Peter Weir
Strangford · Ulster Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“Funding was secured for that scheme, and we have been able to take further steps on it. As highlighted by my colleague Diane Dodds, we have seen my successor, the current Minister, be able to implement it at the beginning of September 2021 and funding be made available for it.”
“One of the great fears — I saw it particularly, as Education Minister, from the point of view of children and the domestic setting between partners — was what was going to happen in families when the doors closed and the locks went on. What was happening behind closed doors?”
“There is another significant element of the Bill. I have spoken about it in the Chamber on a couple of occasions. There is always a slight danger that we, as legislators, see legislation as being the end of a process and think that we can pack it away, put it on the shelf and forget about the problem because it has been solved.”
“I welcome the passage of the Bill's Final Stage and commend all the campaigners who have pressed so hard for it and the Bill sponsor. For Pat Catney, hearing some of the tributes must be like hearing eulogies at your funeral, without having to go through the indignity of dying, which is always a double advantage.”
“As highlighted by a number of Members, the impact of period poverty, though not confined to it, has been particularly acute in young women's education. We know that the impact can lead to the missing of education and constraints within education, and that it does so in a disproportionate way.”
“I support the Bill's Final Stage, and I commend the Bill's sponsor for introducing it. I thank the Minister and the Department for the positive attitude that they have taken towards it.”
The complete record
Every one of 3,831 lines we hold for Peter Weir, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 75 of 77.
“Listening to the Member's cheery analysis of the situation that we are facing in Northern Ireland, I was glad that he does not have a part-time post with the Samaritans. <BR /> <BR />As we approach what is effectively — the Chair of the Committee referred to this — the fourth Budget debate in a matter of a few weeks, the general point that has been raised by a number of Members is that we should seek some sort of reform of the process. The fact that there is a degree of regurgitation makes that case. While I am in favour of memorandums of understanding and, indeed, general reform in that regard, we should not kid ourselves that there is some form of utopia out there in terms of the Budget process.”
“Why were the strategies then issued without approval by the Executive?”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. Nobody has made a case for the legislation not applying throughout the bulk of Northern Ireland. I think that there are advantages to that. <BR /> <BR />The Minister is very good with quotations, but, during the passing of the Taxis Bill, it was brought before the Committee and acknowledged by departmental officials that it may not be something that would necessarily have to apply to all of Northern Ireland and that Belfast would have to be looked at. That is a matter of public record and formed part of the evidence that was given to the Committee at the time. I presume that the Minister will be happy to acknowledge that as well. The Act has not been universally accepted as applying throughout Northern Ireland or automatically.”
“I appreciate that. Looking at the big-scale events has to be in the mix of any solution. As regards Ravenhill specifically — I am sure that the Minister will be smiling at this point because my colleague Lord Morrow has put in question after question on Ravenhill — one of the issues is the contractual situation between Ulster Rugby or Ravenhill and a particular firm or firms. There is full involvement of private hire in that situation. I suspect from what Mrs Cochrane said that it is not one that is working out particularly well, but the single-tier system would not resolve the particular issue at Ravenhill, which is a separate one. However, I agree with the general point that, if we are looking at an overall solution, factoring in the issue with some of the larger events has to be part of the overall mix.”
“There is something out there that can be grasped. There have been discussions already over the last year and a half which point in the rough direction of that solution. <BR /> <BR />From that point of view, I urge the House to allow a sensible solution to be produced which can deal not simply with the issue of the single tier, but with the issues of the bus lanes and metering to try to make sure that all that is put together as a proper package that we can all agree on and unite around and which everybody in the industry can at least live with.”
“There are sensible solutions that can be produced. If the statutory rule was passed today, for example, it would take effect in June. Time should not be the major problem because, if there is goodwill on all sides and a sensible approach, we can reach a solution relatively quickly. That would allow a timetable that is very close to what is there at present. <BR /> <BR />From that point of view, these statutory rules, unamended and unchanged, are not for the overall benefit of the taxi industry and neither, in the long run, are they in the interests of the consumer, at least as regards Belfast. As an Assembly, we have no other option today but to say no to these rules. There will be a commitment from all of us, however, on all sides, to work together to find a "sensible solution", to quote Mr Eastwood accurately.”
