Paul Girvan
South Antrim · Democratic Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“On a point or order, Mr Speaker. I appreciate that my comments on the ministerial statement that was made prior to this motion have created some stir. I wish to withdraw some of the comments in relation my calling into question the judiciary on how they will expedite this inquiry.”
“Minister, I, too, welcome the inquiry. In doing so, I would like to know what is meant by a paragraph in your statement that you would have liked, and your personal preference was for, a time-bound inquiry. We have no indication of how long that could be.”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. I have had occasion to speak to a number of prison officers who have indicated that they are under excessive stress and suffering from a lack of support. What mechanisms is the Minister putting in place to ensure that there is support to ensure that they are safe in their working environment?”
“That is, of course, very important. The Department has been working on a scoping exercise with the Strategic Investment Board that will make recommendations on how we can work together with our arm's-length bodies and voluntary and community sector organisations to promote and develop a culture of lawfulness in our society.”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. The application is not being dealt with at a local level; it is being dealt with at departmental level. As a consequence, I would like to know the Minister's view on the inclusion of what are termed "passing bays" on third-party land that the applicant may not have control over.”
“I thank the Minister for her statement to the House and welcome it. I want to ask her about staff. On the previous Minister's announcement, the PPS had already made a decision and had taken the opportunity to either relocate staff or ask them to go under the voluntary exit scheme (VES).”
The complete record
Every one of 287 lines we hold for Paul Girvan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 6.
“I will speak against the progression of the Bill. I have some reservations. <BR /> <BR />The townland that I was born and reared in is called Dunturky. As stated, a lot of the townland names have been anglicised, and that has probably helped with the understanding of the townland name in the locality where I live. Straidnahanna is a reference to the village of Straid. We also have the townland of Calhame, which is an Ulster Scotsism. <BR /> <BR />I can see that the opportunity would arise for this to be part of a greater cultural war that has already existed, in which Irish has been promoted, and there would be an attempt to put those anglicised names into an Irish context.”
“The views of those people have to be taken into account. There are those who have excluded themselves from registration, and they probably need more attention. <BR /> <BR />Mention was made of those who are mobile scrap merchants. There are many other things that can be termed as "mobile", and I do not want to go too far into that, but there are a number of criminal elements who only want to be "mobile". We need to put legislation in place. <BR /> <BR />I am happy to support the Bill's passage from Second Stage to the Committee Stage for scrutiny. There is work that needs to be done. We have reservations about some areas of the Bill, and I think we can come forward with something that will be workable.”
“<BR /> <BR />I appreciate that one of the mechanisms concerns dealing with cash. Some people say that everything should be dealt with by plastic, but it is nice to have some money in your pocket and know what you are spending. If you work with plastic, you will not know what you have spent: if you start off in the morning with £20 in your pocket and you spend a few pounds, you know what you are left with at the end of the night. Unfortunately, you sometimes spend more when you are using plastic. A cashless society is not necessarily the route I want to go down. <BR /> <BR />There is major engagement on this. At the Committee Stage, we can tease out a number of concerns we have. We have to encourage those in the industry who have been good custodians and have voluntarily entered into the agreement.”
“The voluntary system of registration and ensuring that records are held has obviously proven unworkable in its management. So, a mandatory approach is a necessity for ensuring that that happens. That would be of benefit and would give some form of traceability. <BR /> <BR />I want to make sure that the criminal elements who want to remove lead and copper from buildings receive the full penalties and cannot get rid of the items. That is where the problems arise: if they have a market, they will obviously be willing to engage in such criminal activity. As a consequence, it is vital that we do all within our power to ensure that there is some mechanism for accountability and traceability within an industry that has not had a great press. Putting forward a legal approach in a Bill is probably the way to do that.”
“I congratulate Mr Beggs on bringing forward this private Member's Bill on dealing with the scrap metal industry. <BR /> <BR />I am not going to keep everybody very late, because I appreciate that hot potatoes seem to be on people's minds. This seems to be a bit of a hot potato for the two previous Members to speak, with one defending his Environment Minister's not wishing to take the Bill on and the other defending the Justice Minister's not wishing to take it on. We will just work our way around that. <BR /> <BR />This is an issue on which there is great interest, and it needs to be grasped and dealt with. Unfortunately, the criminal elements will always find a way of ensuring that they do not abide by whatever process exists.”
“I thank the Minister for his answer, and I appreciate the positive approach that is being taken to this matter. All politics being local, I am putting forward a good suggestion that the international airport, which is located in my constituency, is the ideal location for such a service. Does the Minister consider that to be possible?”
