Philip McGuigan
North Antrim · Sinn Féin · Northern Ireland
“I concur with the Minister that patient safety is ultimately the top priority, but patient safety is also important, as the Member said, in terms of assessments. If you cannot get assessments, your safety is compromised.”
“On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Further to my party colleague's point of order about the DUP's internal investigation, what is the point of doing an investigation if you are telling us that you have nothing to answer for? You were the leader of the DUP at a time when accusations were levelled against Jeffrey Donaldson.”
“Minister, in your previous answers you talked about the pressures and the difficulties. You said that you were looking for a fair funding model, and you spoke of the need for taxpayers here to be treated equitably.”
“Minister, the inquiry found systematic abuse, neglect and serious governance failure at Muckamore Abbey Hospital over many years — failures that were not isolated incidents but reflected systematic issues across leadership, staffing, safeguarding and oversight that resulted in decades of physical and psychological abuse.”
“When I engage with health service sectors as my party's health spokesperson, there is not one that does not talk about workforce pressures and problems with staff recruitment and retention. That is clearly the case with doctors.”
“First Minister, you have spoken previously about the opportunities created as a result of our unique economic and trading position and about the increased potential that comes with all-island cooperation.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,633 lines we hold for Philip McGuigan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 19 of 33.
“On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. The Speaker indicated earlier that he would take note of those who were voting for or against. That may help the proceedings.”
“Let us hope — fingers crossed — that the voting is quick, and we can conclude the debate tonight so that we can move towards meeting our ultimate objective of providing ambitious, long-overdue climate legislation for the citizens whom we represent. The Final Stage debate is scheduled for next week. After the voting, I hope that we can move towards that in a quick and timely manner, concluding the painstaking work by all of us to this point.”
“He felt that the amendments that we tabled were not necessary as they are things that the Department is currently obliged to do. He outlined the technical nature of his amendments and the reasons for tabling them. A number of his amendments are to tidy up previous amendments, deal with other amendments or avoid duplication. He felt that other amendments were unnecessary. <BR /> <BR />At this point, I thank the officials in the Bill Office and the departmental officials who were helpful to us and, I presume, to everyone else in assisting with amendments and in supporting the debate and the production of this legislation to get us to this point. As I said, it has been a long process, and we have debated at length, sometimes loudly. Hopefully, at this point, the debating has, by and large, concluded.”
“Tá sé mall, agus tá mé tuirseach; dá bhrí sin, ní bheidh mé ag caint ar feadh i bhfad. It is late, and we have talked at length, so I intend to keep my remarks very short. There was overwhelming support for the tenets of the aspects that we are discussing in group 2, such as just transition, the just transition commission, the climate commissioner, the need for amendments on carbon leakage and, by in large, the need for assessments. Some Members and parties have slight differences on certain aspects of that and things that they support in more detail. By and large, however, those aspects of the Bill have wide support, and that was indicated by all the parties. The Minister, in his summation of the amendments, spoke in favour of assessments.”
“Independent oversight and advice are crucial to ensuring that we protect our environment as best we can while ensuring that the burden for doing so does not fall disproportionately on those who are least able to afford it. Independent oversight is vital in ensuring that we reach our targets in as fair and sustainable a manner as possible while protecting industries, incomes and livelihoods. Amendment Nos 66, 67 and 68 all relate to the climate commissioner, who will provide our independent advice on the path to net zero. <BR /> <BR />I flew through the important aspects. There is a raft of amendments, but most are technical, and we support them.”
“We will support amendment No 63, which, again, expands on and gives more detail on the just transition commission.”
“That is very important when tackling climate legislation. <BR /> <BR />All sectors will have to contribute to the fight against climate change, but, as we discussed during the debate on the group 1 amendments, we recognise the vital role that agriculture in particular plays here, economically and socially. We also recognise that, due to its nature, it will face specific changes, which is why, at Consideration Stage, we proposed and supported an amendment that introduced a just transition fund for agriculture. We will support amendment No 53 from the Department, which expands on the detail of that and tidies it up. <BR /> <BR />At Consideration Stage, we also proposed a just transition commission, which, in our view, is key to the success of the Bill's outworkings to ensure that it is done in a fair way.”
