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 4 of 10.
“As I listened to the first Member from Sinn Féin to speak, that is exactly what I thought. I can understand Mickey Brady, steeped in bigotry, having come through all that we have come through in Northern Ireland, but how could someone born after the Troubles had started to peter out have a mind so poisoned that she could come off with the stuff that she has come off with today? <BR /> <BR />People will say, "Are you any different?" I lived through it as well, and I carry the baggage. I accept that, but for someone so young, who has not come through it all, to be so steeped in the kind of stuff that we have heard must bring great sadness to people who listen to this debate.”
“I started the debate listening to the comments of the Sinn Féin Member and getting angrier and angrier, but, as we got towards the end of her speech, my anger was replaced by sadness. Sinn Féin has deliberately chosen the youngest Member of the Assembly to lead on an issue in a way that must bring great worry to the whole of this society. As I listened to her, I thought of the three wee girls who paddled their way through Heathrow to go and join IS in Syria because their minds had been so poisoned that they could not see beyond the propaganda of IS to the beheadings, the bloody streets, the crucifixions, the hurt and the destruction that they were causing.”
“When the Minister is bringing forward recommendations on the economic implications, will he include in those the negative economic impact that wind turbines can have on not only individual households and property values but the cost of electricity in Northern Ireland and the fact that the more of these that go up, the greater the costs to consumers because of the subsidies that have to be paid for them?”
“— not to look at them individually. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the report and the thoroughness with which it has been done, though I utter caution that, despite what changes might be made, if the direction comes from the top to —”
“That may well be the case, but, when you look at the impact of huge 320-feet turbines on a landscape environment, you have to look at the cumulative impact. The proposition always was that there should be a requirement to look at the cumulative impact. If you see the forest of these things in some areas, it makes sense —”
“<BR /> <BR />It was always intended to be the case that the cumulative impact of wind turbines in an area ought to be considered. That means that where the local planning office may decide about an individual turbine, and strategically wind farms might be considered centrally, those two things should not be divorced.”
“<BR /> <BR />The first aspect of the report that I welcome is the requirement that those who put up or wish to put up wind turbines have to show that they meet the noise standards rather than an environmental health officer having to do that work for them. The noise standards are out of date, and the World Health Organization has highlighted deficiencies in the current standards. We must look to having more up-to-date standards of measuring noise and its impact. <BR /> <BR />The distance issue is also important. While there is no agreement across jurisdictions, some will have turbines as far as 3,000 metres from residential properties. That is important from not just the point of view of noise and the health impacts but the visual impact of wind turbines.”
“<BR /> <BR />While I was environment Minister, it was probably interpreted in the way in which I hoped it would be, ie, that, as it states in PPS 18, where there was an unacceptable impact on human health, public safety, residential amenity, visual amenity, landscape character etc, these things should not be allowed. As I speak to planning officers in my area, I increasingly find that the answer is, "The Minister is keen on these happening", therefore the policy is interpreted in a way that I believe is much more liberal. <BR /> <BR />I welcome some of the changes that have been asked for by the Committee. Always bear in mind, however, that if there is an overall drive and policy of pushing a particular aspect, then the policy itself may be interpreted in a way that even its drafters did not intend.”
“The policy was drawn up at the time because there was no policy about wind turbines. Secondly, I was criticised for it being too draconian. I remember many questions in this House as to why the policy was stopping wind turbines being built. <BR /> <BR />I say that partly in self defence but also because it is a warning that regardless of what changes may be required in planning policy, it will always have a degree of subjectivity. Therefore, it is often the guidance, instructions or will that come from the Minister's office that direct how the policy is interpreted.”
“First of all, this is a very important issue because there is increasing alarm in Northern Ireland at the march of the 300-feet-plus steel triffids across the countryside destroying the natural beauty of Northern Ireland but also having an impact on people's lives and health. When I started reading the report, I was a bit alarmed because, at the very start, the Committee talked about being mindful of the need to have renewable energy. I thought, "Right, what we're going to get here is a report that justifies the way in which the policy is being applied", but I must say I am pleased about a number of the recommendations. <BR /> <BR />Prompted by yourself, Mr Deputy Speaker, earlier, the Member for South Antrim seemed to think that I was responsible for this liberal policy.”
