programme for Government will remove the financial pressures that all our Departments face, nor does the absence of a PFG mean that funding is not being prioritised. Every time that I bring recommendations to the Executive, they are prioritised for the allocation of the finite resources that are available.”
“The debate has covered many aspects of public expenditure and, perhaps, a few topics that are not quite related to that. I will, however, endeavour to address as many of the points that were raised during the debate as I can. First, I again thank the Finance Committee for its agreement that this important legislation be taken through by accelerated passage. That agreement secures the timely passage of the legislation, thereby avoiding risk or legal uncertainty about the funding of public services. <BR /> <BR />I listened with interest to the debate. I will turn to some of the issues that Members raised. Matthew O'Toole indicated the need for a multi-year Budget that is aligned with a Programme for Government. For once, I do not disagree with the Member. I have stated my commitment to multi-year Budgets many times.”
“2) Bill, which I will introduce today and we will debate tomorrow, will ensure that services continue to be funded for the remainder of this financial year.”