Conor Murphy
Newry and Armagh · Sinn Féin · Northern Ireland
“More detailed consultations with individual childcare providers and parents are taking place this month and into February. The group agreed that the research would conclude in March 2025. The work is on schedule; there has been no delay. Childcare is an excellent example of various Departments coming together to deliver for our people.”
“The Bill looks at the issue of flexible working, but at every meeting that we have had with employers, we have made a point of talking to them about the need for them to be flexible, particularly in relation to women who are returning to the workforce, and to offer people arrangements that entice them back to the workforce and give them t…”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak to the motion. <BR /> <BR />Although the Department of Education leads on childcare, it is a priority for the Executive as a whole. When setting the Budget for this financial year, the Executive earmarked an additional £25 million for childcare.”
“As a matter of fact, I publicly launched the scheme and the courses in the Met last summer. My officials are also working with our six further education colleges to develop childcare microcourses for future delivery. <BR /> <BR />I also offered to assist Minister Givan's Department as required.”
“The group identified the need to better understand the business models for childcare, what type of support is needed to ensure the sector's financial viability and how support should be targeted. Given my Department's business expertise, we volunteered to take that work forward.”
“No tensions or obstacles have been placed in the way of any of that work, and I hope that that continues to be the case, because the issues are much more important than party political exchanges across the Chamber. We will continue to work in that manner.”
The complete record
Every one of 4,975 lines we hold for Conor Murphy, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 38 of 100.
“Thank you, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I repeat: I put the option to the Executive. The option was not taken up by the Executive to fund universal credit for the remainder of this financial year or, indeed, for the next three years. I am not prepared to comment on which Ministers took what position, only that the Member's party came out and argued in public something that it had not argued in private. That is what I said, and I repeat it. <BR /> <BR />The Executive table is the place to discuss it, if people have a proposal to reduce the allocation to another Department or a proposal in relation to an allocation that they want themselves. If an option is put to them of funding a particular issue now and into the future, they can propose to support that or ask for a vote on it. None of that happened with his party in the Executive.”
“publicly said something different from the stance it took in the Executive. In general terms, as you will know —”
“It is not appropriate, in general, to talk about which Ministers said what in the Executive. I draw attention to your party because your party”
“I will continue to discuss with all Ministers their requirements. Of course, January monitoring will be the last opportunity in this financial year to bid for additional money. It may be the case that this allocation is, if you like, an instalment on spending that will be required to continue through the early part of next year.”
“When the Health money was taken out of the allocations, Education received the lion's share of the remaining allocations, much more than other Departments. As with all other Ministers and Departments, they had bid for a range of things that were needed. The reduction in some of those is to try to get people through to January monitoring. If there is still a requirement then, there will be an opportunity to revisit some of the requirements, like those the Member talked about. If the bid was not met in full, it might be a consequence of the intention to get through this next period and, rather than meet that full bid now, revisit it in January. <BR /> <BR />I have had correspondence with the Education Minister since the Executive met to discuss the monitoring round paper, and she highlighted special educational needs.”
“I do not call that draft paper; contrary to popular belief, it is the Executive who call it. They can amend it or negotiate around it however they choose. Hopefully, we will come to a draft Budget that the Executive can launch for public consultation. That process of discussion of what is required over the next number of years is happening as we speak, and I will engage with Executive Ministers over the next couple of weeks.”
“If there is a reduced requirement, it needs to be surrendered. I do not have the detail of that; the Member, as a member of the Policing Board, probably has more detail than I have as to why there was a reduced requirement. We are in the process of planning the next three years' Budgets, and I have no doubt that the Department of Justice and the Minister of Justice are putting together bids in consultation with the Policing Board and others in the Department's interest to be put into the three-year budgeting process. <BR /> <BR />I will engage with all of my Executive colleagues in the time ahead. I think that we have meetings scheduled over the next couple of weeks, and, on the back of those engagements and the pre-planning discussion that we had in relation to our priorities, I will try to put together a draft paper.”
“If you are not prepared to put up, there is no point in complaining publicly afterwards.”
“If you take £200 million and give it to the Health Department, that leaves £23 million or £24 million available for a £55 million bid. In that context, the bid could not be met. <BR /> <BR />The Member should bear it in mind that I put a proposal to the Executive. The Executive decide: I do not decide the money. I did not make the cut to universal credit as you, perhaps, alleged on social media as well — talk about expanding the truth in relation to that. The Executive decided in relation to that. I put an option to the Executive not only to fund the universal credit uplift now in the time ahead but to fund it over the next three years. That option was not taken up and was not argued for by the SDLP, which was present at the meeting. I say again that Executive meetings are "Put up or shut up" time.”