“We must be mindful that, in seeking to make a positive contribution to climate change locally, we do not inadvertently make a negative one globally, which is why we will also support the Minister’s amendment Nos 36 and 62, which tidy up the definition of "carbon leakage" that was added at Consideration Stage. <BR /> <BR />In making climate change legislation, we must be mindful at all times that we live on an island with a shared environment and deeply interconnected economy. We have proposed and will support our amendment No 40, which recognises:”
“We want an ambitious, fair and sustainable climate change Bill, and we believe that our amendments in group 2 will help us to achieve that. <BR /> <BR />To that end, we propose amendment Nos 20, 22 and 52, which will ensure that the various aspects of the Bill are fair, proportionate and subject to financial, social, economic and rural impact assessments. Amendment No 21 is similar to amendment No 2, which was in the earlier group, re the need to take account of biogenic methane when developing the agriculture sectoral plan. <BR /> <BR />The Department’s amendment Nos 27 to 35 are technical. They change the word "target" to "budget". Obviously, we will support those as well.”
“As we have discussed, setting targets is a vital part of the Bill, but how we achieve them is equally important. The group 2 amendments are on the sectoral and climate action plans, just transition, the just transition commission and the climate commissioner. Those are all important aspects, most of which were added at Consideration Stage. Most of the amendments in group 2 are technical amendments that tidy up or add aspects to the previous amendments. They are important, though. We must ensure that the transition to net zero is a just one. It is not enough for us to say that no community or sector will be left behind. That must become a reality. We want them to embrace the changes and, furthermore, to guide us in how we can achieve them in a fair and sustainable manner.”
“Again, I am confused about the Member's support for amendment No 17 and his being on the side of agriculture, given, as I said earlier, that the agriculture sector has not said that it does not want to play its part in this. It has actually said the opposite: it needs to play its part because it will suffer if climate change is not tackled. Our opposition to amendment No 17 has absolutely nothing to do with anything other than our support for our agriculture sector.”
“of the Paris agreement. That is all in the context of all gases making a fair contribution to net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. That will not change by passing our amendment.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I am a wee bit confused about the Member's opposition to our amendment. Maybe she would explain whether she disagrees with the "fair and proportionate" methane reductions or the:”
“It is, absolutely. It is about the proposal to cut the payment from 10 hectares to three hectares. One of the DUP Members said that, if this proposal got through, it would decimate our rural communities.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. The Member has spoken a number of times about protecting and investing in our agriculture community. He sits with me on the AERA Committee. We recently discussed the Minister's future agriculture policy. I will not embarrass the Member, but when we talked about the Minister's proposals and cutting the payment from 10 hectares —”
“It wants to play its part in a fair and proportionate manner. Our amendment No 2, rather than the Minister's amendment No 17, will allow our farmers to do that. <BR /> <BR />We will oppose amendment No 17 and amendment Nos 9, 11, 13 and 14, which are related to it. We will obviously support our amendment No 2. We will also move our amendment No 4 but not amendment No 3 and will support the Department's amendment No 5. We had a conversation with the Department and accept the rationale that there is a need to keep a target for 2030 in the Bill to allow for early work on carbon budgets and sectoral plans. We still believe that the 2030 and, certainly, the 2040 interim targets should be amended. Amendment No 5 allows for that to happen within the context of the unmovable target of reaching net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.”
“When I first saw the amendment, I thought that it was an early April Fool's joke. I hope that the Minister reads today's IPCC report and that it resonates with him. The Minister needs to realise that we need to move on climate change and to protect our farmers and agri-food sector, as, in the North, it will be they who will be hit hardest by the impact of global warming in the years to come. He is the Minister for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, and he needs to start acting as such. We can have ambitious climate legislation that protects our environment and our agriculture sector. Each is dependent on the other. The Minister does not need to take my word for it: the farming sector has repeatedly stated that it needs and wants to be part of the climate change solution.”
“Those are all encompassed within the main target of the Bill, which is to reach net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. I hope that that will have the support of all of us in the Chamber, and I hope that it has the support of the agriculture and agri-food sector. Sinn Féin will leave no sector behind. We will stand by our farming, agricultural and rural communities, as we always have. It should never have become a battle between agriculture and the environment. Whilst it may have suited some in the Chamber to frame it that way, that has done a disservice to the climate legislation debate. <BR /> <BR />The same could be said of the Minister's amendment No 17, which would exclude the agriculture sector from the outworkings of the Bill. It is a total nonsense amendment.”