“We are, perhaps, in an unfortunate situation because of the nature of statutory rules: had this been something that was amendable, amendments could have dealt with it. When we are left with a statutory rule, we either have to accept it in its entirety or, alternatively, not move forward. That is something that the Minister would admit; it is in the nature of the system. <BR /> <BR />Sad to say, despite the effort and goodwill that has been put in, we have not reached a solution as yet. We are relatively close to that situation because there are ways in which we can find a compromise that is not in the interest of any particular sector and, to be perfectly honest, would not be the blueprint that the public hire companies or the private hire companies — the major companies — would put forward.”
“With respect, there is a potential danger that a market gets flooded by a couple of major companies. That is a major concern, but I do not know whether that will happen. The reality is that if you damage one aspect of the market and remove a certain level of competition — that is the practical reality — you reduce consumer choice and you move closer to a duopoly situation. That is a very real concern. <BR /> <BR />There is no doubt, with respect to the various sectors involved in this, that there are very strongly held views. If we are all being honest, we would recognise that all those at various levels in the taxi industry will argue for their own point of view and, to some extent, will argue in their own self-interest. That is human nature. In terms of these statutory rules, we have something that is not entirely fit for purpose.”
“I have met the Consumer Council and some of the disability groups. They have taken at face value and accepted the idea that merely removing certain regulations, or putting in new regulations, will simply lead to increased competition. They will freely admit that, if they get further evidence on that, this is not a hard and fast position for them. <BR /> <BR />All public hire taxis are disability-friendly; they are constructed on that basis. However, it is much more of a mixed bag on the private hire side. If it means that large numbers of public hire are effectively put out of business, and the quantum of taxis that are disability-accessible is reduced for the city centre, it will not increase competition or increase the opportunities for those who are disabled. That is why this is not straightforward.”
“<BR /> <BR />If we were starting from a completely blank page, and there were no taxi industry in Belfast, we might come to different solutions, but we also have to deal with what is there at present. The widespread concern that there has been, from public hire and a lot of private hire, is that, rather than the utopian idea of this, simply in the centre of Belfast, leading to increased competition, it will essentially become a duopoly via the back door. You will have a market that is overwhelmingly dominated by two major companies. <BR /> <BR />There is no doubt that, if I were in the shoes of those major companies, I would be arguing very much for a single-tier system on that basis. However, if you have a situation that instead of increasing competition restricts it, that is not in the consumer interest.”
“However, the peculiar situation of Belfast is that you have the range of taxi drivers. <BR /> <BR />This is sometimes misconstrued as being about public hire on one side and all of private hire on the other side. I have met probably all the interested parties. A couple of the major firms are very much in favour of single-tier system, as, indeed, are some solo operators. If you talk to the Belfast Private Hire Proprietors' Association, for instance, which deals with a wide range of taxi firms that would probably be described as the smaller firms in Belfast — not the big two — you will hear that it does not believe the single-tier system to be fit for purpose. It is a much more diverse situation than people will sometimes present.”
“Rather than dwell on the amount of time that it has taken, we need to try to get this right and get an overall solution that deals with a range of the issues, such as metering, bus lanes and the single-tier system. <BR /> <BR />There is a lot in the regulations that I do not have any problem with. Therefore, I think that they can be the basis of a sensible way forward. Similarly, mention was made of the North West Taxi Proprietors. Although I bow to the superior knowledge of Mr Eastwood, who has lifelong experience in that regard, it is clear that we are essentially dealing with a Belfast problem. There are differences in Belfast that do not exist in the rest of the country. From that point of view, if a statutory rule simply dealing with outside of Belfast had been brought in, I would not have had any problem supporting it.”
“Before I answer that, it may be helpful to give way to Ms Lo, and then I will answer both points.”
“I will give way to Mr Maginness, who asked first. Then I will give way to Ms Lo.”
“There is no point trying to extricate particular elements of this, implement them and leave other elements outstanding. I agree, for instance, with Mrs Overend, who, while she welcomed generally a lot of the stuff on it, highlighted a very important issue as regards the bus lanes side.”
“I am not going to put words into Mr Eastwood's mouth, but I agree with him on that, and I think that there is the basis for a sensible solution, but it has to be holistic. <BR /> <BR />There are issues to do with Belfast, with single tier, with enforcement and with metering itself, which is still a source of concern. People in the industry have concerns that the metering side of things should be got right; it is due in by September of this year. There are also concerns over, from a Belfast point of view, the bus lane side of it, not least the impact that it would have on the growing cycling population. I agree, for instance, with remarks made by Northern Ireland Greenways, who have concerns about that. <BR /> <BR />What we need for a solution is an overall package.”
