Sammy Wilson
East Belfast · Democratic Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“I only use it to show the divisions that there are in the SDLP. <BR /> <BR />What kind of individual have we got who is laying down and who made this report? First of all, there is an irony. The day I met Mr Bain was about three months after he had written letters and made threats and things like that.”
“If the Commissioner for Standards heard some of the things that Mr Allister has said in the Chamber when he is not on the side of Sinn Féin and is not in cahoots with them, if he heard some of the things that he has said about Sinn Féin, he would be apoplectic. He would have a heart attack.”
“If we accept that we allow the commissioner upstairs to dictate his view of what a debating Chamber should be, we do harm to all of us who like to see a bit of fire and passion in debate. Of course, he did not have to make the complaint because the Ena Sharples of the Assembly was happy to go running.”
“Quite frankly, I do not care what the outcome of the debate is, but the reason for the petition of concern was very clear. This whole episode is not about people being concerned about the standards in the Assembly, and it is not about whether people have abided by the code of conduct.”
“<BR /> <BR />One of the bits in the interview that I really enjoyed was when, at one stage, he demanded from me an answer that I could not give him. I had not read the Hansard reports, and I had not done any work for it because I was not all that concerned.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I start off with an apology: sorry we got it wrong as far as Mr Bain was concerned. <BR /> <BR />I will start by saying that I welcome the debate. I have been waiting for the debate. Indeed, I have probably prolonged my time in the Assembly to take part in the debate, because there is an important issue at stake.”
The complete record
Every one of 488 lines we hold for Sammy Wilson, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 10.
“We believe that we have brought forward an honest attempt to square the circle of the welfare changes at Westminster, which have inevitable consequences here, just as they did in Wales and in Scotland. In fact, it is significant that, although the Scottish nationalists claim to be anti-austerity, they accepted that those welfare changes had to be implemented. We have brought forward an honest attempt, and we have spelt out the consequences. I hope that, as people cast their vote at the end of the debate today, they will bear all those points in mind.”
“If they pay any attention to it, they will realise the financial and political incompetence that rests on the Benches across the way. If their representatives in the Republic turn their backs on economic and political reality, in the way that Sinn Féin has done here, then, if the people of the Republic are foolish enough to put them into a position where they hold the levers in a coalition arrangement, dear help that economy. We do not need the Southern economy to go into a tailspin because of the kind of people who might take up those kinds of positions: claiming to be anti-austerity but not having a clue as to how to run a modern economy in any one way.”
“The Finance Minister will have a lot to say about how workable the Budget will be if the welfare reform changes do not go through. Mr Maskey also said that his party wanted the acquisition of more fiscal powers. Anybody who would want to add more fiscal powers to the Assembly and to the people who bury their heads in its economic sands would be out of their skull. Indeed, why would you hand fiscal powers to people who clearly cannot even handle the powers they already have? <BR /> <BR />I do not know whether anybody in the Irish Republic ever watches or listens to the debates in the Assembly. I hope that those in the Irish Republic, who Sinn Féin hope will eventually vote them into some coalition arrangement after the next election, are listening to this debate.”
“I am not an expert on this, but I suspect it is too late. However, we have spelt out the consequences of it. Putting this on to the Floor of the Assembly was not due to some rush of blood to the head by the decision-makers in the DUP. It was something that had to be done, and was done only after every effort was made to try to resolve the issue. I must say that I am disappointed that we have failed to do that. <BR /> <BR />I have just one word of warning. Sinn Féin is magnificent with words. This is how Mr Maskey started his speech. He said that the aims of his party were to protect the vulnerable. Well, I think I have shown that they are not protecting the vulnerable in this. He also said they aim to have a workable Budget.”
“Of course, there might be no immediate decision taken by the Government to take this under the control of Westminster, but the one thing that they cannot allow to happen, and the one thing that we cannot allow to happen, is for this festering sore to remain here, because it is going to be more and more costly. Mr Beggs outlined the escalating cost, and I do not want to go into that. As the gap between welfare payments in Northern Ireland and those in the rest of the United Kingdom widens, we will pay back more and we will also pay for the additional cost of administration as we lose the use of the UK-wide system of administration and have to take that on under our own hat and auspices. <BR /> <BR />It is probably too late, at this stage, to ask those who signed the petition of concern to withdraw the foolish action they have undertaken.”