“The Member's party seems to be determined to flog the mistruth that it has been spreading. I do not understand why he wonders why I respond in the way that I do. If you are going to misrepresent people's positions and misrepresent your own party's position, you should expect to be called out because of that. That is exactly what I intend to do. I will not sit here and allow his party to have one position privately in the Executive and another position in public and not call that out. That is exactly what has been happening here. Just do the maths. If you want to take money from the Health Department, make a proposal to do so. Do not stand up here and say "There was money available, because it says here in the paper that there was money available".”
“I do not disagree with the Member's analysis. When the Executive have discussed prioritising health, that has not simply meant the Health Department, although it obviously carries the lion's share of the burden. There is a range of contributory factors to poor health outcomes, including poverty, social exclusion and educational underachievement. When we therefore get into the longer-term planning for health, although it will very significantly be about funding the Health Department, it will also be about looking at other contributory factors. The Member's is a valid argument, but the problem comes when you have to secure the level of resource required to do all that you want to do. Prioritising health goes beyond the Health Department, and I recognise the contribution that education makes to health too.”
“<BR /> <BR />The level of resources available to us, particularly the allocations for the next three years, do not match the rhetoric from the people who stand outside Downing Street on a Thursday night to clap for our healthcare workers. We continue to try to support people as best we can within the limited allocations that are available to us, but there are other measures, such as the one that I have taken with procurement, that can be taken to better the lot of people, particularly those in the domiciliary care sector who are outside the public-sector pay structures.”
“We were pleased that, at the very least, we could make the pay award that the Health Minister had asked for for health workers. I am sure that the Member is aware that, under the procurement policy that I am bringing forward, there will be a requirement for anyone who receives government contracts to pay the standard living wage in the time ahead, and that will help in particular domiciliary care workers who are outside the health system and working for private companies. Even though it will do so in a limited way, I hope that that will improve the lot of many of those people who are vital to providing care and service to our elderly and vulnerable people right across the community.”
“As I said, I waited for over a week for final endorsement of the urgent procedure, and nobody proposed any change during that time.”
“I make a proposition based on the bids that have been received, on the amount that we have, on the analysis of my Department and on the discussions that my departmental officials have had with officials in all the other Departments on the priorities and on what is needed. I make a proposition to the Executive, and the Executive or Executive Ministers can propose amendments to that or reject it out of hand. The proposition that I made for October monitoring was accepted by the Executive. Although Ministers will undoubtedly be disappointed that various bids were not met, they all recognise that way more bids were made than we have money for, and that means that choices have to be made. We presented the paper to the Executive, and they endorsed it.”
“As I say, in general terms, the amount bid for was more than twice that which was available to give. All the bids made by Departments were backed up with supporting evidence for the particular demand. I have no doubt that the Infrastructure Minister was disappointed that a number of her bids were not met. That becomes a difficult question. <BR /> <BR />Contrary to what was said in previous questions, I do not decide these things. I would love for the SDLP to propose that I get decision-making powers over all Executive finances, because it would then be a simpler exercise for me, but the Executive decide.”
“I find it difficult to keep up with the priorities of some parties in the Chamber, because their private priorities are often quite different from their public ones. That is a matter that they can explain to the electorate in the time ahead. My commitment to Health remains. As I say, when the Executive returned, pre-pandemic, in January 2020, they said that Health was their number one priority. The pandemic, if anything, has reinforced that necessity. As I said in response to previous questions, I put that to the Executive at our planning session for the three-year Budget. I will continue to discuss with the Health Minister what his requirements are. On the basis of what is needed for Health, we will have a discussion with the rest of our Executive colleagues about how we can plan appropriate funding over the next three years.”
“You have a responsibility to be honest to people and to stand over the decisions that you take. It is similar to when the high street voucher scheme was being proposed: you had a responsibility. Unless you objected and called for a vote at the Executive at that time to reduce that or to do away with it, do not try to present a different position now. Be honest with people.”
“I am not sure which figures the Member is using. Perhaps someone could provide her with a calculator. When you do the simple maths, you see that either it adds up or it does not. A total of £200 million for Health left about £23 million of resource. That is all that was left. Those are the figures. The rest of it was capital, and that cannot be used for universal credit. There was not £55 million, unless we took money off Health. If her party wants to propose that we take money off Health, it should make that proposal. Her Executive colleague could have made that proposal. As I say, at the Executive table, it is time to put up or shut up. There is no point in sitting silently at the Executive and not proposing changes and then coming out in public to try to present a different position.”
