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 56 of 76.
“<BR /> <BR />We are proposing climate action plans in amendment No 74, which will be discussed in group 3, and we are keen to understand and explore how the sectoral plans would interact with those. While we are supportive of some of the targets that are set out in the plans, we feel that the Bill should be a framework to be developed fully, but we will not oppose any of the amendment Nos 19 to 28. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 36 to clause 16 is a Sinn Féin amendment in the names of Declan, Philip and myself. It requires Departments, when bringing forward to DAERA proposals and policies on carbon budgets, to fully consult with relevant sector-specific groups. It is timely at this point to mention also amendment No 80, as it details the sectors that we are referring to for the purposes of this Bill.”
“I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate on the group 2 amendments, which are on proposals and policies. A number of the amendments make additional clauses to the Bill. I will lay out Sinn Féin's position, albeit Mr McGuigan has already covered some of it. <BR /> <BR />Amendment Nos 18 to 28 relate to sectoral plans and would insert new clauses 10A to 10K. I offer broad support for the concept of sectoral plans, so we will be supporting amendment No 18. The sectoral plans should be consulted on, in keeping with the spirit of consultation and collaboration that we outlined yesterday in our contributions on the first group of amendments. Philip has already set out some of that.”
“Of course, there are opportunities for a new economic dispensation for a green economy that is more resilient to shocks like the pandemic and for green job creation and skills. We should be ambitious now for young people and future generations, but we should also ensure that businesses, workers and communities and the families who are in them are looked after.”
“There are amendments to the Bill that will strengthen it significantly and will ensure that collaboration and consultation are built into the action that will be taken because of the Bill and that account will be taken of all the factors that I have outlined. Later today or tomorrow, those amendments will be debated further, including those on the funding that will be specifically put in place to support the agriculture sector. <BR /> <BR />We all know that tackling the climate emergency is going to be hugely challenging. There are opportunities, and we need to have greater focus on those positives and on the opportunities to create a different and better society where the well-being of our citizens and our planet is prioritised and on the agenda and where we do not just focus on economic output.”
“It is not as if they were not warned that the British Government would do those trade deals to undercut our high-quality food with cheap imports. <BR /> <BR />Creating a divisive narrative about the need to take climate action and the type of action that we need to take in order to prevent the breakdown of our planet, albeit the narrative is on a much more local level and is about protecting our family farms for future generations, suits the DUP because it puts a focus on something other than its disastrous Brexit agenda. <BR /> <BR />The legislation that we are debating is about setting a path, and we are proposing to add further safeguards to it. We can send a signal today that we understand that the time for action is now.”
“My colleague Declan McAleer has sought to introduce legislation to do that. <BR /> <BR />As Ms Bailey referred to, currently, the biggest threat to our rural communities and family farms is Brexit, the loss of EU funding and the fact that there is no replacement funding for rural development. Farmers in my constituency of East Derry, like those in every other constituency across the North, wait anxiously to see what will replace the vital EU subsidies lost to Brexit. There are also the trade deals that the British Government are doing around the world, about which the DUP Minister and MPs have publicly expressed concern.”
“Amendment No 35 requires all Departments to ensure, when developing policies, that those policies are consistent with targets in the carbon budgets. <BR /> <BR />I have listened to those who have expressed concerns about the climate Bills. It is fair to say that our farming communities have been the most vocal group. Let me say this clearly: Sinn Féin is committed to standing up for our rural communities and family farms. People should look at our track record in doing that. When Michelle O'Neill was the Agriculture and Rural Development Minister, she put in place the biggest rural development programme to support our rural communities. She maintained the area of natural constraint (ANC) payment, which was unceremoniously dropped by her DUP successor and has never been reinstated.”
“That provides an additional layer of consultation with the public and all stakeholders and sectors that want to have a say. It also gives future MLAs a say and provides for further accountability on what is contained in the carbon budgets. <BR /> <BR />Importantly, amendment No 32 inserts new clause 13A. Mr McGuigan outlined some of that. It relates to the setting of carbon budgets, specifically the social, environmental and economic factors that relate to those budgets. The amendment sets out in detail the requirement for consideration to be taken of the impact of our carbon budgets across a number of factors. Those amendments and amendments in other groups are proposed to ensure that particular account is taken of the unique circumstances of our society and our economic make-up and to ensure that the best science leads the decisions.”
