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 55 of 76.
“<BR /> <BR />At its meeting on 24 November 2021, the Committee considered a paper from the Department that indicated that it had surrendered £41 million of reduced requirements for the DFC energy payment support scheme. While members support the scheme, they expressed considerable dismay that such a significant easement had occurred so late in the financial year, particularly when members had, on a number of occasions, advocated the allocation of funds to a range of sectors that had not benefited from COVID relief schemes or were continuing to struggle. That included the £21 million that was held as contingency for overspend on the high street scheme, which members had previously queried. The Department indicated that its ability to surrender such a significant sum was a result of the improved economic context.”
“<BR /> <BR />A bid of £7·1 million in conventional ring-fenced resource DEL was submitted to DOF regarding a new approach to the treatment of depreciation for FE colleges. That dated back to 2019-2020, when the accounting treatment for FE capital grants changed. The Committee would like to see that issue dealt with in the Department's baseline, rather than through monitoring rounds. <BR /> <BR />The Department entered the October monitoring round with £16 million of unallocated capital DEL. In response to members' concerns, officials indicated that there were a number of emerging capital DEL pressures to which that might be allocated. Again, the Committee highlighted the rapidly reducing window in which to spend the funds.”
“The remaining £1·3 million overcommitment was managed within the overall departmental position. <BR /> <BR />The Executive's approval for flexibility in managing the funding envelope for ERAP allowed the Department to hold a contingency of £21 million with respect to the Spend Local prepaid card scheme in case of necessary overspend. Officials considered that the number of eligible recipients may have been underestimated by 100,000 people and that further administrative costs would be incurred for any larger allocation of prepaid cards. Members questioned the need for such a large contingency, but officials suggested that flexibility around ERAP funding meant that it could be allocated elsewhere if it was not needed. Again, members expressed concern that there would be limited time to spend that money.”
“<BR /> <BR />In the June 2021 monitoring round, the Department sought to fund £8·2 million of resource DEL pressures from within its baseline. At that monitoring round, the Department had almost £17 million of conventional capital easements, with just over £2·5 million in pressures. That left just over £14 million of unallocated capital. Members, again, expressed concern at the level of easements and the Committee's ability to track and scrutinise in-year allocations. <BR /> <BR />Going into the October 2021 monitoring round, the Department had £3·9 million of resource DEL that was unallocated, and £3·2 million of resource DEL reduced requirements. That was allocated against £8·4 million of pressures that were identified as part of the monitoring round process.”
“Officials highlighted assurances that in-year capital allocations of £42 million and £3 million would be made for Project Stratum and the graduate medical school at Magee. Financial transactions capital bids of £35 million were met in full to cover Ulster University's greater Belfast development, Invest NI schemes and Catalyst's work. <BR /> <BR />Prior to the June monitoring round process in 2021, the Department was allocated £40 million in year to make FE colleges safe spaces and for business relief schemes. Again, that size of in-year allocation is difficult for members to scrutinise in detail or track. Between the January and June monitoring rounds in 2021, the Department reallocated internal easements of almost £20 million in non-ring-fenced DEL. Again, that was hard for the Committee to track and scrutinise in real time.”
“Resource DEL bids under the ERAP and associated COVID relief therefore rose to £283 million, including the high street scheme, or the Spend Local card. <BR /> <BR />The Executive approved an allocation of £276 million of resource DEL and £11 million of capital DEL. The resource DEL represented £145 million for the high street scheme and £131 million to be used at the Department's discretion. Again, discretionary spend is very difficult for members to monitor and scrutinise. We highlighted the difficulty for the Department to spend such a significant amount of money within the financial year, particularly across a variety of schemes and through in-year allocations. The £90 million of capital DEL in the 2021-22 budget was inclusive of £20 million for the ERAP.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee considered the final draft DFE budget for 2021-22 at its meeting on 10 February 2021. The finalised budget in April did not differ from the draft, with the resource DEL baseline remaining at the 2020-21 level of £805·4 million. At that point, the Department indicated that it would be reliant on in-year allocations to fund a range of commitments. Reassurances on that were made by the Finance Minister, but it is not an ideal situation for the Committee effectively to monitor the Department's budget. <BR /> <BR />The Department submitted £201·6 million of resource DEL bids as part of the October 2020 comprehensive spending review (CSR), but none was met. The Department's development of an economic recovery action plan (ERAP) resulted in the majority of the CSR bids being superseded by or absorbed into the ERAP.”