“We do not know where this will lead us, constitutionally, but one of the options, constitutionally, is for the Government at Westminster to say, "Since welfare reform is not devolved to Wales and not devolved to Scotland, and Northern Ireland can't handle it, we will take it back to Westminster", and all the protections that I have spent some time outlining here today will disappear. Somehow or other, that is supposed to be a good outcome for the vulnerable and for those who will be mostly affected by welfare reform. <BR /> <BR />If that is the logic of those who have signed the petition of concern, then it is little wonder that the stock of some Members in the Assembly is so low amongst the general public. That is something that has to be given real consideration.”
“Of course, he could have saved that money by not pursuing as rigorously his policy of promoting Irish language schools, but, no, Irish language schools are much more important than those families who would have benefited from the early years programme. Again, we can see the hypocrisy of the party opposite. They use such fine statements as, "We want to protect the vulnerable", but, when they have to make decisions about protecting the vulnerable, they are not so good at doing it. <BR /> <BR />That takes me to the absolute crux of the point that I want to make.”
“Furthermore, the vulnerable are attacked as a result of the incompetence of Sinn Féin in dealing with the issue of welfare reform. Of course, that £1·7 million reduction in the early years programme, which deals with vulnerable families, could have been avoided by simply passing the Welfare Reform Bill. The money we would have saved in one week, rather than it going back to Westminster, would have ensured that those early years programmes were continued. So, not only has the financial situation been brought about by Sinn Féin, but the Minister decides to attack the vulnerable rather than cut some of his pet projects.”
“We have muddled through crises before in the Assembly, and the only people to have suffered have been those who have been affected by the delays and the indecision, and the only thing to have suffered has been our credibility. I do not think that our credibility being affected in that way is good for the political process. Some people play fast and loose with it.”
“The real danger is what will happen if we do not proceed with this and if we prove that we are not mature enough to take the hard decisions. Being in government means that you have got to take hard decisions. It is one thing to say that we want devolved government and we want more devolved powers — in fact, I heard Mr Maskey say that he wants not just this devolved, but a lot more fiscal powers devolved — but putting up or putting down taxes will be hard decisions to make because they will have consequences. If you cannot deal with the issues that we have before us, how can we hope to deal with any more powers being transferred to the Assembly? If we do not have the ability to do that, one of the possibilities — I do not want to be alarmist.”
“I was just coming to that. Some 80% of those who will be affected by the changes to universal credit will either be no worse off or better off. Forty per cent, or 80,000, of them will be better off; 40% will be no worse off; and 20% will be less well off — and even they will have transitional protection in that it is only when their circumstances change that they will find that their payments are reduced. <BR /> <BR />Here is the real danger. I said that we were entering uncharted waters on this. I pay tribute to those parties who recognise that there are difficult decisions to be made and that there are costs involved in that. At least, they have not buried their head in the sand in the way that Sinn Féin and the SDLP have done. They have been prepared to support this.”
“<BR /> <BR />Sinn Féin has tied itself up with its rhetoric that not one person would lose out. The truth of the matter, given that the total welfare budget will not rise as fast as it would have without welfare reform, is that some people were always bound to lose out. Let us not pretend that that was not going to be the case, but the groups deemed to be the most vulnerable have been covered. I am sure that the Minister for Social Development will be more than happy to spell out, and will be more competent than me in doing so, the detail of how those people will be covered. By turning our back on the Bill today, they, the very people whom those who signed the petition of concern claim to want to protect, will not be protected.”
“The truth of the matter is that, when you examine it, you see that not one penny has been removed. Every single penny of the money that, before Christmas, Sinn Féin and the SDLP thought was a sufficient guarantee for vulnerable people is still in the budget for this Bill. <BR /> <BR />The groups that they asked to be addressed, children with long-term disabilities and people with severe disabilities, are covered by the supplementary fund. A discretionary fund has been set aside to look at the cases of future claimants. Where they merited payment, they would get it. Despite what Mr Maskey said, the paper states that the losses to those vulnerable groups, especially those with children, will be covered. People will not lose out, yet we are told that this is not sufficient.”