“I resent the suggestion that I am stretching the truth in these matters. The figures are there. If the Member or her party colleague at the Executive wanted funding to Health to be reduced, because that is the only way in which you could have made up the £55 million for universal credit —”
“We are working through the figures with the Department of Health to see what it absolutely needs in the time ahead and what resources, as we now understand them to be following the spending review, will therefore be available to the Executive over the next three years. It is my clear view that issues such as waiting lists and support for staff need to be tackled on a longer-term, recurrent basis. If we do not address them in the longer term, they will become cyclical problems. That is my firm intention, and I know that the Minister of Health shares that view.”
“There have been very significant discussions at official level. No doubt, I will talk to the Minister of Health in the time ahead. We have talked many times since the Executive returned about the requirements for the health service, the desire to get into that longer-term planning and budgeting, what needs to be done around recurrent spending to attract and retain staff, and the impact that that will have on reducing waiting lists and improving the viability of the service generally. We have had a lot of discussions. As I have said on a number of occasions, during the planning session on the three-year Budget, I proposed that Health remain our priority in the time ahead.”
“It is, perhaps, for the Minister of Education or the Department of Education to go into the granular detail of that bid. It was a bid to support IT across the Department of Education. As the Member said, special educational needs provision is a priority, and it is also a priority for the Education Minister. She has written to me since the October monitoring round to ask for some assurance that we will continue to prioritise it in the January monitoring round. I have assured her that we will. We recognise that there are significant challenges across all Departments, but we need to look after the most vulnerable, particularly our most vulnerable students.”
“<BR /> <BR />When the option that I presented in relation to universal credit was not taken up by the Executive, there was an agreement to come back to a discussion on poverty issues and to see what the Executive collectively can do on those. I look forward to that. While we do not have resources for that at the moment, we may get the sense between now and January as to whether any other resources are being surrendered. I am sure that the Department for Communities and the Minister for Communities will want to see as much support as we can offer going to assisting people with the cost of living crisis that is beginning to develop.”
“The tables accompanying the statement show the bids that were made and the funding that was received. I do not believe that there was money for DFC, and I am sure that the Minister was disappointed. As I said, more than twice the amount of money was bid for than we had to deliver. If you take out the £180 million that came across as a Barnett consequential for Health, the rest of the money was a very small amount to distribute as part of the monitoring round. It is a challenge, and I know that Departments want funding. Given the cost of living crisis into which we are heading, I am sure that the Department for Communities will seek additional support over the winter period, because people are facing many challenging circumstances.”
“Yes; those bids were met in full. As I said at the outset of the statement, there were more than double the amount of bids than we had the resources to allocate funding to. Departments, of course, are disappointed with the overall outcome, but it is important that we have funding for winter pressures for DFI Roads and the taxi sector. There is a shortage of drivers, and we need to do anything that we can in order to encourage people into that profession. That bid was met in full.”
“There are restrictions on using financial transactions capital and parameters within which it can be used, but I have always encouraged and will continue to encourage Departments to explore that to see whether they can meet the requirement and make use of that funding.”
“We allocated all the capital that was bid for. We cannot add on for Departments if they have not bid for it. That left about £3·2 million at the end. Departments will now know that that is available, and we would expect improved bids in January monitoring to ensure that it is spent. The picture for accessing financial transactions capital has improved from where we were a number of years ago, but it is still short of where we need to be. I will continue to encourage all Departments, including the Department for Infrastructure, which will be bidding on behalf of Northern Ireland Water, to make sure that they seek opportunities.”
“They should not wait for a week, speak to the press and criticise others for what they did or did not do. When people are asked to put up or shut up, some people, unfortunately, shut up. Therefore the option that I had put forward was not accepted. It is not complicated: there was an option to do it; there was not enough money in the monitoring round. People did not go for the option when it was available to them.”
“The statement is not complicated. It is simple: if we gave the £200 million to Health, we did not have enough money. That is a simple mathematical calculation. Instead, I presented an option to the Executive, because there had been a lot of discussion on that. Of course, my view is that the situation should have been prevented in Westminster, where the Member's party attends. In any event, there was not sufficient funding within the moneys available to us, and, of course, our decision on those was taken prior to the outcome of the spending review. When we are having those discussions around the Executive table and there is an option on the table, it is time for parties to put up or shut up. If they want to go for that option, that is the time to speak up.”
“It is money that is required at the end of the scheme. As the Member knows, the LRSS was a vital support for a lot of businesses during the pandemic. It was based on the health regulations and requirements that were placed by the Health Department on businesses to close in order to assist in restricting the transmission of the virus. Once those regulations ceased, the support ceased, but there are tail ends to sort out. For instance, some people have appealed because they did not get it, and there are others who received money that, perhaps, was not required. That is part of the tidying-up exercise. I hope to get that concluded in the not-too-distant future.”