“— look at the big picture and ensure that we deliver for the whole Province.”
“However, I mentioned earlier that Northern Ireland is so small a country that we cannot say that we should try to ensure that we do not have jobs five miles down the road because the area that I represent will be excluded, which is somewhat petty. We have to see Northern Ireland as a whole —”
“We need to ensure that we get a fair crack of the whip. As far as inward investment, visits and opportunities for firms to come in are concerned, nobody goes out wilfully to discriminate or to ensure that they do not visit west of the Bann or west or north Belfast. My colleague from North Belfast will be only too glad to say that it is vital that one region of our capital city is not excluded. It is important that we all get a fair crack of the whip. As far as I am concerned, people should not be brought here and told that they have to locate their business in Dungannon or Enniskillen. They will pick what they believe is the proper economic heartland that will best meet their purpose. <BR /> <BR />We have a job of work to do on infrastructure.”
“Half of my family live in the Fermanagh area — my mother is from Fermanagh — so I appreciate that there are difficulties in certain rural settings. However, a fund has been set up that is helping to deliver local economic development in rural communities through the local action groups (LAGs) that were set up through the Department that the party opposite's Minister has control of. They have the opportunity to deliver economic development in rural communities. Some areas have more money than others. South Antrim, which I represent, has a minuscule amount of money for its LAG this term compared with other areas, and that is simply because a large part of my area is classed as urban. As a consequence, it has not availed itself of as much money. <BR /> <BR />There are areas that we need to focus on and improve.”
“That is quite a bit out of their day, and that happens in certain areas of the south-east of England. Those people make a decision on that. <BR /> <BR />If you look at London, it has sucked the life out of some of the small areas around it. It has been the magnet for a lot of major industry and major business. The same has happened in Northern Ireland with Belfast. My colleague in South Antrim made reference to what goes on in our constituency. Many of our people commute to Belfast on a daily basis to work. I appreciate that Belfast has become the economic hub of Northern Ireland, and it is good that we have somewhere that has easy access to rail and road transport links, boats and air connectivity. <BR /> <BR />We have work to do on improving our infrastructure. There are areas where we need to improve infrastructure.”
“I oppose the motion. I appreciate that we look at Northern Ireland's economy as a whole. The phrase that everyone keeps using is this: a rising tide floats all boats. Money spent in Northern Ireland has a ripple effect, no matter where it is spent. I appreciate that there might well be areas in Northern Ireland that seem to have been, for some reasons, whether geographical or other, excluded from opportunity for investment. I do not accept that that has been due to religious or political bias. <BR /> <BR />We live in a Province where you can travel from one side to the other in less than two hours. I had the opportunity to visit England recently, where I met people whose daily commute is three and a half hours to work and three and a half hours home.”
“You try to do that to the best of your ability with a reduced budget. To be honest, some people just say that they will take money from the easiest area, which will have the most impact on the public, and make that the area where everyone sees the hit. <BR /> <BR />I support the Budget on its way forward, but I believe and take on board the Minister's comments that, should we not get the full implementation of the Stormont House Agreement, we are passing a Budget that, ultimately, we will not be able to balance at the end of the year. It is vital that we move forward and ensure that we make savings as early as possible in the financial year because the longer we leave it, the more stringent the cuts will have to be in the latter part of the financial year, so I support the Bill as presented.”
“A similar approach could be taken by DFP, which could state, "The most impact will be from no longer paying salaries, so we will close down the department that processes salaries. We will not get rid of anybody. We will have people sitting in the office doing something slightly different, which does not mean that we are getting rid of any staff or reducing our outlay." Yes, DRD will cut its fuel bill, but the people will still be sitting around, not being used. It does not make any common sense. <BR /> <BR />Unfortunately, common sense seems to be lacking in many areas. I come from the private sector, and I am still involved in it. Unfortunately, in the private sector, you make decisions daily on where you can and must make savings, and, in those areas, there are key and vital functions that you still strive to deliver.”
“That seems to be where everyone is putting their focus, stating that the £2 million a week that we are costing our economy in public spend, and which could be used in other areas, will be handed back. Some people say that we are receiving that in kind, through benefits received on a welfare basis. There is great difficulty in trying to ensure that people realise that those who are in great need are also those who are waiting for hospital appointments or operations, some of which are, unfortunately, for life-threatening conditions. <BR /> <BR />We hear about major cuts. I want to take exception to some areas. We hear of one Department, the Department for Regional Development, which has a 0·6% reduction in one area of its budget but fails to deliver the grass cutting that is associated with that area.”