“Will the Member accept that, whilst wind is free, the means of turning wind into energy is the most expensive means of generating electricity, and, as a result of our dependence on it, we have added to fuel poverty and made industry less competitive?”
“Whilst we must all welcome the impact of the downward turn in energy prices internationally, does the Minister recognise that many firms in Northern Ireland, especially large consumers of energy, admit that one of the problems when it comes to expansion and investment is the cost of energy? Since our grid is increasingly overloaded with expensive electricity from renewable sources, what requests has she made to the Government at Westminster, who seem now to be receptive to this, to reduce the percentage of electricity that has to be produced through expensive renewable sources?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Does he accept that, if we are to meet the target that has been set for 2020, we are probably looking at setting up around another 1,500 of these turbines across Northern Ireland, so the cumulative impact that he has talked about is very important?”
“You would not be the first Sinn Féin Minister to do so.”
“What is the Minister doing and what consideration is he giving to ensure that there is a level playing field when it comes to that very important incentive for pupils to attend one sector as opposed to another?”
“The discrepancy between the percentage of pupils who qualify for free school transport in the integrated sector and that for the controlled and maintained sector is a ratio of about 3:1, which partly explains the popularity of the integrated sector, especially at secondary level. That presents an unfair advantage for integrated schools over the maintained and controlled schools adjacent to them. It distorts the budget and the capital budget.”
“The cost savings that will result from this exercise are important during a time of financial restraint, but the real goal is to achieve much more efficient, joined-up and effective delivery of government. Can the First Minister outline how he believes this change will help us to move away from the silo mentality of separate Departments and lead to more strategic joined-up decision-making and policies?”
“A Bill that, according to the explanatory note he has provided, got 41 responses — I suspect from the most vociferous of the lobby groups — does not strike me as one that has gained the imagination of the general public. We therefore need to question that. <BR /> <BR />For all those reasons — I could make other points, Mr Deputy Speaker — I do not believe that this is a good Bill. I suspect that it will go to Committee, but I hope that, when it does, the points that I have raised will be fully considered. Many motorists will be appalled at the prospect of large areas of Northern Ireland being subjected to 20 mph limits. I hope that we do not finish up with a Bill that for many people might be not a Road Traffic (Speed Limits) Bill but a horse-and-cart Bill. That would be a retrograde step.”
“You are exactly right, and that is the point that I was going to make. How can you get community buy-in if people do not even know what they are buying into? We are not clear about whether the Bill is simply about putting up signs or is about putting up signs, humps, chicanes and all the rest of the paraphernalia that goes along with traffic calming. I suspect that many people might have reservations if that is the road that you want to go down. Other people might welcome it with joy. That is why a Bill needs to be very clear. It has to have support. Mr Ramsey has talked about the widespread support for the Bill.”
“Mr Ramsey is suggesting that, in light of the discussion that we have had and some of the points that people have made, he is now thinking that we ought to do this in zones, where you do not simply have the signage but have all the infrastructure of putting in traffic calming, to ensure that the figures that he quoted from London can be met. If that is the case, the costs will become significantly higher. Of course, there is another issue in that there might be greater resistance to it. Many constituents make representations to me in support of traffic calming measures, but many constituents say, "It was the worst thing that ever happened. We want those bumps removed because of the vibrations in my house and the noise of traffic bumping over them".”
“If we are really selling this as a way of making it safer for people, let us be quite clear that the Bill is doing the job that it is designed to do. I do not believe that it is, and that is one of the reasons why I am particularly critical of it. <BR /> <BR />We come to the costs. I know that the Member has dismissed the costs of this. I do not want to sound cold and calculating about this, but, with all public policy, the cost has to be measured against the benefits that are obtained from it. In the part of Portsmouth that was covered, it cost just over half a million pounds just to put the signage up.”