“We will try to provide a draft Budget that is based on those priorities and to get support for that in the Executive.”
“When we first came back into office in January 2020, the Executive agreed that health would be our priority. That was prior to the pandemic landing on top of us. If anything, it is an even greater priority now, given the pressure that the health service is under, so, of course, I will continue to argue that. As part of our three-year Budget planning exercise, I proposed to the Executive that we retained health as a priority and that, if needs be, we would have to look to other Departments to contribute to that priority. We are examining closely the outcome of the spending review. We are also discussing with the Health Department and the Minister the Health Minister's budget requirements in the time ahead and the money that is needed to reduce waiting lists, to bring about transformation and to support healthcare staff.”
“As that goes on into years 2 and 3, it drops off, given the increased pressure on services and inflation, until we reach what is basically a flat line in years 2 and 3. I am disappointed. I know that we will debate the Budget and the spending review at a later stage, but there was an opportunity to invest properly in public services and recognise that public services got us all through the pandemic experience and continue to do so. We should invest properly in them. That opportunity was not taken, and that is why I am disappointed with the outcome.”
“On financial transactions capital or RRI borrowing, we cannot give the figure for the end of the year until we get to the end of the year. I discussed this with the Chairperson earlier. I am disappointed that we have not got a greater uptake to this point. We will go back and encourage Departments to make use of it, because we are challenged in the resources that we have available. I have always been of the view that we should maximise those resources and look at that closely. <BR /> <BR />On the figures in the spending review, the £1·6 billion did not match the figures that we had. They were starting from a previous baseline, whereas we were starting from last year. The only way to measure the additional money that you have is to look at what you had last year as a baseline. Therefore, it is about £450 million.”
“<BR /> <BR />Members are, of course, free to disagree with the October monitoring outcome, but it is hypocritical to say publicly that Health should be prioritised while privately seeking to reduce funding for it, disingenuous to say publicly that you support the universal credit uplift when privately you did not support its funding on a long-term basis and dishonest to say publicly that you object to the use of urgent procedure when privately you raised no objections. <BR /> <BR />I commend the October monitoring outcome to the Assembly.”
“The decision was therefore taken at that Executive meeting that the monitoring round would be approved by urgent procedure. To be clear, no changes have been made to the allocations, and the decision on universal credit has not changed from the position discussed at the Executive meeting. <BR /> <BR />Following the Executive's discussion on October monitoring, I wrote to all Ministers informing them that I was seeking approval through urgent procedure. A week passed, and no Minister replied to propose an alternative allocation or to object to urgent procedure. On Friday at 3.46 pm, urgent procedure was granted. I immediately released a written statement and wrote to the Speaker to inform him of my intention to make an oral statement.”
“As that funding may be used only to address pressures in the student loan impairment ring-fence, it is not available for allocation by the Executive. There is £66·7 million of financial transactions capital that remains unallocated at the conclusion of October monitoring. I again call on Departments to consider ways to use that lending capacity. <BR /> <BR />To aid transparency in the process, the statement is accompanied by tables outlining the detail of changes to spending areas in Departments. <BR /> <BR />Before I conclude, I will comment on the use of urgent procedure and the timing of this announcement. Regrettably, at the Executive meeting on 21 October, the First Minister was not in a position to sign off on the monitoring round.”
“<BR /> <BR />With all the capital bids having been met, £3·2 million of capital DEL remains available for allocation at the conclusion of the October monitoring exercise. <BR /> <BR />Ring-fenced resource DEL is strictly controlled by the Treasury, and funding cannot be moved out of that area. Changes to that area are shown in the tables that accompany the statement. Colleagues should note that we have exited the monitoring round with no surplus funding in ring-fenced resource DEL for depreciation and impairments. There are pressures of £21·9 million that have not been met, and that situation will be reviewed in January monitoring. <BR /> <BR />There remains, as previously notified, £443·8 million unallocated in relation to student loan impairment.”
“That includes £11·5 million for the Department of Education: £8·2 million for minor works across the school estate; £2 million for CO2 monitors to assess classroom ventilation in the context of COVID-19; and £1·3 million for IT equipment. <BR /> <BR />The Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs receives £8·6 million for a range of COVID-19 recovery schemes, including rural community and small settlements regeneration programmes. The Department of Health will receive £6·7 million: £3·6 million for the health and social care trusts and £3·1 million for health support services impacted by COVID-19. The Executive Office has been allocated £1 million for the social investment fund (SIF).”