“<BR /> <BR />Obviously, the 2021-22 financial year must be viewed against the backdrop of the continuing pandemic and the role that the Department for the Economy played in the provision of COVID relief to businesses and individuals. The Committee observed on a number of occasions, however, that the Department's budget planning was a key issue in the requirement for significant flows of funds in and out of the Department during, and between, monitoring rounds. Members acknowledge and sympathise with the extremely pressurised environment in which the Department's staff have worked over the 2021-22 financial year. On the positive side, transparency in the Department's budgeting has improved in this financial year. The Committee welcomes that, as well as officials' willingness to engage and respond to members' queries.”
“The pandemic continued to have a huge impact on the Department for the Economy's budget for the 2021-22 financial year. The Department's spring Supplementary Estimates memorandum reflects that. It highlights the change between the opening budget position for 2021-22 and the spring Estimates that take account of in-year changes. Resource departmental expenditure limit (DEL) rose by 51%; capital DEL, including financial transactions capital (FTC), fell by 155%; resource annually managed expenditure (AME) fell by 575%; capital AME fell by 12%; and non-budget resource fell by 4%. Overall, the Department's total net resource requirement rose by 16%, while its total net capital requirement fell by 21%.”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. Obviously, we are already seeing the impact of global forces, particularly on oil and gas prices, which are impacting on families and businesses, and the current situation in Ukraine could exacerbate that. Did the Minister get a sense that there is an understanding of and a willingness for the need for support to rapidly invest in renewables in order to ensure security of indigenous supply and affordability for people? Is he engaging on that with his British ministerial counterparts in particular?”
“Despite that, our Ministers here are making meaningful interventions. Whether it is Deirdre Hargey putting in place supports for families with their energy costs and ensuring that workers in the community and voluntary sector have proper pay and conditions, or whether it is the Finance Minister supporting businesses through the restrictions and ensuring that procurement rules support local businesses, those measures highlight that the best people to take decisions on behalf of people here are the people on this island. Surely, it would be so much easier if we had the powers of a sovereign Government and the ability to plan our public services and economic development for ourselves.”
“<BR /> <BR />We are often left to deal with the consequences of bad decisions or inaction in Westminster.”
“<BR /> <BR />I, along with other parties, have called for a windfall tax on some of the biggest companies that are benefiting from rising energy prices to be directed towards fuel poverty interventions. The reality is that, before the energy price hikes, we, here in the North, had the highest rates of fuel poverty. That is likely to have risen considerably. We need to see meaningful action, and it has to come from British Government level. <BR /> <BR />There is also the planned National Insurance increase coming down the track. Despite the cost-of-living crisis, it seems that the British Government are intent on ploughing on with that. Obviously, that will hit lower-paid workers and small businesses. I and others have urged the British Chancellor to rethink that move.”
“<BR /> <BR />We are facing a cost-of-living crisis, with families struggling to make ends meet and businesses struggling with increased costs. Inflation is at its highest level in years and energy prices, in particular, are really impacting. To date, the interventions from the British Government have been inadequate, with what amounts to a loan in the reduction of energy bills in Britain and no meaningful intervention in regard to living costs. The Finance Minister has made representation to the British Treasury regarding the removal of VAT on energy bills, which would immediately cut household bills by 5%. Perhaps he could update us on whether anything is likely to happen in respect of that.”