“<BR /> <BR />Our legislation must be fair to individuals and to all sectors of society, such as transport, including shipping and aviation, infrastructure, our energy sector, our business community and waste management, and it must be fair to our agriculture sector. I have said at every stage of the Bill that no sector of our society can be left behind. I thank the Minister for recounting my comments at Consideration Stage about Sinn Féin's protections for our agriculture sector. At every stage of the process, Sinn Féin has submitted amendments in the interests of being fair and to make the Bill both more ambitious and fair to those in society whom it will affect. <BR /> <BR />Our amendment No 2 is, again, an attempt to strength our previous amendments to protect our agriculture sector on our pathway to net zero. It states:”
“Two climate Bills, months of Committee scrutiny, 80-plus amendments at Consideration Stage and 70 amendments at Further Consideration Stage today show the interest in and the importance of climate legislation. It also shows the importance of the efforts of all of us to get it right for our citizens. That is the spirit in which Sinn Féin has approached the climate legislation debate to date, and it is further evidenced by our amendments today. The North needs a climate Bill that is ambitious, fair and deliverable and that, in the context of this jurisdiction, plays its part in achieving the scientific necessity of keeping to the Paris agreement targets. Given the IPCC report that came out today, that should be the clear focus for every one of us who is determined to fight back against global warming.”
“I thank the Minister for the statement and the details. Minister, on an important action plan like this, stakeholder engagement and consultation is vital. I say that as a member of the AERA Committee, and I do not think that there has been any engagement with that Committee so far on the development of this action plan. What stakeholders have been spoken to in identifying priorities, and will continued engagement take place, including with the fishing sector, on the details of the action plan?”
“Minister, the meeting was about energy efficiency, so I suppose that I should commend your efforts to condense the detail into a two-and-a-half-page statement. This is an island, so you would imagine that marine energy generation would be a big part of our renewable plans here, but, as we know, it has been fraught with difficulties. What is the current status of marine energy generation in the North, and what role do you see it playing in the future?”
“<BR /> <BR />In summary, the Committee is satisfied that the order that is being considered today is appropriate and recommends that it proceed in order to bring into effect important provisions in the Environment Act that will provide DAERA with the legislative authority to discharge its duties in respect of environmental oversight and which also legitimise the role and function of the OEP in respect of local matters.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Department notified the Committee of its intention to lay the regulations on 16 December 2021, and the Committee considered the policy intent on 6 January 2022, where it recommended that the Department proceed to lay the regulations. Following the submission of the SL1, filed by the Department on 25 January 2022, the Committee referred the order to the Examiner of Statutory Rules for scrutiny. The Examiner reported back to the Committee on 4 February and did not draw the Committee's attention to any of the provisions. The Committee, therefore, subsequently recommended that it be affirmed by the Assembly.”
“The commencement order will bring a broad swathe of the Act into effect locally, including provisions regarding the activities of the Office for Environmental Protection, producer responsibility requirements and provisions pertaining to DAERA's ability to bring forward regulations to set charges on single-use plastics and carrier bags. It also provides a legislative basis for the Department to enforce the removal of controlled waste, to make regulations for waste-charging schemes and to facilitate water quality monitoring. The Committee notes that certain aspects of the Environment Act, including the management and use of forest risk commodities and provisions regarding disclosure of information to the OEP, will not be implemented via the order and will come into effect at a later date through alternative means.”
“I welcome the opportunity to outline the views of the Committee on the commencement order, which will bring into effect a number of provisions of the Environment Act, which completed its legislative passage in Westminster in November 2021. Members will recall that the Assembly previously granted its legislative consent for the extension of the Environment Act to here on 30 June 2020 and for supplementary provisions on 20 September 2021. The regulations before us today will bring into law most of the aspects of the Act that apply to the North. <BR /> <BR />As Members will be aware, the Environment Act establishes a framework for environmental policy and oversight and provides powers to jurisdictions in respect of a number of different areas, including water, resource efficiency, biodiversity, and air and water quality management.”
“Minister, the independent Fiscal Council said that a multi-year Budget provided a "golden opportunity" to reform public services, including to reform and improve our health service. Does he agree that it is disgraceful that this golden opportunity has been jeopardised by the DUP's reckless and selfish decision to collapse the Executive?”
“Minister, you are quite right: these are vital programmes and projects. You indicated the nervousness and unease felt by people involved in the projects over the DUP's pulling out of the Executive and the uncertainty about funding. I welcome what I seem to be hearing from the Minister, namely a commitment that the funding will be in full. The Communities Minister did support the Finance Minister's proposals, so that could have been done. Will the Minister once again commit to the House that these projects will be funded in full for the next year?”
“Minister, I absolutely support the need for our children to be taught about the environment and educated on ecology and the interactions around them. Following on from previous contributors, I ask the Minister to detail the number or percentage of schools across the North that are eco-schools and to tell me how many more, if given the funding, will be able to work towards achieving eco-school status.”
“I agree that a regulator will be essential to the development, operation, regulation and enforcement of future gambling legislation. <BR /> <BR />The Bill is a good start, and I certainly hope that it becomes law before the end of this mandate.”