“I thank the Minister for his intervention. As I outlined, the IPCC has indicated that Governments are not doing enough. The panel is one set of scientists — a considerable set of scientists — who put forward their evidence and came to the conclusion that we need to do more. Otherwise, we will have surpassed the Paris Accord target by 2040. <BR /> <BR />I turn to the specific amendments. Mr McGuigan has already spoken to some of them, so I will keep my comments fairly brief. I urge Members to support amendment Nos 2 and 6 on targets. Amendment No 29 to clause 11 on carbon budgets requires a 16-week consultation on the proposed carbon budgets and for those proposals to be laid in the Assembly. It gives the Assembly a vote on the approval of those budgets.”
“As my colleague Philip McGuigan pointed out, that report was compiled by 234 scientists from 66 countries and concluded that Governments were not doing enough to limit global warming to 1·5°C by the end of the century. Some of our amendments would require cognisance to be paid to those experts also. I urge Members to support those amendments.”
“That is the Paris Accord target and the target on the rest of this island. We cannot shirk our responsibility. We need to do our bit; otherwise, we will be left lagging behind most of Europe. That means worse water and soil quality and greater biodiversity loss. <BR /> <BR />We need to be led by the science, but, as already mentioned, the CCC is just one group of experts. It has modelled on the basis of specific circumstances and within the parameters that it was asked to mode within. Other scientists have been referred to, particularly the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which has pointed to the imperative to act. Its most recent report was dubbed a "code red for humanity".”
“I thank the Member for her intervention. A just transition is detailed in the amendments, but I have outlined the overall principle, which is, of course, ensuring that those who are least able to afford it and are most impacted are supported. <BR /> <BR />My colleague Philip McGuigan and others have mentioned the fact that there are more ambitious targets in the South and Scotland than in the Minister's Bill. There are, of course, pathways to achieving those. As someone who worked in agri-food research for over a decade and a half, I am well aware of the types of R&D and innovation that are ongoing, and I am confident that we will achieve the targets that we have set out. Of course, we need to have ambitious overall targets, and that means nothing less than net zero by 2050.”
“That means ensuring that those who are most likely to be impacted and those who can least afford to move away from fossil fuels and carbon-intensive industries are supported to do so and are not left to shoulder the burden. It means that workers and families, particularly those on lower incomes, are supported. We see it currently with the energy crisis. As the price of fossil fuels, including gas, oil and coal, soar, those who are least able to afford new types of equipment to heat or to insulate their homes are most exposed to the fluctuation of those prices. We cannot allow that to happen. <BR /> <BR />Climate action must be about fairness. The legislation that we pass must be not only ambitious but achievable and fair. We need to have ambitious overall targets —”
“I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate. At the outset, I thank the AERA Committee for its conscientious work on both climate Bills and to those, including the Minister, who tabled amendments in response to the evidence that was received. <BR /> <BR />We should not in any way understate the crisis that our planet faces from the climate and biodiversity crises. If we act to mitigate it, it will require a change in how we and future generations live our lives. However, if we put off change and do not act, it will be catastrophic, and the land that we live on and our environment will be unrecognisable within decades. That is what is at stake. <BR /> <BR />It is critical that we commit to taking action to tackle the climate emergency on the basis of the principles of a just transition.”
“It is about putting an end to a culture of precarious work and casualisation that does not recognise the value of workers and that contributes to poor outcomes, most importantly for workers themselves but also for our economy. <BR /> <BR />The Bill to ban zero-hours contracts is about standing up for workers and ensuring that they have decent conditions and greater security in their jobs. It is about delivering real change for workers and their families. I urge Members to support the Bill at Second Stage.”