“As it stands, we are dealing with not just the cuts to the block grant from Westminster but in-year cuts, because of the SDLP and Sinn Féin, resulting from moneys that we have to hand back as a consequence of penalties. <BR /> <BR />Those who want to live with their head in the sand and believe that a white horse will ride over the horizon and deliver a pot of money to resolve all of those issues are not necessarily living in the real world. All I can say is that the indication that I get, from listening to the media and those who have been in communication with the people who hold the purse strings, is that there will not be any additional moneys to deal with welfare reform.”
“The difficulty is that there seems to be a certain amount of sticking one's head in the sand in relation to the Budget and how we move it forward. We know that we will have a hole in our budget of £604 million because of the non-implementation of the Stormont House Agreement and missing out on the savings that could be delivered, not just this year but in subsequent years, from the voluntary exit programme that has been put forward for civil servants. As was outlined in earlier questions, the numbers who have declared an interest in availing themselves of that will be and could be denied the opportunity to do so should we not move ahead with the welfare reform approach and the savings that would be delivered from the Stormont House Agreement.”
“I, too, stand as a member of the Committee for Finance and Personnel. I believe that a certain amount of work was undertaken in the Committee. I appreciate that the Committee granted accelerated passage to the Bill, and, in doing so, we felt that we had had the opportunity for adequate scrutiny in relation to the matter. Departments were not necessarily that open about where they were making their spend. I am talking about one Department in particular — the Department of Education — where there seemed to be something of a smoke-and-mirrors approach to revealing information on where the spend was and where savings were being made or not being made. <BR /> <BR />I feel like we are going through déjà vu. We are going back over the same day again, or Groundhog Day, as the man says.”
“— major national issues such as HS2 are factored in and that we get a consequential that we can add through.”
“<BR /> <BR />There was mention of HS2, the high-speed rail network, and how there should have been Barnett consequentials for its inclusion. Unfortunately, we probably did not do as well out of the Olympics as we might have under Barnett. We got some £5 million as a Barnett consequential from that, but the potential opportunity is there. We have to ensure that we fight our corner to make sure that —”
“Professor Holtham undertook a study on behalf of the Welsh Assembly, and his report indicated that Wales has not necessarily come out as well as other regions such as Scotland and Northern Ireland. At least one thing has been clear in that it has given us a clear stance and a formula to calculate exactly how much we will get. It takes away the need to go to Westminster every year to fight our corner to see whether we can get additional moneys. I appreciate that, up until now, the formula has worked very well as opposed to having to go across every year and fight your corner, not knowing what you will get for the next financial year. There is an element of security in knowing where we stand. That has been good.”
“Due to various factors, it is possibly no longer a safe haven. Professor Holtham was at another evidence session. Up to now, it has been a safe haven for funding. The convergence issue was mentioned, and we have done well up until a certain point, and, after that, it could be less favourable. On the basis of it being less favourable, it could mean that we might get what is, in a GB-based stance, a fair crack of what they believe we should get. Up until now, we have been quite happy, and I am reluctant to raise too many issues about wishing Barnett away. That needs to be put forward. <BR /> <BR />We appreciate that this has been ongoing since 2012.”
“In the evidence that was received and is found in the report, Dr Graham Gudgin brought forward the argument, "Don't wish for change, because, if you do, it might not necessarily get you what you want." We should remember that, in the overall scheme of things, Barnett has been quite helpful to Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />Before we consider going down another route, which would be deemed to be needs based, we need to remember that some of that is built on assumptions of what need is, how you actually define it and get it on a level footing, so as to make it the correct way forward. Unfortunately, what one person deems to be need and another person deems to be need are two different things. It was to ensure that there would be some measurement if that were to be brought forward.”
“I appreciate that this debate is on the back of the report that came through the Committee for Finance and Personnel. It was a very worthwhile exercise in gathering information on how the Barnett formula has worked historically. Northern Ireland has done very well out of the Barnett formula up to now. There were evidence-gathering sessions, and a number of recommendations came through as a consequence of the inquiry. <BR /> <BR />There is still a body of work that needs to be looked at on how we go forward with Scotland and Wales to ensure that we get a fair crack of the whip. Unfortunately, some people are looking forward to seeing some change.”
“I thank the Minister for his answer thus far. Have the criteria been applied fairly and equally throughout all the sectors of education that exist in Northern Ireland?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Does he not believe that Wales and Scotland already have their Budget set for 2015-16? As a consequence, that is where we stand. They already have a Budget set, and, when Westminster meets to make those announcements on 8 July, whatever transpires will be automatically implemented in Wales and Scotland.”