“I also welcome all aspects of the draft code that are aimed at protecting children and young people from exposure to harmful products. Some aspects of the code that deal with gaming machines will be crucial here. We must do everything that we can to ensure that those protections are as strong as possible and are enforced. As someone who was, unfortunately, able to rack up a substantial debt using a range of credit cards solely on gambling with no restriction, I welcome the draft code ban on credit cards for gambling. I have no doubt that the inclusion of such a ban in the code will offer much protection and reduce gambling harm to individuals. Finally, I expect the development of a regulator to oversee the code of practice to be included in phase 2.”
“From experience, I am all too aware of how gambling companies try to impede customers or discourage them from withdrawing their winnings by, among other things, placing a limit on the amount that they can withdraw or, perhaps, by placing a delay of up to 72 hours on their being able to receive their winnings. All those practices are undertaken not to protect the gambler but in the hope and expectation that the gambler will continue to gamble with their winnings and, ultimately, lose.”
“<BR /> <BR />In the APG, when looking at affordability checks, we considered, among other options, the equivalent of a membership-type card that can check the affordability of an individual's gambling, taking into account all premises visited, to ensure that those placing bets are not doing so beyond their means. That is crucial. People should not bet beyond their means. Data protection issues mean that legislation would be needed, so that could, potentially, be included in phase 2. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the inclusion in the draft codes of action on reverse withdrawals.”
“In the APG inquiry, affordability checks, spending limits and self-exclusion practices were continuously raised as important factors in reducing harm. I note their inclusion in the consultation on the draft codes of practice, and I hope that all the measures will be strengthened as a result of the consultation process. I accept that those aspects may be more easily addressed in online than in land-based gambling, but there are examples of how, in other jurisdictions, for example, multi-premise self-exclusion schemes work. I hope that that is given due consideration by the Minister in developing the codes.”
“The programme is aimed at preventing harm in young people. It is, potentially, the type of project that could benefit from a levy and expand its reach. Any decisions on where the funding from a levy goes obviously need to be completely independent, from the industry in particular. <BR /> <BR />I welcome clause 15 and the introduction of codes of practice. That is vital. It is right and proper that, when designing the codes, there be an exploration of issues that could reduce harm. The Department's draft codes state, among their objectives, that they are to:”
“We are a long way behind where we need to be in the North on having useful data on gambling, so we need to improve research and data gathering on gambling practices and activities, just as we must improve the gathering of statistics in the Department of Health on those who present as or could be suffering as a result of gambling harm. In Health, that data is currently pretty much non-existent. <BR /> <BR />From a public health perspective, gambling-related harm needs to be put on a level with other addictions such as alcohol and drugs, including in how potential dangers are taught to our children in the education system. To that end, I congratulate the charity Gambling with Lives on its welcome pilot education programme that is being delivered in a small number of schools in the North.”
“<BR /> <BR />We absolutely need a levy on the gambling industry, so I welcome clause 14, which proposes such a levy to go towards projects related to gambling addiction and other forms of harm or exploitation associated with gambling. I welcome amendment No 3, tabled by the Minister to extend the list of those who are to be consulted on the outworking of the levy to include those who have experienced harm and those who are knowledgeable about the treatment of gambling harm. <BR /> <BR />I note that the Committee asked that, under clause 14, paragraphs (4)(a) and (4)(b), which deal with the proceeds of the levy, cover education, treatment and research. The APG also raised that issue and considers it to be important.”
“It is not an exaggeration to say that reforming our gambling laws has the potential to improve the lives of many families and to save lives potentially lost through addiction and gambling harm. We need a socially responsible gambling industry and a much better balance between the freedom to gamble and protection from the social and financial risks that gambling entails. The Bill is part of that process. <BR /> <BR />I declare at the outset an interest as a member of the APG on reducing harm related to gambling. I welcome the clauses in the Minister's Bill and her amendments. I will also support amendment Nos 4 and 5. I do not intend to go into detail on all the clauses and amendments but will highlight a few issues.”
“Some 86% of gambling profit comes from 5% of the customers. If you understand that statistic, you realise that there is little incentive for gambling companies to regulate themselves. That is why legislation is vital. We need to see responsible policy and legislation from government, followed by responsible provision by operators, to allow and assist responsible consumption by customers. I recognise, as others have said, that the Bill is only the first step and the smallest part of the Minister's proposed gambling reform package and deals solely with land-based gambling. The legislation and the process of reform is long overdue, and this is a much-needed start.”
