Debate contribution: Public Sector: Late Payments
Debate contribution by Dr Caoimhe Archibald on .
- MLA
- Dr Caoimhe Archibald
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 10 September 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Public Sector: Late Payments
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4517816
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.
I welcome the opportunity to speak to the motion as it shines a light on an incredibly important matter. Small and microbusinesses, as many Members have reflected, are the heart of our local economy. It is, therefore, incumbent on all of us to do what we can to support those businesses. I also fully recognise the difficulties that are caused by delays in promptly paying suppliers, particularly for small businesses and microbusinesses that play an important part in supporting the local economy. Many small businesses, as has been reflected, have a limited cash flow, and undue delays in paying invoices can have a devastating impact on the survival of those businesses and their employees. I am pleased to confirm that the current public contract regulations, which apply to all public bodies here, including councils, already require that payments to contractors be made no later than 30 days from receipt of a valid undisputed invoice. Those regulations also require contractors to pay their subcontractors within 30 days and that those requirements be in all further subcontracts in the supply chain. The new procurement regulations, which are due to come into force shortly, also incorporate those requirements. The Executive have a prompt payment target whereby Departments aim to pay valid and undisputed invoices within 10 days of receipt and no later than 30 days. I encourage all Ministers to require their non-departmental public bodies to implement that policy. I add that, while the Executive have no authority over councils, I encourage the Minister for Communities to work with council networks to improve the payment practices in that area, given the number of microbusinesses that provide goods and services to councils. Where my Department's responsibilities are concerned, the Finance Shared Services provide transactional processing and reporting, including making payments to suppliers on behalf of central government. In the previous financial year, the Finance Shared Services processed over 807,000 payments totalling approximately £4 billion. During that year, 91% of valid invoices were paid within 10 days of receipt and 97% of valid invoices were paid within 30 days. That strong record of prompt payment has been maintained throughout this year, and I am committed to ensuring that central government leads by example and continues to drive up performance. Unfortunately, the level of performance across the public sector varies greatly, with a number of areas requiring immediate attention to improve their performance. I strongly urge all public- and private-sector organisations to adhere to that best practice and, where their performance falls short, to take immediate action to make the necessary improvements. I am meeting the local government partnership panel next week and have already requested that prompt payment performance be a key matter for discussion. In addition, my officials have been engaging with the Federation of Small Businesses to share learning and discuss prompt payment performance and reporting. I will meet the federation tomorrow, as Mr Honeyford mentioned, to discuss how best we drive up performance and improve reporting across the public sector. It is important that there is transparency around prompt payment performance and reporting on the reasons for delay. The motion references:
"56% of small business owners and the self-employed ... had experienced late payment in the past three months".
The data supporting that does not relate exclusively to the public sector, and I urge all private-sector businesses to also promptly pay their suppliers, particularly those that are in their supply chains. I suggest that resources be concentrated on improving the current 10-day target, with the aim of moving to a five-day target when that has been achieved, depending on transaction and resource implications. I also call on all sectors, public and private, to recognise the challenges that businesses face and the importance of cash flow to them and their employees and to immediately address any shortfall in the prompt payment to their suppliers. I strongly believe that payment performance in the public sector will improve only if we strengthen the monitoring of prompt payment targets. I plan to bring a refreshed public procurement policy statement to the Executive that will include a requirement for public bodies to report on their prompt payment performance. That additional transparency will improve accountability and maintain the appropriate level of scrutiny and focus on this important matter. In my role as Finance Minister, I will continue to advocate for the prompt payment of our small and medium-sized enterprises for the goods and services that they provide and for central government to lead by example.
754 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.02 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.96).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.01 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.96 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.83 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.17 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:02 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.