“Within a few weeks, we will have already passed that £38 million cut for the current year, and we paid back penalties of £87 million last year. So, that is where we stand on it.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. He made comments earlier about spending. Public spending is being cut because of the lack of implementation of the Stormont House Agreement; it is costing us over £2 million a week. You mentioned earlier that £38 million is being removed from our Budget this year.”
“What we have is some way of balancing it. There is concern about the delay in something as important as this coming before us, considering that the review took place in 2006 and we are just getting it in 2015. It has been somewhat dragged out; that is all I will say. <BR /> <BR />I will maybe use our court system as evidence of how things can be somewhat dragged out and not always the most efficient in some ways. Perhaps the efficiency or inefficiency of our court process and system is a debate for another day; it is another matter. As it stands, we are here to support the moving on of the Legal Complaints and Regulation Bill. I feel that there is an attempt here to address what has been very much an oversight.”
“<BR /> <BR />I appreciate that some weighting could be put in to ensure that the spokesperson and the chairperson of the panel are laypeople, that there would be a balance in favour of those who are not necessarily looking at it totally from a legal perspective, and that they do not just protect their colleagues or those whom they have affiliations with. They would be there to ensure that justice is not just seen to be done but is done and that a complaint is dealt with in a fair and equitable fashion. <BR /> <BR />As a consequence, we have the bones of something on which to work. I appreciate that there will be further scrutiny of the Bill at Committee. There will be an opportunity to receive additional evidence from those who want to contribute; they will be called before the Committee, and that will be of help.”
“I support the Second Stage of the Legal Complaints and Regulation Bill. We had the opportunity to visit the Law Society and the Bar Council on 29 January 2014. I appreciate that some of the points that the Chair has just alluded to are some of the issues that were brought forward. They relate to determining how complaints are logged and controlled and ensuring, as has already been stated, that this is not just the tip of the iceberg and that confidence is given to members of the public who are not in the legal profession and who feel that it is not right to complain because it is something of a cartel operated by solicitors and barristers, present company excluded. It is relevant that they have the confidence to believe in the independence of the investigation and the thorough delivery of it.”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. Were any calculations made for areas of deprivation in the criteria for the new programme?”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. I appreciate that it is not additional contractors that are being brought in to undertake that work; it is staff from the Department. Have any been laid off? What duties are being carried out by those who were trained to do such a function?”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. Will he outline what benefits the Lagan footbridge and cycle path will bring to Belfast city centre?”
“A very interesting piece of graffiti appeared on a wall in west Belfast: "We don't want the IRA, we just want our DLA". That is quite interesting, and some of these people come up with wonderful ideas. The graffiti did not appear to stay very long, but that is the sort of thing that some people have been putting forward. That says more about what is going on here than anything else, because it is important that the most vulnerable are protected. <BR /> <BR />At the end of the day, everybody is suffering as a consequence of the non-implementation of the Stormont House Agreement, and it is vital that we get the work done. We are not rolling over and saying that we will just accept those hits. We will fight to try to ensure that we can move forward, balance our Budget and deliver for Northern Ireland.”
“For the Estimates, we have a cash sum of £8·3 billion and a resource of just over £9 billion, and we will have to work within that amount for the forthcoming year. We have some difficulty in trying to ensure that the economics of the whole issue are brought forward. Mention was made of what the Scottish Executive have done and how they have agreed a Budget, albeit a Budget that has not taken a major hit for the non-implementation of welfare reform. We have concerns about many aspects of welfare reform, but, ultimately, they are not taking that hit. <BR />Those who say that they are here to protect the most vulnerable in our community are removing money from vital budgets that would deliver health and education throughout our Province.”
“Northern Ireland has held its regional rate for the last number of years and has just had an inflationary rise over that period to such an extent that we have a 1·4% rise in the current year — other regions of the United Kingdom have worked out at an average of 1·9% — and that has been a great help. The implementation of the small business rate relief scheme has also been a great help and ensured that almost 50% of businesses in Northern Ireland were able to avail themselves of some form of rate relief. That message was given to us as elected representatives, and we have had to take that on board. <BR /> <BR />We have to cut our cloth according to the amount that we are given, and it is vital that we do so.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. <BR /> <BR />I appreciate that that leaves us in a very difficult position, but, as the Minister stated, should we not get implementation of the way forward, we cannot continue to move forward when we cannot balance our books at the end of the year, and that is where the difficulty arises. Ultimately, it is vital to push forward and continue the work to try to get a resolution, but the longer we leave it, the more in-year cuts we will have to make to balance the books, and that is a difficulty. <BR /> <BR />We have been very successful in ensuring that we held down our regional rate.”