“While the general principle of the single tier was something that in broad terms people could buy into, DOE officials indicated in their evidence in 2007 that it would not necessarily be a one-size-fits-all approach. Indeed, we had quotations from Hansard in the Committee indicating that this is something that may or may not necessarily apply to Belfast, but, indeed, we were looking at the wider sphere of Northern Ireland. The peculiar problems in Belfast have been acknowledged and accepted for a long time. <BR /> <BR />I would like to respond to an issue raised by the last Member to speak. There is a range of issues, and I think what we need to do to move forward on the taxi issue — I agree with Mr Eastwood on at least one point — is to have a sensible consideration and, indeed, a sensible compromise.”
“I rise with a heavy heart in certain regards. For many of us who have been involved in the Committee, and some of us have served our time since 2007, it is a pity that we have come to this position, because, as the Deputy Chair highlighted, this issue has been ongoing for quite some time. <BR /> <BR />While there are differences of opinion and of emphasis in the Committee, all of us had hoped to see a resolution. Certainly, a range of concerns about Belfast has been directly raised in the Committee for a year and a half at least. Indeed, mention has been made of the legislation, and as somebody who went through every painful session on the legislation a number of years ago — I think that Mr Boylan was in the same position — I can confirm that it was acknowledged even at that stage.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I appreciate his point, and I will come to it in more detail. He mentioned the airport, but this does not change that situation. Those are the regulations for the airport rather than the lack of a single tier or otherwise.”
“The Member said that the Minister seemed to feel that this was not, by definition, a contentious issue and did not, therefore, bring it to the Executive. Yet, if it is such a non-contentious issue, why have the Minister and his party signed a petition of concern to block it? Does the Member not see an element of irony and some double standards in that?”
“— offer us a change of 0·25%. That is the shallowness of the Ulster Unionist Party analysis, and it deprives projects that are legally entitled to money to try to plug the gap created by its own failures in DRD.”
“Where will the money go to? Disraeli was accused of and often gloried in being a one-nation Conservative. It seems that, with these proposals, the Ulster Unionist Party has become a one-Department party. Everything is to plug the mistakes that are being made in DRD. That is effectively where the money is going, with a few other projects and the remainder of the allocation being thrown around. The allocation is back-of-a-fag-packet economics. It is a belief that the party will take the principled stand of voting against the Budget, yet its changes in the Budget —”
“I will wait with interest to find out which Lobby my colleague from North Down goes through to see whether he is voting against those projects.”
“I will listen to hear that explained at the end of the debate. That would similarly impact on a number of other projects. My colleague mentioned some of those, and, in north Down, it would impact on the scoping exercise for community house facilities in Bangor and in neighbouring Ards and on the planned sport facilities in Kilcooley under the project. All those would end under the Ulster Unionist proposals. It would be similar with transition money in the south-eastern zone, which would be aimed particularly at early intervention projects looking at educational attainment and the school readiness and transition between the primary and post-primary sector. All that would be scrapped under the proposals, because that is what the £26 million is paying for.”
“There are a couple of questions that need to be asked in relation to it. As I understand it, when the Ulster Unionists made submissions on the Budget, they indicated that, particularly as regards the fund, they would not be looking to alter in any way where there were already contractual commitments. Yet, at a stroke, they wipe out the entire £26 million that has been allocated to this Budget. I would be interested to hear from the Finance Minister at the end on that. Are we going to be in a situation in which things that are contractually agreed, which are legally obliged, are simply going to be rode roughshod over. The Ulster Unionist position not only defies logic but goes against its submission to the draft Budget. It runs contrary to that.”
“<BR /> <BR />For those of us who are involved in local education, the concern about the pressure that was being put on local schools was very evident from the consultation responses. The £63 million that has now been allocated, taken with the additional money that has come from the Department of Education, more or less moves that problem away from the pressure that was being put in place. <BR /> <BR />It is also the case that we must look at the issue of joined-up government. For example, the additional money that is being put in place for nurture units through the change fund is vital. Some of the changes that have been put in place by way of the social investment fund are also vital. <BR /> <BR />I have to say that I am somewhat bemused by the Ulster Unionist amendment.”
“All those things are important innovations. What we are faced with is a very innovative Budget. <BR /> <BR />Since we have moved on in the past couple of weeks from the draft Budget, the Finance Minister and the Executive have done a good deal of work to try to improve the situation regarding some of the concerns that were raised in the draft Budget. One criticism that probably was made because of the tightness of the Budget before was the issue of support for the universities and the position of DEL. I am glad to see that there has been movement on that. Indeed, from that point of view, producing a joined-up approach is also vital as we face our economy. We have seen the money that has been allocated through the collaborative skills fund, which will be worked jointly between DEL and DETI. That is a very positive way forward.”