“There was a desire to see action, including from my party colleagues and from others. The then Department for Employment and Learning Minister was minded to ban exclusivity clauses but ultimately, in a situation familiar to Members, time ran out to see that issue dealt with. <BR /> <BR />The Bill has been welcomed by trade unions as providing a balanced way forward. Hopefully, given that all parties in the Executive have signed up to New Decade, New Approach, and I expect that most Members of the Assembly will want to see this important Bill progress, it will now go forward for Committee consideration and further scrutiny at that stage. Ultimately, the legislation that we are debating aims to provide better protection for workers, across a number of sectors, who are often on exploitative and restrictive contracts.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Bill also prohibits the use of exclusivity clauses and, again, gives workers on those types of contracts greater flexibility. The Bill will apply to workers and employees. It is also worth highlighting that the use of exclusivity clauses is prohibited in Britain, and workers there are protected from dismissal on those grounds. <BR /> <BR />Members will, of course, be aware that there was a departmental consultation on zero-hours contracts back in 2014, which had over 270 responses. Therefore, the issue has been looked at previously in detail, including to understand the extent of the use of these contracts, but, as Jemma outlined, the figures are likely to be underestimated. Action on zero-hours contracts is an issue that was raised in the Committee consideration of the Employment Bill in 2016 and in the Committee report.”
“I certainly urge workers to join a trade union for their sector or, if their workplace does not have a trade union, to seek to unionise. Representation is an important step forward in driving progressive change. <BR /> <BR />In the absence of the broader changes that are envisaged in New Decade, New Approach, the Bill is an important step in protecting workers, particularly those who are in less secure and lower-paid jobs. Ms Dolan has detailed the specifics of each of the Bill's clauses, so I will not repeat them. The Bill strikes a balance in that it requires employers to offer banded-hours contracts — Jemma has explained her rationale for that approach — and to keep a record of that. A worker does not have to accept that, and there is some flexibility there.”
“However, it is disappointing that there has been no consultation on the New Decade, New Approach commitments in respect of workers' rights. <BR /> <BR />The impact of the pandemic on workers and some of the gaps that exist in employment protection with regard to sick pay and leave and protections for those who are self-employed, have been highlighted, as has the particular impact on sectors where there remains a prevalence of low-paid workers on precarious contracts. Many of those workers are our key workers, whose roles were deemed essential early in the pandemic. The best thanks that we can give those workers is better terms and conditions and decent pay, and to encourage and facilitate greater trade union representation, including strengthening collective bargaining rights.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee welcomes the Second Stage of the Bill and recognises that it now requires detailed consultation across a range of stakeholders. The Committee will endeavour to engage as widely as possible in the time available through its own survey and consultation at all levels with those who are impacted by the legislation. <BR /> <BR />I will now make some remarks in my capacity as Sinn Féin's economy spokesperson. Ms Dolan has already outlined the detail of the Bill, and I have already mentioned that banning zero-hours contracts is something that the parties signed up to as part of the New Decade, New Approach commitments to employment and workers' rights. We all recognise that COVID has had an impact and, in some ways, has limited what could be achieved in this short mandate.”
“The Committee is aware that a significant number of workers in the North are on zero-hours contracts, which leaves them in a vulnerable position where they have no guaranteed hours or stable income, and that they are often on a lower rate of pay. The Committee recognises the need for legislation to address the issue. <BR /> <BR />The Committee explored a number of issues with the Bill sponsor, including the response to the consultation, the types of workers who would be covered and the practical enforcement of the provisions. The Committee also sought legal advice following the session with the Bill sponsor on an issue that was raised in Committee around the definition of "a contract" for the purposes of the Bill.”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak as Chair of the Economy Committee to outline the Committee's consideration of the Bill to date, after which I will speak briefly in my party capacity. <BR /> <BR />As the Bill sponsor, Jemma Dolan MLA, outlined, the Bill aims to end the use of zero-hours contracts in the labour market and replace them with banded-hours contracts. The Committee received a pre-introductory briefing from the Bill sponsor on 8 December 2021, when she outlined the Bill's detailed policy proposals. I thank the Member for her early engagement on the Bill and for briefing the Committee on its principles. <BR /> <BR />The Committee acknowledges the New Decade, New Approach commitment to banning zero-hours contracts and that that aim is widely supported.”