“<BR /> <BR />It must be stressed again that the projects employ 1,700 people across the North and support 17,000 people to gain skills in employability programmes, including some of our most vulnerable citizens, those with disabilities and those furthest from work. The people working in those projects are skilled community workers, and they are being put on protective notice, which is incredibly stressful. If they are at risk of losing their current position, they will seek other work, meaning that their skills could be lost to the organisations that they are currently with. So I urge the Economy Minister to clarify his position and the comments that he made earlier today. I will write to him on that as well.”
“We are also now in a situation where European social fund projects, which were extended for a year, last year, as a result of the Finance Minister being able to allocate COVID funding, have been told that the Department for the Economy will not provide the additional 35% match funding that it would have done in previous years, although the Economy Minister said earlier today that he wanted to support those projects. I ask the Finance Minister to update us on the latest position regarding whether or not the Economy Minister has signalled that he will take him up on the proposed solutions that were outlined to him last week, and which the Communities Minister confirmed she would take up and will provide £1·5 million of match funding to the projects funded by her Department.”
“The loss of EU funding will particularly hit the Department for the Economy because, despite a £50 million uplift over the next three years, there will be a £100 million loss in EU funding, and the so-called replacement fund — the Shared Prosperity Fund — remains elusive. We are no further forward on any clarity around its administration or purpose. The Economy Committee was presented with model savings that would particularly hit skills and business support, which is obviously entirely counter-intuitive to driving forward economic recovery.”
“Obviously, as a result of the DUP walking out of the Executive, there is £300 million of funding that cannot be allocated. As I understand it, no additional funding can be allocated at this stage for those businesses, even if the Economy Minister were to decide to support them, although he has discretion over his own budget for economic recovery. Perhaps the Minister could clarify the situation around any allocations that can still be made at this stage. <BR /> <BR />Last week, the Finance Minister announced that the draft Budget consultation is being paused. We were concerned by what was being presented to us by DFE in Committee.”
“However, that was before the restrictions as a result of omicron came about. I and, I am sure, other Members were contacted by businesses in different sectors that faced difficult circumstances due to those restrictions. However, despite representations, the Department for the Economy did not bid for any additional money in the January monitoring round to provide support, despite money being available. The travel sector, for example, was first hit and is still a long way from recovery, and the beauty sector is another that continues to struggle and make representations. While the Finance Minister brought forward the omicron business support scheme for hospitality, hotels and soft-play businesses, nothing has come forward from the Economy Minister.”
“I will not go on at length today, as I have further remarks to make tomorrow in the Budget debate. The past year has continued to be a difficult time for many families and businesses. The Department for the Economy was allocated £246 million to fund economic recovery activities. Members will be most familiar with the high street scheme, which was part of that. <BR /> <BR />In December, when the Finance Minister asked Departments to look at their budgets to try to identify any money that could be freed up to bring forward the energy support scheme, in response, DFE relinquished £40 million, £30 million of which was from the economic recovery fund. We were told that that was possible because the economy was in a better place than expected. I am glad that the money could be made available to the energy support scheme.”
“Does the Minister accept that part of the problem is that his party has failed to deliver a strategic policy directive to effectively develop our economy and to direct the agencies under his Department?”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. I welcome the review of Invest NI, which I have called for for some time, and I wish the panel well. <BR /> <BR />The second part of the review's terms of reference describes how Invest delivers the Department's economic policies. The DUP has led the Department that is responsible for the economy for the past 15 years. Under DUP policies, we have had stubbornly low economic growth, low productivity and the highest economic inactivity of any region across these islands. As a result of the Brexit that was championed by the DUP, we are losing vital EU funding, including for Invest, to deliver business support and development. Last week, it was reported that, due to the uncertainty that has been caused by the DUP's walking out of the Executive, we are losing investor interest —”
“As others have mentioned, he was very witty — sometimes caustically so — but he was always respectful and friendly and would never pass you by. <BR /> <BR />Christopher was a very able parliamentarian and loved being one. He could certainly be robust, but, as Andrew said, he was someone who played the ball and not the player. That was the thing about Christopher: he was decent; he had manners; he had class. We are worse off for his loss. His intelligence, his dedication to the Assembly and his humour will be missed, and I will miss him.”