“Therefore, the voluntary exit scheme — and some have caused a degree of mischief with that — is very important for the future. Let me make it absolutely clear: as they used to say on 'Blankety Blank', the clue is in the question: it is a voluntary exit scheme. It is not an issue of compulsory redundancies; it is an issue of a scheme that is based on the voluntary principle of people choosing to leave. <BR /> <BR />Other aspects of the Budget are also significant. Mention has been made of: the creation of the change fund, which, I believe, will become increasingly significant in years to come; the Northern Ireland investment fund that has been put in place; and the social innovation fund, which is allowing the money, particularly from the dormant bank account side of it, for groups who feel that there are problems with the system.”
“I highlighted some of the issues in the debate on the draft Budget, but I think that a number of aspects of the Budget are very significant. While I do not necessarily agree with the amendment that has been put forward by Mr McCallister, I will say that at least he has identified important strategic issues, and a number of important strategic issues have been identified in the Budget. <BR /> <BR />Mention has been made of the voluntary exit scheme. The criticism that can be made at times of Departments simply trying to chip away at the edges to meet financial problems was highlighted by Mr Bradley in his speech, and it is, in many ways, tackled head on. We have to realise that there is a major challenge for the public sector in how we move forward.”
“I support the Budget. While I digress from the remarks of the previous Member who spoke with enthusiasm of the Greek election result, it is perhaps appropriate that he quoted John Lennon. As we face an age of austerity and move along the "long and winding road" of the Budget today, it is tempting to fall into the words of Paul McCartney and simply "long for yesterday". I am waiting for the next Member to start quoting Ringo Starr. <BR /> <BR />While it is tempting to cling to the position of a few years ago when, financially, it was much easier because of the wider context of public finances, I believe that the Executive have faced the very difficult challenges of the current Budget and met their responsibilities very well. I suspect that the significance of this Budget will be realised more when we look back at it in a few years' time.”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. Obviously, one of the major challenges as we move ahead is ensuring that front-line services are maintained and improved where possible. I note that recommendation 9 of the Donaldson report is about moving to the forefront of new technology. What role does the Minister believe technology could play in the key challenge of improving services for patients?”
“What opportunities exist to expand the use of shared services across the public sector?”
“I thank the Minister for her reply. I am sure that we all welcome the announcement on corporation tax, but given that the earliest that a reduction can be brought into effect is 2017, what does the Minister feel that Invest NI could do between then and now to take advantage of the reduction?”
“Will the First Minister agree that, rather than further analysis or additional new bodies, what is really required is for parties to take difficult decisions rather than playing party politics and providing no credible alternatives?”
“I congratulate the Minister on his statement. In the interests of brevity, does the Minister believe that the £30 million that has been set aside for the change fund will be successful?”
“<BR /> <BR />There is no doubt that there are difficult and austere days ahead, and there is no doubt that, when the Minister comes back with the final Budget, he will have taken into account those changing financial circumstances through the Chancellor's announcement, for example, and some of the agreements through Stormont House. However, despite the difficulties, I think we have a Budget that is looking to the future — a Budget that places reform and change at the heart of its agenda. As we progress in the next few years, that is what Northern Ireland needs.”
“It also belies the argument that was used by some that we should simply try to dig our way out of this problem by higher and higher rates rises. It should be noted that, for every additional percentage that we put on the regional rate at domestic or non-domestic level, for example, the combined total would be in and around £7 million. So, if we were to try to start to close some of the gaps in the changes, the level of increase that would need to be created in the regional rate would be exorbitant on our local businesses and households. Therefore we have got to think, and I think the Minister is providing solutions that are joined up.”
“It is also the case that there is an emphasis on support for the private sector, as we seek to rebalance the economy, going alongside some of the agreements that were reached prior to Christmas. We have seen the initial steps with corporation tax, for example, but there is no point in taking those steps if we do not look also at the levels of support that are available to businesses. Efforts have been made to hold down manufacturing rates, for example, which, at present, equate to around £60 million within the Executive's Budget. The continuation in 2015-16 of a range of benefits to small businesses equates to somewhere in the region of around about £20 million. That level of support has to be consistent across the board.”
“That will have a major impact on our Budget, but, almost as importantly, it will lead to a degree of rethinking over the way that we deliver public services. It will also provide a major challenge to Departments not to simply tinker round the edges but to look much more fundamentally.”