“Those who claim to have a monopoly on being worried about the vulnerable ought to remember that all the issues that they raised were taken on board seriously, dealt with and reflected in the legislation that we have here. We were prepared to put our money where our mouth is and deal with the financial consequences of that. <BR /> <BR />Then, of course, the issue that came up was that there were still vulnerable groups that needed to be supported. One of the reasons why additional moneys, to the tune of £540 million, £550 million or whatever it was, were found in December was to provide additional support for those groups over six years. The impression has been given that, by some sleight of hand, the Minister for Social Development turned his back on those agreements.”
“The fourth one was that there were people who would find it difficult to manage their money, and, if they were paid once a month, they would find themselves short at the end of the month, so we got a change whereby we could make more regular payments. The fifth one was that, in some dysfunctional households, if you paid all the money to one person, they would go out and spend it on drink, so the money should be split, and that was dealt with, too. <BR /> <BR />All five had financial consequences, of course, in extra administration, but every issue raised was dealt with, and, by the way, it was a DUP Minister who negotiated with a Minister at the Department for Work and Pensions.”
“If it is refused and rejected, there will be consequences. <BR /> <BR />Let us look at what is being proposed. It is not that the Bill is unnecessarily harsh. I remember being on the ministerial group that discussed the Bill. This seems to be a moveable feast because, at that stage, a number of things were highlighted, all of which were dealt with. The first one was the impact that it would have on the social fund, and the Executive put more money into that. The second one was the impact that it would have on people who would no longer be eligible to receive help with their rates, and the Executive put more money into that. The third one was the spare room subsidy and the fact that we did not have the housing stock to move people around, and we got an exemption from that.”
“<BR /> <BR />The other argument is, "Well, if we all went together collectively to speak to the Prime Minister, perhaps he would give us more money". That has been well articulated here today. Those who put forward that argument know full well that it is nonsense. Anyone who thinks that a party that would not give more money when in coalition with the Liberals will, now that it has won an election, is in power in its own right and is going to introduce more welfare cuts on people in England, Scotland and Wales, exempt Northern Ireland, where it does not have one MP, is living in a fantasy world. Yet those are the arguments that we have had today as to why we should not proceed with the Bill. They are all false and threadbare, and they will have dire consequences because the Bill has to be voted on today.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is significant that, although the Social Development Minister has brought forward proposals that, we are told, are still unacceptable, we do not have a clue why they are unacceptable. Have we had any amendments? Sinn Féin has refused to accept the challenges, but I would have thought that I would at least have heard from its spokesmen today some indication as to where the flaws are. However, we have not heard from them, so what more is there to talk about? We have had extensive discussions with DWP Ministers; we have had changes made to the legislation; we have had the Stormont House Agreement and the subsequent papers tabled from it. There has been no new input from those saying that this is still unacceptable. No changes have been proposed.”
“<BR /> <BR />As Mr Ford pointed out, while Sinn Féin poured out the anti-austerity rhetoric, it was not present when the debates about austerity were taking place in the Parliament of the United Kingdom; it was being too precious about its republican principles. That is how much it cares about the vulnerable. If there had been a real concern about the vulnerable, we would have seen Sinn Féin making its arguments in the place where welfare reform had its genesis: the House of Commons. Indeed, Sinn Féin has made it quite clear that, should there be future cuts, it will not be there to defend the vulnerable because it is a party of abstention. Abstention is more important than protecting the vulnerable. Let us not have any more of this nonsense about, "If only we had more time to talk. We're interested in supporting the vulnerable".”
“Before that, the former Social Development Minister worked with the DWP Minister in England and got concessions that, as my friend Mr Campbell said, are the envy of other parts of the United Kingdom. Since then, the Social Development Minister, on the basis of the agreement reached before Christmas, brought forward a plan as to how vulnerable groups might be protected, all of which has been presented to the Executive. I point out that nearly all those changes have not been as a result of those who claim to have concern for the vulnerable; they have been as a result of the work of a succession of DUP Ministers who took the lead on these issues.”
“It is not contrived, it is not forced and it is not something about which the Finance Minister, the Social Development Minister and the First Minister thought, "Let's ramrod this through." It is something that has been in the making for a long time, and there has been an expectation that it is something that we would deal with. <BR /> <BR />The second argument that I have heard here today is, "Well, if only we had a bit more time, then we could've resolved the issues. Why couldn't we just sit down and talk?". Mr Maskey said we should work together to make more progress. The parties worked together at Christmas and thought that they had made progress.”