“Employment is fully devolved to the Assembly; we have the ability to set our own policy, and, in the Bill, we have utilised that. We are standing up for workers, and the amendments would make us a leader across these islands in ensuring that workers suffering miscarriage will have access to paid leave — that they, along with workers who suffer the death of a child, will have the right to paid time off to seek support, to deal with the practicalities or simply to grieve. Moving forward with the Bill and the progressive amendments to it is something of which the Assembly, which does not always get the best of press, and we as MLAs collectively can be proud.”
“I thank in particular the Bill Clerks for their support in achieving what, I hope, will be a positive outcome today. <BR /> <BR />As I have said, this is important legislation in its own right. The Bill will provide support for workers who find themselves in the awful circumstances of the death of a child or of a stillbirth. The amendments made by the Assembly at Consideration Stage and today's amendments, if they are supported, will provide for rights to statutory leave and pay for workers suffering a miscarriage from day 1 of employment. Those are important steps forward. The intent is to ensure that workers in those terrible circumstances have the right to compassionate support from their employer from the time that they enter employment. <BR /> <BR />The amendments show the benefits of devolution.”
“At Consideration Stage, the Assembly expressed its support for a time frame to be applied to the provision of paid leave for those suffering miscarriage. That is achieved through amendment Nos 19, 20 and 21. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 22 will not be called if amendment Nos 19, 20 and 21 are made, but, for the record, I will not move it. <BR /> <BR />I support amendment Nos 23, 24 and 25 in the name of the Minister. <BR /> <BR />I put on record my appreciation for the work of the Committee team that guided us through the Bill and for the constructive and cooperative approach of my fellow Economy Committee members throughout the consideration of the Bill. I thank the departmental officials for their work and for setting out the challenges and for the approach that they took to get to where we are today.”
“The deadline for the provision to cease, as set out in amendment No 19, is generous but appropriate to allow for any unexpected occurrences. I reinforce my view that the provisions should be made as quickly as possible and reiterate that officials have told us that they are working towards April 2024. It will obviously be for a future Economy Committee to hold a future Minister to that. I urge Members to support amendment No 19. <BR /> <BR />I propose to insert the same time frame into the Minister's amendment No 20 on commencement via amendment No 21. That amendment links the removal of the temporary provision in amendment No 19 with the commencement of the provision for miscarriage leave and pay. It is therefore appropriate that the same time frame apply.”
“I will not move amendment No 18, as, having been briefed by departmental officials, I appreciate and accept that they are working to implement the provision for miscarriage leave and to remove the 26-week qualification period by April 2024. There is a deadline of November 2022, however, for informing HMRC of the intention to make those changes by 2024. If there were additional complexity or unexpected circumstances and the November deadline were missed, it would be April 2025 before the changes could be initiated. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 19 reinserts the 26-week qualification period but sets a deadline of April 2026 for ceasing the temporary provision and ensuring that the entitlement becomes a day-1 right.”
“To be clear, the amendments, as described to the Committee by an official, are not designed to disqualify but to allow a worker the best chance of being entitled to statutory pay, and they will benefit not only new workers but those on zero-hours contracts who may be paid differently in different weeks.”
“The amendments tabled by the Minister will insert into the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 the method of calculation of the minimum earning threshold that applies to other statutory family benefits that can be recouped by employers. That puts qualification by earnings for the statutory paid entitlement on the same footing and will allow for it to become a day-1 right, which is what the Assembly set out to achieve. The amendments that cover those changes are more appropriate than the alternative amendments drafted in my name, so I will not move amendment Nos 2, 4, 7, 9, 10 and 14, and I urge Members to support the amendments in the name of the Minister.”