“Or would it be regarded as a classified road and therefore the very fear that people have, namely that children in a school are at risk, would not be covered? <BR /> <BR />I think of the village of Glynn, which you and I are both familiar with. There are houses on either side of the road there. That busy road through the village carries heavy traffic from Larne port down into Belfast. Would that be regarded as a classified road or a non-classified road? A Bill like this would certainly raise expectations that, in an area where there is not even a footpath outside some of the houses, people there might feel safer after this. I suspect that that road would not be covered by the Bill, because it is part of the A2 and therefore would not fall under this, yet there is a school on it and houses facing right out onto it with no footpath.”
“Let us not sell it on that particular basis. <BR /> <BR />That brings me to the point about the definition of a residential street. In the legislation, it is where you have street lamps that are placed at 185 metres apart and the road has not been classified. Maybe the Minister, when he is summing up in his speech on this, will give us some practical examples of streets which are deemed to be not classified and the extent of the roads that will be covered by this particular situation. <BR /> <BR />Let me give you a couple of examples within walking distance of where we are today. There is the primary school down the Belmont Road. There are houses on either side of the road. The residential areas are not off the road but on it. Are we saying that that road would be covered by a 20 mph limit?”
“<BR /> <BR />The reason why children do not play in the street and parents do not feel that children are safe to play in the street is not just because of the through traffic. I know that when constituents come to me, it is about the number of houses that were built in housing estates, especially in the 1960s and 1970s, when car ownership was not as prevalent and off-street car parking was not available. Where houses used to have no cars, they have now got two cars. It is the danger of children playing between parked cars. If you jump out from between parked cars and somebody comes down at 20 mph as opposed to 30 mph, you still have not got a chance. Let us not pretend that this legislation will result in children's happily being able to skip around the streets of our estates. It will not do that.”
“<BR /> <BR />All kinds of claims have of course been made about the impact that this will have. Mr Ramsey talked about tourists happily sailing around the countryside and through the towns on pushbikes. Mr McKay talked about children playing football in the street, liberated from the fear and worry of being knocked down. Elderly people will walk with great assurance around town centres, knowing that they will not be run over. I have got to say that if that is what this is being sold on, it does not even marry up with what is in the Bill. According to the Bill, the very areas that tourists would want to go around will not be covered. They are through routes, town centres and main thoroughfares. They will be excluded.”
“You have then got to ask, first, whether you raise false hopes; secondly, whether it is worth the disruption; and, thirdly, whether it is worth the cost. Before we get into the cost of one death and that we should not tolerate one death on the roads, if that were the case, even on Mr Ramsey's own statistics, we would ban cars altogether because at 20 mph, you still have a 3% chance of being killed. Do those 3% of people not matter? Where do you draw the line? Do we go back to the point that Mr Dallat referred to, where we get people walking in front of cars with a red flag to cut down the danger of being killed? If we are going to look at this in a serious way, we have got to get behind the rhetoric and the emotion and ask ourselves some of these serious questions.”
“Rather than a reduction in the number of people who were either killed or seriously injured, that number went up by 2%. This was not some snap survey; it was carried out over a period of the year at, I think, 129 locations. It looked at the statistics for the whole area that was covered by the changes in Portsmouth. If we are looking for evidence on this, it would appear to be that where you have got only 20 mph limits being imposed and signage being put up for it, it will not be effective.”
“What he did not point out, though it has been pointed out to him by a number of Members since, is that the evidence from London was not based on the terms of his Bill; it was based on areas that were zoned, so there were other issues that accompanied the imposition of the 20 mph speed limit, such as traffic calming measures, narrowing of roads, chicanes and all the other things that roads agencies do. The Bill is simply about sticking up 20 mph signs when you enter those zones. <BR /> <BR />The evidence is comprehensive because it was carried out in Portsmouth a year after, so that people had time to get used to the changes in Portsmouth. The evidence that was produced there indicated that rather than speeds being reduced by a significant amount, average speeds were only changed by 0·9 mph.”