“We have seen a number of items that the Finance Minister has put in place which build towards the future. For example, with financial transactions capital, money is set aside for the creation of an investment fund and that is a very positive way forward. Similarly, the £30 million set aside for the change fund is something that will be an incentive towards reform. However, the biggest single challenge is the voluntary exit package, which looks to rebalance our economy, on an entirely voluntary basis, to see where people can be released from the public sector.”
“That is illustrative of an approach that does not look, from a ministerial point of view, at a particularly strategic direction. <BR /> <BR />Similarly, there has been criticism of the education budget. That is something that we will come to in much more detail tomorrow. The idea of saying, "Give more money to education", rather than looking at how the Department prioritises its money, is a fundamental flaw in that. So there is a challenge to all Departments to think much more long term and strategically. <BR /> <BR />Similarly, there is a challenge to the Executive as a whole. It cannot simply be a question of seeing what little bits can change here and there to make things work. <BR /> <BR />That is why the positive in this draft Budget is its forward-looking nature.”
“So we have to deal with the austerity and the reality of the situation. <BR /> <BR />I believe that that offers at least two levels of challenge, a micro level and a macro level, for the Executive. As indicated, there is a major challenge to each of the Departments. We have heard that there is concern that, in some Departments, there is a tendency to salami-slice — to see what can simply be chipped off the edges — rather than look at a strategic way of moving forward. We have heard criticism in the Chamber of the way in which that has been done by a number of Departments. I suspect, for example, that my colleague the Chair of the Regional Development Committee may be off the Minister's Christmas card list, given some of his comments.”
“That is very understandable, but the idea of the Finance Minister simply signing additional cheques for worthy causes is not really something that is particularly doable. <BR /> <BR />The additional money that will potentially come from the Stormont House Agreement and the £70 million of extra revenue that will potentially flow towards the Executive as a result of Barnett consequentials from the December statement by the Chancellor, can be used to ease some of those pressures and burdens. However, it is not a solution simply to say that there can be a blank cheque. <BR /> <BR />Despite the good arguments that Northern Ireland is a special case — those were pushed very hard prior to Christmas — there is no situation in which any Government at Westminster are simply able to offer a blank cheque.”
“However, as we move ahead, despite the good work that was done on a cross-party basis at Stormont House prior to Christmas, where additional funding could be levered in, there is no doubt that the overall direction of travel in years to come is towards greater levels of austerity. That has been eased by what happened at Stormont House, but it has not been solved. <BR /> <BR />Faced with the challenge of austerity, we can take a number of actions or move forward on a number of routes. It is relatively easy and understandable that a wide range of interest groups will look at the Budget and simply say, "Give us more money" or "Restore such-and-such a budget". We have heard that from external organisations and also from representatives of a range of Departments across the Chamber.”
“I rise at this late stage in the debate to draw out a couple of the themes that have emerged. As we look towards the draft Budget of 2015-16, there is no doubt that, in many ways, it is a very significant financial year in budgetary terms. It acts as a signpost to good and bad in the future. <BR /> <BR />There is no doubt that, as we progress, we are moving further into an age of austerity. As the Finance Minister and the Finance Committee have already indicated, had expenditure gone ahead at the levels operating in the last Parliament and continued on to this Parliament, we would probably be somewhere in the region of £1 billion better off.”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. In light of the fact that we are about six weeks away from the date by which landlords are required to register — 25 February 2015 — I ask the Minister what is being done to remind landlords of that deadline.”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. It is good to see that there is at least some progress being made on cross-border movement of waste. However, there is still quite a large backlog. When will the next phase of repatriation take place and to what extent will it happen?”
“I thank the Minister for his response. We were talking about the Barnett formula. Obviously, with Lord Barnett recently deceased, he would seem to fall outside the law of defamation. The Minister outlined contingency arrangements. Will they in any way compromise the independence of the project?”
“He has obviously been promoted today. Can I ask the Minister what the Northern Ireland Executive are doing to increase digital inclusion?”
“I thank the Minister for his response. It is a little disappointing that he keeps on dragging in the chestnut of academic selection as the answer to everything that relates to this. <BR /> <BR />There are obviously concerns about the low attainment, in particular, of males from a unionist background and on free school meals. The Minister outlined initiatives that principally focus on the schools, but I wonder whether he could give a bit more information on the support or opportunities for support for a number of community-based organisations that are seeking to tackle educational underachievement.”