“So, it has not come out of the blue, but the one thing that we do know is that the Finance Minister has to bring forward the final part of the Budget to the Assembly so that Departments and all those people who are affected by spending decisions of the Assembly know where they stand, so that schools know how much money they have for the rest of the year, further education colleges know what courses they can afford to run for the rest of the year, those who have applied for voluntary redundancy know whether they will be taking it and community groups know what they will have in their budget. I could go on. <BR /> <BR />There was no alternative but to bring this issue to a head.”
“<BR /> <BR />I remind the Assembly that this has not come out of the blue. We have been trying to get this Bill through the Assembly for around a year and a half now. We have had meetings of all the parties, extensive discussions, negotiations with Ministers in England and even a crisis summit before Christmas last year.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is little wonder that the SDLP and Sinn Féin have taken the stance that they have in the introductions to their speeches here today. There is an embarrassment there. Indeed, it is significant that none of the Sinn Féin spokespeople were prepared to take any interventions. That, to me, is an indication of how weak and paper-thin their arguments are. If they were sure of the ground on which they are opposing this legislation, you would have expected them to at least be prepared to stand and debate and discuss it and to answer questions in the Assembly. They have not been prepared to do that. In fact, we have had the excuses that this is a contrived situation and that, somehow or other, the Finance Minister has pushed us into having the Bill brought early.”
“This is an important debate. It is perhaps one of the most important debates that we have ever had in the Assembly. As a result of the decision that the Assembly will make today, we will move into uncharted waters. We do not know constitutionally where this could lead us, and we do not know politically where this could lead us, but the one thing that we do know is that, financially, the consequences of this have been spelt out and spelt out very clearly by the Finance Minister. We can talk in the abstract about the financial consequences of the Budget for this Assembly, but those financial consequences will be felt by every family. That is why the debate should be of importance to the people of Northern Ireland. Every family in Northern Ireland will face financial consequences as a result of the outcome of the debate today.”
“Will the Member accept that the fantasy economics extends even further than that? On one hand, they claim that there will be £1,500 million lost to claimants as a result of welfare reform over the next five years, yet they believed that, by negotiating with the Government before Christmas for slightly above £500 million, they could ensure that none of the people who will be affected would lose out and that £500 million would cover £1,500 million of reductions. Does he not think that that maybe shows that their grasp of numbers is not great?”
“Does he also accept that the changes that were made and presented to the Executive reflected exactly the kind of groups that Sinn Féin and others said, including his own party, that they wanted protections made available to? That has been faithfully reflected, yet oddly enough, despite the fact that the money is there, the protections are there and the groups that were identified are covered, we now face this situation today.”
“I will be brief. Does the Member accept that these reductions are nothing to do with the introduction of corporation tax, which is at least three years down the line? To argue that they are a consequence of the devolution of corporation tax is totally false.”
“There are huge business organisations that are queuing up to give money into a social investment bond, and I think that the Assembly does need to look at alternative forms of finance when it comes to this. <BR /> <BR />The last thing it that there should be an honest assessment of the value of organisations outside the statutory sector, whether those are voluntary, community or whatever. Lastly, some Ministers need to look at their priorities, and I have to say that I find it very difficult that, at a time when we are trying to improve literacy, things like Bookstart are closed down by the Minister of Education while he opens a school in Dungiven for 14 youngsters. All of that money would have paid for the whole of the Bookstart programme.”
“It is disappointing that Anna Lo, for example, feels that she has to defend her own two Ministers. Her own two Ministers are as guilty of this as the Ministers in all other parties. Indeed, the motion has been presented by the Ulster Unionists, and the Minister from that party is as guilty as Ministers in other parties. Sometimes, as Back-Benchers, we need to be able to challenge this. <BR /> <BR />Secondly, we should be looking for alternative forms of money. It will be difficult to get more money from the block grant, but there are new and innovative ways. There is the social investment bond, which I know that the current and previous Ministers of Finance were looking at, whereby we bring in private money along with public money.”