“The Committee was then briefed by officials later that morning, and, following that, I requested that the Bill Office draft late amendments, which were accepted by the Speaker and are listed on the Marshalled List. <BR /> <BR />To be clear about my intentions, I intend only to move the late amendments, and I will set out why. I am content with amendment Nos 1 and 17 in the name of the Minister, which provide for miscarriage leave and pay and specify the conditions to determine that a person has had a miscarriage. They also provide for a person in a relationship with a person suffering a miscarriage to access statutory paid leave. I support the Minister's amendment Nos 3, 5, 6, 8, 11, 12 and 13 on the calculation of the entitlement to pay and amendment Nos 15 and 16.”
“I appreciate that the amendments were complex, but, when we had not received them by the Friday before the deadline, I engaged with the Bill Office and instructed it to draft amendments to achieve the outcome agreed by the Assembly as a contingency. As I have alluded to, that was a complex process, but the Bill Office did it anyway, and I record my thanks for the quick turnaround by it late in the day. <BR /> <BR />The Committee then got sight of the Minister's proposed amendments late on the evening before the deadline for amendment submission. I considered the amendments. I still had some questions about them, so I submitted my own in advance of the deadline.”
“We reported that back to the Committee and corresponded with the Minister that, subject to seeing the amendments, we were content with the approach of having both the provision of miscarriage leave and pay and the removal of the 26-week qualification period come into effect in April 2024. <BR /> <BR />The Further Consideration Stage of the Parental Bereavement (Leave and Pay) Bill was scheduled for today, and, since the end of Christmas recess, the Committee, via the Clerk, has been pressing the Department to see and to be able to consider the amendments in advance of the deadline for submission.”
“The officials, however, set out, as part of that discussion, a challenge in relation to the time frame, as HMRC imposes a deadline for any changes being requested of about a year and a half in advance. That deadline has passed for the implementation of changes for 2023, which is what we had envisaged in the amendment proposed by the Committee at Consideration Stage. The earliest date that changes could come into effect was April 2024. They also informed us that it would be the same with the removal of the 26-week qualification period, which we had intended to come into effect immediately, potentially through a manual process. However, there were also complexities with HMRC in relation to that.”
“I welcome the commitment from the Minister that that will go ahead for April 2022. The Department has indicated that the work in relation to miscarriage leave and pay and to remove the 26-week qualification period will take until 2024, which is longer than what was allowed for in the Committee's amendments. Therefore, I support allowing for that longer period. <BR /> <BR />I have a number of amendments listed on the Marshalled List, and I want to set out my intention in relation to those for Members. The Deputy Chair of the Economy Committee and I met the Minister and officials following Consideration Stage to discuss how the process was moving forward and, through that discussion, ascertained that the Department was working to table amendments at Further Consideration Stage.”
“I welcome the opportunity to contribute again to this really important debate on the legislation to introduce the statutory right to leave and pay following the death of a child or a stillbirth. At Consideration Stage, the Assembly supported amendments tabled by the Economy Committee to extend the right to leave and pay to include those who suffer miscarriage and to make it a day-1 right. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the amendments that the Minister has tabled to achieve what the Committee intended, which was to allow the provision for parental bereavement leave and pay for parents whose child dies or who suffer a stillbirth to proceed while further work is done in relation to the introduction of miscarriage leave and pay and to allow for the development of systems by HMRC.”
“— to be made to work, and 40% want the Executive to maximise opportunities. Does the Minister accept that, just like with Brexit, he and his party are out of step with the majority of businesses here on the protocol?”
“The Minister and his colleagues are fond of cherry-picking figures. I see that he is not quoting the bit in the same study about substituting imports in the EU and the rest of the world, because we can. Under the protocol, that could reduce the impact on GDP by half. <BR /> <BR />Anyway, a recent Manufacturing NI survey showed that the biggest issue facing businesses is the shortage of labour, with the protocol being down their list of priorities. Two thirds of businesses do want the protocol —”
“The Committee received a pre-introductory briefing from the Bill sponsor at its meeting on 24 November where she outlined the detailed policy proposals in the Bill. At its meeting on 1 December, the Committee agreed to publish its call for evidence and survey and to write to key stakeholders inviting written submissions on the Bill. At the meeting on 15 December, the Committee took oral evidence from key stakeholder groups. The Committee has completed taking oral evidence and requests an extension to ensure that the Committee Stage of the Bill is completed to the standard that is expected. <BR /> <BR />To conclude, I ask on behalf of the Economy Committee that the Assembly support the motion to extend the Committee Stage of the Bill to 11 February 2022.”