“I, too, extend my sincere condolences to Christopher's wife, Laura, their children, his mum, his family and friends and, obviously, his party colleagues. I am very, very sorry for your loss. <BR /> <BR />As others have said, Christopher talked all the time about his wife and children. He clearly loved them dearly and was very proud of them. I think, genuinely, that I might know more about Christopher's family than I do about the families of some of my party colleagues. He was also proud to be from a working-class background and to represent his community. <BR /> <BR />Christopher was one of those people who always spoke to you; it did not matter where you were. I got to know him better, however, when he was on the Economy Committee.”
“Therefore, I hope that all parties and MLAs will be able to support the principles of this straightforward Bill to ban fracking at its Second Stage, and I look forward to further scrutinising it at Committee Stage.”
“Given that Sinn Féin is on record, along with other parties, in stating that we would not support policy proposals at the Executive unless they include a ban on petroleum licensing, perhaps the Minister will take the opportunity during his remarks to outline his preferred option for the future of petroleum licensing. <BR /> <BR />Given the discussion that we have had over the past week on the Climate Change (No. 2) Bill and the overwhelming rate of scientific evidence, including the IPCC sixth assessment report published in August past, which was described as a "code red for humanity", it is clear to me that there is no place for any new fossil fuel exploration in the North. Fossil fuels should remain in the ground.”
“The Minister indicated at the Economy Committee a couple of weeks ago that he was finalising a document to go out to consultation and that he would have to take that to the Executive. He said:”
“The Minister responded to questions about future petroleum licensing policy by saying that he planned to bring options to the Executive soon. In December, a Department spokesperson said:”
“Therefore, our policy attention and investment should be focused on developing our renewable energy capacity. The energy strategy published by the Department for the Economy is clear on that matter. <BR /> <BR />Sinn Féin has repeatedly stated on the public record its opposition to petroleum licensing through exploration, drilling or extraction in the North and has called for a ban on petroleum licensing. In that context, I was disappointed that the Minister did not bring forward proposals to ban petroleum licensing when he published the energy strategy. As I referred to in my earlier remarks, the Department has undertaken a review of petroleum licensing and has been in possession of the Hatch Regeneris report on the matter since last summer.”
“To conclude, the Committee welcomes the Second Stage of the Bill. However, there is obviously limited time left in this Assembly mandate, and, with the Committee's current legislative workload, it will be limited in its ability to give the Bill the attention and scrutiny that it deserves and requires. <BR /> <BR />On behalf of Sinn Féin, I will make some brief remarks. Sinn Féin's position on fracking is unambiguous. We are completely opposed to fracking and want to see the ban on fracking extended across this island, which is why this legislation has been brought forward. In the context of the climate crisis, and given that, just yesterday, the Climate Change (No. 2) Bill passed its Consideration Stage, it is clear that we need to end our reliance on fossil fuels.”
“Although the Committee has not yet discussed the Bill itself, it has already consulted anti-fracking groups during informal Committee meetings. We also wrote to the then Minister outlining concerns, such as the impact of fracking on public health.”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak briefly as Chair of the Economy Committee to outline the Committee's consideration of the Bill to date, before speaking in my party capacity, also briefly. <BR /> <BR />As the Bill sponsor outlined, the Bill aims to secure a ban on the issuing of licences in the North for the onshore exploration, extraction and production of fossil fuels by means of fracking. The Committee's current extensive legislative workload means that it was unable to invite the sponsor to brief members on the Bill in advance of Second Stage. The Committee will aim to do so if the Bill passes Second Stage today. <BR /> <BR />The Committee acknowledges that a review of petroleum licensing is ongoing in the Department for the Economy. That review has not yet been published, however.”
“It will be a year, next week, I think, since the consultation on the clean air strategy closed. Will the Minister provide an update on what aspects of that have been taken forward so far?”