“The Committee might wish to consider that, as, I suspect, the Bill will go to the Committee anyhow. Are there inappropriate limits at the other end of the scale? The Member for North Down asked me what evidence I have that the legislation would not necessarily be effective. I must say that I am always wary about statistics because I know that, just as Members who have made the case for the Bill can abuse or be selective with statistics, I could be accused of doing exactly the same. For example, when Mr Ramsey was speaking about the evidence, he quoted from London.”
“That is an issue not for legislation but for public representatives to press officials. If the power is available to them and if there is a clear case that the power should be used to have that power exercised, it does not mean that we go for one-size-fits-all legislation where thousands of miles of road will have a limit imposed on them that may not necessarily be the kind of limit that is required. It is another reason why I really cannot understand where the Bill is coming from. If the Minister did not have the power to do it, I could understand why we needed to introduce legislation; however, if the Department has the power already, let it be applied in a particular way.”
“Where there is evidence that the current speed limit is not appropriate, the Minister for Regional Development has the power to reduce that.”
“<BR /> <BR />When it comes to the issue of the speed limits, as Mr Lyttle has pointed out, the Minister for Regional Development already has the ability, where it is believed that there should be a lower limit imposed, for example, where there are community demands or where accident statistics and evidence are produced to show that —”
“<BR /> <BR />The whole point is that we might think that we will solve this problem by simply saying to drivers, "There is a big round sign with a figure inside it", and think that, once we have put that up, we have solved the problem. However, drivers have to use sense. I know that, at times, it is not appropriate for me to drive at 20 mph in certain places, and you slow down to a lower speed. On other occasions, of course, it is appropriate. I think that an awful lot of driver experience has to be applied here.”
“Unfortunately, it has come to haunt me in this Chamber. <BR /> <BR />I want to come to the evidence, but I want to point out that, first, I believe that the Bill is flawed. Secondly, there are arguments for saying that, in some places, the speed limit ought to be reduced. I think that Mr Elliott made a really important point: the speed limit does not indicate the speed at which you must drive. I, too, have got some roads around where I live where the 60 mph limit is not appropriate, as I have found out on occasions when I have tried to abide by what I thought was the minimum speed limit but which was the maximum speed limit. Mind you, I do try to drive at the speed limit on them because I feel obliged on occasions.”
“I know. I have been reminded on many occasions that he was one of my pupils, but not all of my pupils were successes in life, unfortunately, and we have to live with the consequences.”
“Absolutely, I am indeed, if he has some patience. I was going to suggest, actually, that this Bill is so flawed that it probably sits beside the kind of manifesto that is put forward by his party. It does not go quite as far as wanting to ban people from eating bacon on a Monday to save the planet or not advertising for holidays that involve flying to Spain in case you bring the Mediterranean to Northern Ireland through climate change.”
“Mr Lyttle gave some figures that were slightly higher than the figures that were given by the proposer of the Bill, and do not forget that all of the conversation so far has been about the impact on pedestrians and cyclists. Mr Ramsey suggested that five pedestrians were killed, and Mr Lyttle has suggested that seven pedestrians were killed. We do not know whether they were all killed within areas where there is currently a 30 mph limit, a 40 mph limit or a limit above 40 mph. We do not have those figures.”
“In fact, he did not even know the extent of the roads that would be covered. He had no idea of the cost. We have had contradictory evidence as to the period over which the legislation would be introduced. On the one hand, his Bill proposes a massive advertising campaign, designed to tell people that, if you are driving through a residential area that has not been defined, the speed limit is 20 mph. On the other hand, we are told that that might not happen for more than two years, for six years or for as long as it takes to spread about the cost. <BR /> <BR />The other thing, of course, is that it does not actually address the main issue. We have had contradictory evidence.”