“<BR /> <BR />Yesterday, progressive MLAs across most political parties in the Chamber came together, after three long days of debate and voting, to shape ambitious climate legislation for the North. I hope that, once all the stages in the legislative process are complete, that Bill will become law before the dissolution of the Assembly. The Climate Change (No. 2) Bill will set out a new, green, environmentally proofed path for the North. There is no place in that pathway for petroleum licences and petroleum extraction, and there is certainly no place for fracking. Sinn Féin is vehemently opposed to that practice, and I support and commend the Bill.”
“This is a short Bill, and I will, hopefully, keep my remarks equally short. There are many reasons to be opposed to fracking. My colleague Áine Murphy has outlined them all: damage to our environment, water systems, soil, air and health and much more. Fracking destroys our land, countryside and communities. Sinn Féin stands with those communities that are rightly opposed to fracking. No community should have that threat hanging over it. <BR /> <BR />As others have said, there is no public demand or support for fracking, and it is a practice that should not be countenanced by any Member. For that reason, and in the absence of various DUP Ministers bringing forward policies or legislation, I thank my colleague Áine Murphy for introducing the Bill.”
“— it is imperative that the commission is made up of people who know their own sector best, whether that is infrastructure, agriculture, civic society, trade unions, academia, young people or local community groups. As I said, that is an important aspect of the Climate (No. 2) Bill. We will support all the amendments that bring forward a just transition and policies in a fair and equitable manner for everybody in the North.”
“Similar to the climate change commissioner, the just transition commission that we propose at amendment No 53 would have not only a watchdog role but an advisory one, offering Departments advice on how to best ensure that their policies and proposals are just transition-compliant. As always, —”
“As I have said, all industries will be required to make significant changes in the years ahead, but it is important that we recognise the unique role of agriculture as a primary producer and the unique source of its emissions. A bespoke fund to assist farmers in making the necessary changes is both justified and necessary if we are to reach our emissions targets. <BR /> <BR />Just as independent oversight is required to ensure that the Bill is fully implemented, a just transition commission is required, in our view, to ensure that all aspects of the Bill are compliant with just transition principles.”
“I absolutely agree with that sentiment. Sinn Féin will ensure that farmers in the North are part of the solution in a fair and just way that allows them to continue to produce their excellent product and drive forward and support the economy here in the North. That is why we have tabled amendment No 54 on a separate just transition fund for agriculture and have added many other protections for farmers and the agri-food sector to the Climate Change (No. 2) Bill. The agriculture fund that Sinn Féin has proposed is designed to support farmers in making changes to reach whatever fair targets are set for agriculture through the sectoral plans and to adapt to and mitigate climate change. The fund will also support research, innovation and knowledge transfer.”
“We will not tolerate food production in Ireland being reduced only to be replaced with unsustainable imports from the other side of the globe. We will protect the interests of family farmers and the communities that depend on them. <BR /> <BR />I note that, recently, the Ulster Farmers' Union has produced car stickers that state:”
“Rural communities across all 32 counties of Ireland are at the coalface of climate change. It is they who will suffer the brunt of floods and droughts that will intensify without the necessary political leadership. We, in Sinn Féin, are determined to provide that leadership. We will demand that any policies that are made as a result of the Bill are fair. Ours will be an all-Ireland approach in character and delivery, because we know that it is ludicrous to suggest that we plan for different targets in different parts of this country. North and South, we will demand that climate measures are fair. <BR /> <BR />Sinn Féin will not allow beef and sheep farmers in less-favoured areas to go out of business, as some people have suggested. That is total nonsense.”
“So bad are the trade deals that the DUP has brought us that they could wipe out the farming sector over the next 15 years.”
“Let me be very clear to all who are listening and all who have misquoted me and Sinn Féin Members during parts of this climate Bill debate: Sinn Féin has always stood by the farmers of Ireland, whether they farm in north Antrim or north Kerry. We stand by the farmers of this island today in this Chamber and during this debate, and we will continue in word and deed to stand by the farmers of Ireland long into the future. We will not take any lessons from the DUP Minister or DUP MLAs on how to protect farmers and the agri-food sector. The DUP, through its support for Brexit, has taken away the long-term certainty of EU funding and delivered trade deals with Australia and New Zealand that will greatly damage our local farmers and economy.”
“Some may be challenging to our elderly population, and some may be more challenging to rural communities. At the bottom of them all, we here in Government must ensure that the costs and burdens are not met by the most vulnerable in our society, or those on the lowest incomes. A just transition must protect workers, families and communities. We have supported just transition amendments in the debates on the previous groups, and we are happy to support amendment No 44 and others in this group. <BR /> <BR />Given the amount of discussion that we have had during this climate Bill debate about our agriculture and agri-food sector, Sinn Féin felt that it was vital to propose a separate just transition fund for agriculture. I am happy to support similar amendments that have been tabled by others.”