“We included it in our response to the consultation, and, along with other parties and Members, we raised it at every stage as the Bill progressed. I am glad that the Assembly has ensured that these provisions will be in the legislation. <BR /> <BR />Sinn Féin is committed to standing up for workers, and this legislation delivers for workers. It ensures compassionate support for workers in the most difficult circumstances. It will make a real difference to people's lives. I am proud of the role that I, John O'Dowd and my party played, along with our fellow Committee members and other parties and MLAs, in delivering this important legislation. I am so pleased that it passes through the Assembly today.”
“Today is a good day for workers as the Assembly passes legislation that ensures the right to paid leave under the terrible circumstances of a death of a child, a stillbirth or miscarriage. Those rights will become day-1 rights, and that will ensure this important protection for workers from the first day of their employment. <BR /> <BR />I am delighted that the Bill has got to Final Stage and that we have ensured that, as well as the important provisions introduced to support parents whose child dies or who suffer a stillbirth, the North will now lead the way across these islands and, indeed, Europe by having the statutory right to paid leave following a miscarriage. That issue was raised with Sinn Féin when we engaged with organisations and individuals in the initial consultation on the Bill.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee is appreciative of the evidence that it received from individuals impacted by parental bereavement and miscarriage. Without their evidence to inform the Committee, the Bill would not be passed as it is today. Like the Minister, I pay tribute to those who contributed. <BR /> <BR />The Committee is delighted that the Bill is completing its Final Stage before dissolution in order that these important entitlements can be put in place as soon as possible. The Committee understands that much of the detail will be specified in regulations. I am sure that the successor Economy Committee will work closely with the Department to bring those forward according to the schedule. <BR /> <BR />The Committee is happy to support the Bill. <BR /> <BR />I will now make some remarks on behalf of Sinn Féin.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee focused on two main areas where, it felt, the support and provisions offered by the Bill could be widened and improved. These were the inclusion of miscarriage provision and the allowing for a day-1 right, rather than the application of a 26-week qualifying period as was in the Bill as drafted. The Committee amendments to bring these two aspects into the Bill received the support of the Chamber at Consideration Stage and were refined at Further Consideration Stage. <BR /> <BR />The Committee would like to thank and congratulate the Minister and his officials for their work in supporting that happening and for their engagement throughout the process. The role of the Bill Office Clerks was vital to the amending of the Bill. On behalf of the Committee, I would like to thank them.”
“I will speak, first, as Chair of the Economy Committee before speaking in a party capacity. <BR /> <BR />The Committee welcomes the legislation. It is long overdue, given that there was no statutory entitlement to parental bereavement or miscarriage leave and pay for people at what must be the most difficult times of their lives. People need adequate time to grieve and should be supported by their employer to do so. The Bill will ensure that that is the case. <BR /> <BR />There was overwhelming support for the Bill as originally drafted. Responses were positive in relation to the introduction of a legal entitlement to employee parental leave and pay with the expectation that it would be a minimum provision in ensuring that parents and carers would be supported in the event of a parental bereavement.”
“Obviously, we will get into more detail on the just transition commission in the group 4 debate.”
“The amendment adds a subsection to require the Department to take account of:”
“of Royal Assent and every five years thereafter. The plan must set out how the interim targets and the overall target will be met. That is the appropriate time frame for the climate action plans. Again, we urge Members to support that amendment. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 78, which is also in my name and the names of Philip McGuigan and Declan McAleer, is an amendment to clause 31 on:”
“We will not, however, support amendment No 67, because it does not go far enough. We want to see a commitment in the legislation to establishing a climate office and a climate commissioner. <BR /> <BR />As Philip outlined, amendment Nos 68, 69, 71, 72 and 73 essentially do similar things. We have tabled amendment No 73, which inserts a new clause after clause 28 that requires the Department to bring forward regulations to establish a climate office and commissioner within two years. We ask Members to support our amendment, which is obviously subject to prior votes. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 74, which is in my name and the names of Philip McGuigan and Declan McAleer, inserts a new clause after clause 28 that requires the Department to:”
“Philip outlined our concerns about subsection (4) of new clause 21A, which defines "public authority" as any authority listed in schedule 3 to the Public Services Ombudsman Act 2016, given that it could place quite a burden on some of those organisations. Obviously, that links back to the Department's reports in clause 16 and the policies and proposals on carbon budgets. Perhaps the Members who tabled that amendment would be willing to look at that at Further Consideration Stage to see whether the language in subsection (4) could be amended to include something like that which is already in clause 21, which could then be defined under regulations. <BR /> <BR />We support the Minister's amendment Nos 61 to 63, which strengthen the requirement on the Department to bring forward regulations on the requirement for public bodies to report.”