“In fact, I suspect that, if the Minister were to ask Roads Service officials in my area about the number of times, even within the past three months, that I have had them out on-site looking at road safety issues, he would find that I am probably one of the most prolific Members in the constituency at raising such issues. I know the importance of the issues to constituents, but the one thing that I do not believe it is right for a public representative to do is to bring forward legislation that is not going to be effective. <BR /> <BR />Let us look at the legislation on the basis of what we have heard so far from its proposer. We have no firm evidence that the Bill will achieve the objectives that it is designed to achieve. The proposer is not even clear about what kinds of roads he wants to see covered.”
“If the Member is going to take exception to such a mild remark, I fear what he will think of some of the other things that I want to say later on about the Bill. He need not become all sanctimonious, as SDLP Members tend to do when they find that some of the things that they bring forward are either plainly stupid or do not measure up to proper scrutiny. That is the typical tactic from SDLP Members. It does not matter whether you are talking about the Budget or welfare reform: they get all sanctimonious on you, and you are not allowed to speak your mind on particular things. <BR /> <BR />Let me say that road safety issues, be they difficulties and dangers outside schools, in estates or in residential areas, are brought to me continually by constituents.”
“I know that this is not necessarily the Member's legislation. It was initiated by the former Member for South Belfast, who left the Assembly at a rate much faster than 20 mph. In fact, I think that he left it at about 100 mph. Nevertheless, Mr Ramsey inherited the Bill. However, it is deeply flawed legislation. Some of my colleagues have been a bit more gracious than I would be on the issue, saying that they are at least prepared to take it to Committee Stage, where it will be changed, altered, reconstructed or whatever other terminology has been used. I suspect that I will be in a minority in the Chamber, perhaps even in a minority of one, but my personal view is that the Bill is so flawed that it should probably have been strangled at birth. I say that not because I do not have concerns about road safety. In fact, I probably find that —”
“We have to judge legislation on whether it will achieve the objectives that are set out in it, how it will affect other issues and whether it is competent.”
“First, I have absolutely no doubt about the sincerity and motivation of the Member who proposed the Bill. Indeed, I remember how, when I was Environment Minister, he used to plague me with road safety issues. He was not always right. In fact, I remember that when we were deciding to stop funding the Road Safety Council, he predicted all kinds of carnage on the roads and all kinds of consequences of going down that route. It did not come to pass. Nevertheless, the one thing that I know is that, in the representations that he made, he genuinely believed that it was an issue that had to be dealt with seriously. Having said that, I have to add that we do not judge legislation on the passion that someone demonstrates when bringing it forward or the sincerity that is displayed.”
“The Member has cited a specific example, which is not always the best way of deciding what policy should be. Will he agree that, if a Volvo were travelling at excessive speed in a 30 mph limit, it would be likely to travel at excessive speed in a 20 mph limit? If he is using the example that he has given as justification for this Bill, it is a very poor argument.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Does he accept that, if he goes along the route of the changes suggested by Mr Lyttle, so that it is not just about sticking up signs at the beginning and end of a 20 mph limit area, the Bill will become significantly different, especially its cost?”
“Maybe the Member will tell us how many tourists cycle around the Castlemara estate in Carrickfergus or the Antiville estate in Larne. If he is making an argument on the basis that this will increase cycling and tourism, at least let us be realistic about it. The streets that he is referring to are, by and large, not tourist streets. Let him be upfront about that.”
“Since he is into the statistics of this, perhaps he will tell us if those casualties were on the residential roads that are referred to in his Bill, or were they on roads that would not be covered by his Bill?”
“It is not that people are left without a safety net; that is the whole point. It is not that they are left without alternatives or, indeed, that the regulations are so draconian that there is no way back when somebody gets themselves into that position.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. His concern is for people who have either got huge mental-health problems or disabilities. First of all, in the debate on the last bunch of amendments, we discussed the advice-giving opportunities that there are and the resources put into them. The people whom he describes will also have significant input from social services and other statutory bodies. Is he suggesting that they do not do their job in helping people through the network, as well of course as the help available through social security offices?”
“Surely it is the job of the Assembly, when making law, to inject some responsibility into those who get benefits from the state, especially when looking in on that are people who feel that the abusers are sometimes treated better than those who abide by the regulations.”