“Of course the responsibility stops with the Minister at the end of the day, but I am trying to show that the budgetary process is biased towards keeping money within Departments rather than looking at whether other organisations deliver the services more effectively, more efficiently, more cheaply, more flexibly and everything else. I believe that we should be keeping on top of Ministers about that issue through questions in the Assembly and through Committees. <BR /> <BR />It is one thing to rant and rave about these reductions, but what are the kinds of things that we can do? We cannot magic money out of thin air. If it is not there, it is not there. That is why I believe that the first thing that we ought to be doing is challenging some of the budget cuts — even budget cuts made by Ministers from our own parties.”
“Very often, it is seen that way, and I will give you an example. The DRD budget was cut by 5%, yet community transport got a whack of 37%. The Education budget was reduced by, I think, 2%, yet early years got a reduction of nearly 50%. It is an easy option.”
“<BR /> <BR />The whole budgetary process, where Ministers are advised by civil servants on how and where reductions in budgets need to be made, is biased against those who are outside the statutory sector. It is very unlikely that Ministers are going to receive advice from civil servants that funding to core departmental services should be cut, regardless of whether they are less or more efficient or effective than some of the services created by outside bodies. Ministers are not going to get that kind of advice, and so we get a disproportionate impact, and that is across Departments.”
“The £900,000 cut to the arts budget is half the amount of money that we lose each day in Northern Ireland because of the ideological position adopted by Sinn Féin and the SDLP to welfare reform. All of the money that has been lost in early years amounts to one day's repayment to Westminster that we must make as a result of the intransigence on the other side of this House on welfare reform. So, before we start putting the blame on somebody else, let us start looking at the problems that we cause ourselves because of the ideological positions that have been adopted by two parties that have buried their heads in the economic sands and will not recognise the damage they are doing to a lot of the voluntary sector.”
“I do not want to go through the long list of organisations in my constituency that have been affected by the reductions to their budgets. Needless to say, whether it is Bookstart, which helps with early literacy, or Good Morning Carrickfergus, Good Morning Larne and Good Morning Newtownabbey, which help people who are isolated by giving them some contact on a daily basis with those who check on their well-being, or community transport, all of them have been affected. <BR /> <BR />I want to make something very clear at the start. I know that Sinn Féin and the SDLP especially love to put all of this at the door of Tory cuts, but let us look at some of the facts.”
“Does the Minister agree that, first, the purchase of homes by tenants is popular; secondly, it releases capital that is tied up in houses that are not available for public dispersal at present; and, thirdly, will he reject the left-wing state-controlled ideology of Sinn Féin that wants people to be dependent on the public sector rather than have the freedom to own property if they so wish?”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. He makes a very important point, but I expect that the concern that he has talked about is more a concern for people's own party political position than for the poor. Can he assure us that, just as the parity principle is important in pensions, in any discussions that there have been, there will not be additional money made available to those who sought to blackmail the Assembly when they did a U-turn on an agreement that they made just before Christmas?”
“Will he outline to the Members opposite just what the consequences are of their disgraceful and dishonest behaviour this morning?”
“Does the Minister agree with me that the previous question illustrates the Alice in Wonderland world that Sinn Féin is living in at present? Either the Member does not know that her party has reneged on the Stormont House Agreement, and no corporation tax will be devolved to the Assembly as a result —”
“Mr Dallat also mentioned Steensons, the jewellery company in Glenarm. Would the Minister accept from me that, had it not been for some of the help from her Department and the Tourist Board, the grant aid that went into the Star of the Sea school, which will give Steensons a new platform from which to present their goods, would not have happened?”
“I went up to see the launch of one of Red Bay Boats' new craft. In fact, I got a bit seasick just sitting on it in the harbour, to be quite truthful. Again, there is huge employment potential there in a small village along the coast. <BR /> <BR />The Member is right: there is huge tourism potential, even in the rural part of East Antrim. There is also industrial potential for local entrepreneurs who are developing a product locally and want to stay local. Those are the opportunities that I think we have to look out for in the future.”
“It wants to take people right up to Larne — to the gateway to the glens.”