“The establishment of a climate office and commissioner had support from stakeholders. It is important that there be an independent source of evaluation. It is important that, as the various plans, policies and proposals in the Bill are rolled out, the performance of those be evaluated. The inclusion of a climate commissioner is an important element to add to the Bill in order to provide that level of accountability independent from the Department. <BR /> <BR />Mr McGuigan has already laid out our position on some of the amendments in the group, but I want to pick up on a few of them. On amendment No 60, Declan outlined how the AERA Committee heard that public bodies and agencies support the need to ensure that there is a requirement placed on them to embed action on climate across their organisations.”
“I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate on group 3. The amendments are essentially about oversight and governance, and there are amendments in the group that do different versions of the same thing, particularly in relation to the establishment of a climate office and a climate commissioner.”
“<BR /> <BR />That is the commitment that Sinn Féin is making: climate action will not be done to people and communities but will be done with people and communities in a spirit of partnership. I emphasise again, as has been much talked about already, that the basis of action to tackle the climate emergency has to be on the principles of just transition. That is what is being written into this legislation through amendments in this group and others. This climate legislation needs to deliver fairness in action — fairness for workers, for families, for communities and for businesses. We must ensure that those who will be most impacted on and those who can least afford to move away from fossil fuels will have the support that they need to do that. That is what we are committed to.”
“<BR /> <BR />I will not rehash all the contributions from yesterday's debate on the previous group, but I emphasise that I believe that the amendments that have been outlined by us and others will add to this Bill. They reinforce the spirit of collaboration and consultation that I think is really important in getting the buy-in from communities that we all represent that they will have the opportunity to be consulted and to be part of the process. Effective climate action will only be achieved and be successful if there is real buy-in from individuals and organisations. Departments may develop plans and policies, but they will be delivered by other people. Those who have expressed concerns, along with all our other stakeholders, need to be involved in shaping the plans.”
“Given that, as an island, we are a single biogeographic unit and that our waterways, air and soil do not recognise borders, it makes sense that, where policies can align, they do so. The amendment is obviously qualified with the language "as far as reasonably practicable", so I hope that Members will be able to support this sensible and practical measure. <BR /> <BR />We will not support amendment Nos 77 and 79, which give the Department additional powers to make regulations to amend the new clause 16A in relation to the subsections on just transition and small business and do not require advice to be obtained about proposals to make regulations.”
“Even though amendment No 41 is mutually exclusive to our amendment No 42, it adds some further detail. We will also support the new clauses proposed in amendment Nos 45 to 49 and amendment No 51, which add clauses 16D to 16H and clause 16J. Again, those clauses add further detail to the measures that are being introduced in the new clause 16A. <BR /> <BR />Not finally, but getting near to the end, amendment No 76 is a Sinn Féin amendment to clause 29, which is on duties to ensure that targets are met. This amendment adds to the duties on Departments a duty that, as far as reasonably practicable, plans, policies and strategies should align with those in the South.”
“I ask Members to support both of those amendments, which strengthen the Bill, to ensure that there is that requirement to consult with those being impacted by the plans that are being brought forward. <BR /> <BR />We will support amendment No 37, tabled by the Greens, to clause 16 in relation to publishing the report on consultation. I think that it is important that there is transparency to get that public buy-in. We will also support amendment No 38, tabled by the Minister, which will insert the new clause 16A in relation to the requirements for policies and proposals made under carbon budgets. It adds transboundary elements, just transition principles, nature-based projects and the impact on small businesses. We will support amendment Nos 39 and 41.”