“It has received cross-party support, in principle, with agreement that employees should be given adequate time to receive the help and support required, and should be supported by their employer.”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak as Chair of the Economy Committee to seek an extension to the Committee Stage of the Domestic Abuse (Safe Leave) Bill. The Bill was referred to the Economy Committee on 30 November 2021 for its Committee Stage. The Bill should, under Standing Order 33(2), complete its Committee Stage by 31 January 2022. The main objective of the Bill is to provide workers or employees who are victims or survivors of domestic abuse with at least 10 days' paid leave in each leave year. The legislation is long overdue, given that, up until now, there has been no statutory entitlement to paid safe leave for people in these very difficult circumstances.”
“There is also an onus on the Irish Government and the EU to make it clear to the British Government how fundamentally unworkable and unacceptable it would be.”
“Many people in the South may be completely unaware of the requirement, and penalties if found to be in contravention include a fine or up to six months in prison. Requiring pre-travel clearance would harden the border for thousands of our fellow EU citizens. <BR /> <BR />The proposal is unworkable and would be unenforceable. The very fact that it has been proposed highlights the complete lack of understanding by those in the British Administration who came up with it. It is clear that they do not have a notion about daily life here. The British Government need to listen to the objections and concerns that are being raised across this island and go back to the drawing board. The proposal needs to be scrapped.”
“<BR /> <BR />Thousands of people cross the border every day for work, study, childcare and healthcare, and for family, social and tourism reasons. Those thousands include non-Irish EU citizens. The British Government claim that there will be no checks at the border but have said that there will be ad hoc in-country checks. I fear that that would create a real risk of racial profiling. <BR /> <BR />The proposed requirement would create unreasonable levels of bureaucracy and unacceptable legal uncertainty for thousands of citizens.”
“The so-called Nationality and Borders Bill is passing through Westminster. The Bill, with its many regressive provisions, is an extension of the Home Office's hostile environment, and concerns have been raised about it for some time. However, it is the particular requirement for non-Irish EU citizens to have to apply online for pre-travel clearance to cross the border that I want to raise. <BR /> <BR />The proposal has been criticised by parties across this island and by rights organisations. The requirement would undermine the Good Friday Agreement, as well as being in conflict with the protocol around the non-diminution of rights. It is, frankly, ridiculous to suggest that people in the South, particularly those living in border areas, would be subject to pre-travel clearance to go about their daily business.”
“We have no input per se to the research councils and how that funding is prioritised.”
“— structures, yes, of ARIA, compared with what is already in place for the research councils, for example, which are reserved under the 1998 Act.”
“I just want to ask the Minister a question. This is an advance in terms of input from us in the North into the operations — not the operations per se but the priorities or —”
“We raised that with officials at last week's meeting and asked them what safeguards would be in place in respect of that. Perhaps the Minister can refer to that in his closing remarks.”
“Over the past two years, we have seen the importance of R&D in, for example, tackling the pandemic, where we were able to make very quick advances on vaccines. The type of research to be funded by ARIA is important, and there are examples, as the Minister said, of this having been successful elsewhere. These high-risk, long-term projects might not meet the criteria of existing funding streams and therefore need this separate stream. We support the aims of the Bill.”
“That will provide additionality and will support research that would not otherwise proceed. <BR /> <BR />On the basis of the very limited time available to the Committee to scrutinise the LCM, and given the general contentment expressed by stakeholders, the Committee for the Economy agrees to support the LCM. <BR /> <BR />I will just make a few brief comments as Sinn Féin economy spokesperson. Obviously, research and innovation are hugely important, not just economically but socially and culturally, in terms of making technological advances and advances in a whole range of fields, not least as we seek to meet our decarbonisation targets and tackle the climate and biodiversity crises.”