“We are part of the United Kingdom, and, therefore, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have to accept the democracy that spoke to set up the Conservative Government. I appreciate that the Chancellor and the Government will put forward their spending plans in the autumn, but that will really reflect upon years further forward. <BR /> <BR />I will deal with our Supply resolution and the spend that we have for our Supply. We have to work with the Budget that we agreed on 27 January, albeit knowing that there could well be adjustments to it in-year and being aware of the outworkings of it, but the longer we delay in bringing forward —”
“As a consequence of its non-implementation up to now, there is a potential cost and a loss to our block grant over time, but my ambition is not necessarily to roll over and say that we have not won that war. We intend to fight and continue to see what we can bring back as opposed to saying, "Let us rule out all the moneys that there would have been as a result of the Stormont House Agreement". The figure of £604 million has been mentioned. I appreciate that there are costs associated up to now. <BR /> <BR />The voluntary exit scheme was one of the programmes put forward, and the savings that it could deliver are on hold until such times as we move forward with those who believe that our paymaster, the United Kingdom Government, will act.”
“I will speak in favour of the Minister's motion. I will deal with the Excess Votes at the outset. One area that we had a concern about was that the cause of the Department of Education's Excess Vote was arm's-length bodies. There is a major concern about accountability in some arm's-length bodies and how they deal with it. As a consequence, they overspend. That came out in the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) report, and we, as a Government, have to look at it and ensure that we are making those arm's-length bodies totally accountable for every penny that they spend. <BR /> <BR />The motion is to do with a Budget that we agreed on 27 January this year, albeit one that was very much predicated on the full implementation of the Stormont House Agreement and all its outworkings.”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. I am giving my own view here, but sometimes I feel that the Department tries on many occasions to protect what it delivers, as opposed to trying to get better value for money from the community and voluntary sector. When can these organisations expect to hear about the prospective changes to their funding for the future?”
“I thank the deputy First Minister for his answer. He alluded to the protection of the most vulnerable and some of the protections that had been negotiated and agreed in relation to welfare reform. Should direct intervention from Westminster be the only way forward, would those protections still be there for people who had the bedroom tax agreed previously?”
“It is important that we bring to the attention of the new Government in Westminster the benefit that we see in having something such as this. I support the motion.”
“There were other verses to the poem, but they refer more to what was happening in the forthcoming election:”
“The sector has shown its capability to grow, to create employment and to react to change very quickly. A number of major events in Northern Ireland, as the proposer of the motion said, have gone off very well. They have been well supported and facilitated by the hospitality industry, and it is vital that we support what is a very good industry. We have a lot to offer as a nation. We have some wonderful scenery, so we should be using all the tools in the box to capitalise on that. <BR /> <BR />Prior to the election, a DUP delegation met the Chancellor on the same matter. During that meeting on 20 February 2015, the delegation presented a petition along with a short poem, which read:”
“The information that I received was that 6,000 jobs had been created as a consequence of the lower rate of VAT. If you use the same formula for Northern Ireland, it would equate to around 3,300 jobs being created in the tourism industry, should the Chancellor decide that the VAT rate in the United Kingdom for the hospitality industry should be reduced to a certain level. I will not venture an opinion on what the figure should be, but, suffice it to say, if we want to go lower, we should go lower than the Republic of Ireland. That is one way in which I would wish to go.”
“I support the motion. In doing so, I want to say that it is very much a decision that has to be made by Westminster and one that 11 Downing Street should possibly be driving forward. It will and should benefit the tourism industry in Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />I appreciate the figures that have been mentioned: the £720 million that tourism generates for Northern Ireland's economy and the 43,000 jobs that spin out from that. Those are all relevant facts. We are unique in that we have a land border with the Republic of Ireland, which has a hospitality VAT rate of 9% and, because of that advantage, has been able to grow its tourism industry over the last couple of years. <BR /> <BR />I do not quite go along with the figure of 30,000 jobs.”
“The Department has responsibility for the voluntary and community sector. What assistance is being given to organisations that are being impacted on by the efficiency savings that they have to target over the next number of years?”
“No, I have given way to you already. We will move the amendments, including amendment Nos 100, 101 and 102. We support an increase from 10,000 cubic metres to 25,000 cubic metres.”