“In addition, it would be important to replace the universal credit uplift on a long-term basis and not just until the end of March. The costs of that are expected to rise to £200 million per year. In order to adequately fund Health and universal credit, I set out the pro-rata contributions needed from Departments other than Health to fund the universal credit uplift not just for this financial year but for future years. Given the cynical party politics that have surrounded the issue, let me reiterate that it was not possible to fund both Health and universal credit from the monitoring round. Therefore, I presented a different means of funding the universal credit uplift on a long-term basis. That option was not accepted. <BR /> <BR />The £27·8 million in capital bids submitted by Departments have all been met.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Assembly has been allocated £0·2 million to cover Members costs, including allowances and pensions. <BR /> <BR />All available resource DEL funding has been allocated. Members will be aware that, shortly after information was provided to the Communities Committee, it was leaked to the media that the Minister for Communities had made a £55 million bid for universal credit. That bid was to reinstate the £20 per week uplift that, disgracefully, has been withdrawn by the British Government. After £200 million was allocated to Health, only £23 million of resource was available. That was not enough to meet the universal credit bid. Meeting the universal credit bid from the monitoring round would be incompatible with the public commitment of the Executive and of many Members to prioritise Health.”
“I appreciate that NI Water faces significant pressures as a result of increased energy costs, and that can be revisited in January monitoring. <BR /> <BR />The Executive Office has been allocated £3·2 million for lost FTC loan interest repayment income due to the revision of loan terms and holiday payment arrangements that impacted on the timing of the interest repayments. <BR /> <BR />The Department of Finance has been allocated £3 million to cover the COVID-19 localised restrictions support scheme (LRSS), which supported businesses subject to health restrictions. <BR /> <BR />The Department of Justice receives £2 million: £1·5 million for the Legal Services Agency (LSA) and £0·5 million is for the safer communities programme.”
“The Department of Education will receive £9·2 million. Of that, £7·7 million is to help children with special educational needs (SEN). In my view, SEN should be prioritised in the January monitoring. There is £1·3 million for non-SEN school-based pressures, and the remaining £0·2 million is for non-SEN substitute teacher cover. <BR /> <BR />The Department for Infrastructure will receive £6 million. Of that, £4 million is for road maintenance and winter pressures, which meets that bid in full. There is £0·5 million for a scheme to encourage people to become taxi drivers. That money will refund licence fees and cover the cost of taxi meter tests. NI Water has been provided with £1·5 million to aid with increased electricity costs.”
“There is also £15 million for health and social care trusts and £5 million to expand the mental health support fund.”
“Of that, £80 million is for hospital pressures arising from COVID-19, £70 million is for the pay award requested by the Health Minister and £30 million is to fund elective care. That adds to the £31·5 million that was allocated in June.”
“There were also a number of reduced requirements totalling £41 million resource DEL and £19·6 million capital DEL. Further details are included in the tables that have been provided with the printed version of this statement. <BR /> <BR />The Executive met on Thursday 21 October to discuss the monitoring round. The resource DEL bids submitted by Departments amounted to £516 million, more than double the £223 million available. Full details of the bids and allocations are set out in the tables that accompany this statement. However, I will highlight a few specific areas. <BR /> <BR />In my view, Health should be our top priority. I am therefore glad to announce an additional £200 million for the Department of Health.”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle, for the opportunity to make a statement on the outcome of the Executive's 2021-22 October monitoring exercise. On Friday, I made a written ministerial statement and notified you of my intention to make an oral statement today to allow Members to engage more fully on these important issues. <BR /> <BR />As Members will be aware from my written ministerial statement, in this round, the Executive had £223·6 million resource departmental expenditure limit (DEL), £31 million capital DEL and £66·7 financial transactions capital (FTC) DEL available to address pressures. The majority of that, some £180 million, arose from the Barnett consequential relating to an additional £5·4 billion for the NHS in England.”
“We have all the challenges of ongoing opportunities or attempts to try to undo Tory policy by spending money that we would otherwise be spending on our own public services. That is the balance that we continually face.”
“No. The Tories announced some Barnett consequentials at the start of their party conference to give some measure of support to people. I think that it is well short of what the Department for Communities provided last year. I am sure that the Minister for Communities is looking to see how she can provide assistance to those who would normally get support for winter heating and allowances. <BR /> <BR />There has been a substantial hike, particularly in the cost of gas. That will be challenging because that is a private-sector matter, but it will push more people into fuel poverty. The Executive will have to face those significant challenges. We have had the discussion about the universal credit uplift.”