“I give some credit to the Minister in the Republic who pulled the plug on the A5 and, therefore, made funds available for us to spend in Northern Ireland. Of course, I was fortunate enough to be Finance Minister at the time and was able to encourage funds to be redirected in certain ways. <BR /> <BR />There is huge tourist potential, which David Hilditch mentioned. Take Carrickfergus, for instance, and now the Gobbins project, which I believe will rival the Giant's Causeway. I know that the Minister will be lobbied on the development of the Magheramorne quarry area. There is huge tourism and sports potential there, and, with some tourist money to kick-start the some of the development, it could link in. Of course, the Railway Preservation Society in Whitehead wants to run old railway trains to the site.”
“With regard to the point that Mr McMullan made, if we are going to promote small businesses in rural areas, that is one of the important parts of the infrastructure that we need to have in place. I believe that this is one way of retaining people, although I am not allied to the idea that you provide employment opportunities and training facilities in every small village and hamlet. For a start, it is not practical. We want to broaden people's horizons as well. If they have to travel 15 or 20 miles to find those opportunities and get quality training, that has to happen. <BR /> <BR />There are things that are not within the Minister's remit, such as the railway and roads. I am glad that we have got two new roads being built in east Antrim.”
“I want to pay tribute to the Minister for the work she has done. I remember that when Caterpillar lost so many jobs, she undertook to work with it through Invest NI to see what opportunities there might be. A lot of the job losses at Caterpillar were replaced by additional work that was brought into Northern Ireland. Of course, we have seen the successes of investment in Ryobi, Schrader, Terumo BCT and a lot of other major employers in the area, as well of course as the jobs fund and many of the other jobs that have been produced as a result of help for small businesses. <BR /> <BR />Whilst I have, on occasion, upbraided the Minister about the broadband provision, it has improved. I do not want her to take too much comfort from that: there are still big gaps. Nevertheless, progress has been made.”
“I do not know whether, after the poetry presentation, I am expected to sing or dance my speech. I think I will desist from that. I will say that I am glad that we have had the opportunity to have a debate about the potential there is in east Antrim, though I have to say to the proposer of the Adjournment topic — and I know that Mr Ross has already mentioned it — that if you want to promote an area, you certainly do not go around denigrating it, talking it down, describing some of the towns as being run by mob rule or calling into question the future of some of the main facilities, such as the harbour at Larne. I think that that is the first rule. If you want to promote an area, talk it up; do not talk it down. <BR /> <BR />The second thing I would like to say is that there has already been significant public investment.”
“I am sure that, like me, the Member has been around the Larne Skills project. Does he agree that the idea is to get all those skills under one roof so that young people can experience a wide range of skills? The suggestion that has been made of having small units located all round East Antrim would not be a way of ensuring that people get experience of the range of skills that might be available to them.”
“<BR /> <BR />We are not going to resolve this issue today in this forum, but one thing that worries me is that, over the next number of months, we are meant to address the issues of the past. If this is Sinn Féin's way of addressing the past, I do not think that we have any chance of putting the past behind us, because they want to put the poison and pollution of the past into the minds of the future generation so that it will be carried out. That is the message that we get from the decision of Newry and Mourne Council last night.”
“I admit that, Lot-like, the SDLP has been dragged out of the political cesspit that is now Newry and Mourne Council. Of course, everything that Sinn Féin touch, they pollute, and, unfortunately, everybody who is touched by them gets polluted in one way or another as well. I am glad to see that the SDLP, rather belatedly, have allowed themselves to be dragged out of it, although I have to note that, despite what the leader of the SDLP said, this is what one of the SDLP members used to justify their position: they believed that the naming of the park was a healing process — a healing process — and a compromise. How on earth do they ever see that as a healing process?”
“No, I will not give way. <BR /> <BR />Outside Northern Ireland, people look upon this with bemusement and horror. I remember the first time that I raised it in the House of Commons and MPs came up to me after and said, "What? A play park named after a terrorist who committed suicide, poisoning the minds of the next generation in Northern Ireland". That is how it is seen outside here. Beyond the closed minds of Sinn Féin, people regard it as some kind of horror. How could grown people want to poison and pollute the minds of young people by naming a play park, which is meant to be a place of fun rather than a place of propaganda, in a council area? <BR /> <BR />I suppose that we should not be surprised at Sinn Féin, but we do have to be surprised at the SDLP.”