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 20 of 33.
“In simple language, a just transition is a set of principles and protections that ensure that no one is negatively or disproportionately affected during the conversion to a net zero society. The policies that emanate from the climate Bill must be fair and just. They must ensure that livelihoods and incomes are protected and that we take full advantage of the many opportunities that are offered by the creation of a green economy. <BR /> <BR />A just transition will be important across every sector of society. It will affect those who work in construction and those who work in the energy and electricity sectors. It will impact on our businesses and tradespeople and on how we heat our homes, fuel our vehicles and much more. Some of those changes may be challenging to different sections of our society.”
“Today's fourth group of amendments are a vital component of this climate Bill. I hope that, after this debate, we will have strengthened this climate legislation by clearly setting out our thoughts on a just transition and its principles, by agreeing the need for a just transition commission to oversee those principles, and by confirming the need for a separate just transition fund for agriculture. <BR /> <BR />In most debates in here, we use terminology, phrases and jargon that often mean little to people outside of this Building. I suspect that "just transition" is one of those phrases. I have said time and again during the debates on this climate Bill that nobody and no community can be left behind on the North's climate journey to net zero by 2050.”
“After the Examiner of Statutory Rules identified that the rule was laid under incorrect procedure, the regulations were subsequently relaid with the Business Office under the correct procedure, and the AERA Committee, at its meeting on 27 January 2022, recommended that the Assembly affirm the regulations. <BR /> <BR />In summary, the Committee is very supportive of the regulations and considers that the increase in charges for single-use bags and the extension of the levy will discourage unnecessary purchasing of bags, reduce the amount of plastic that is used and go some way to protecting our health locally.”
“The Committee noted that the vast majority of respondents were supportive of an increase in the charge and that a price of 25p would discourage people from buying a single-use bag. The Committee sought assurance and clarity in writing from the Department on the rationale for the proposed 25p price and asked whether other potential charges had been considered. <BR /> <BR />The Department informed the Committee that it had looked at the potential effect of 10p and 20p charges and, based on the information available, it was evident that many consumers purchasing single bags already pay that amount for them. Therefore, the higher charge of 25p was preferred as the means to positively impact consumer behaviour. The Committee was content with this rationale and advised the Department to bring forward the regulations.”
“<BR /> <BR />In the context of pledges from the Government to protect the environment and mitigate the impacts of climate change, it is an opportune time to reinvigorate and re-educate the public on this issue through the regulations being debated today. The regulations will require retailers to increase the charge for a carrier bag from 5p to 25p and amend exemptions to make it chargeable on all bags priced up to £5. They will also extend the charge for purchases made on certain forms of travel and simplify processes for retailers and customers by applying the charge on bags of one overall size. <BR /> <BR />In May 2021, the Department notified the Committee of its intention to consult on this matter and then provided a written briefing on the results, which the Committee considered at its meeting on 7 October 2021.”
“It has been very successful in discouraging members of the public from unnecessarily purchasing bags, which has reduced plastic consumption and helped to protect the local environment. The revenue generated from the levy has also provided valuable resource through investment in and support of environmental projects. Whilst, however, it has become routine for many of us to bring our own bag when shopping, single-use bags are still commonplace in the high street. Large retailers are producing thicker heavy-duty bags that take longer to degrade than flimsier plastic and therefore carry a higher environmental burden.”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak today, as Deputy Chair of the Committee for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, and to outline the views of the Committee on the regulations being proposed. The Committee is acutely aware of the importance of protecting our local environment by ensuring that all steps are taken by the Government and the public to reduce littering and unnecessary waste. All Members will agree that the sight of discarded plastic bags in hedgerows, at the sides of paths and on roadsides is an eyesore that not only detracts from the beauty of our natural landscape but can be a threat to wildlife. <BR /> <BR />The 5p charge on carrier bags, introduced here in 2013, was a very extensive and detailed levy.”
“Minister, following on from previous questions about the legal advice on the SPS checks at the ports, will you confirm whether the legal advice was commissioned by your Department or by you as an individual? Further to that, who met the cost?”
“— and in the Castlerock and Greysteel massacres. Given that that covers at least 17 murders and that substantial evidence in the report points to person K being a mass murderer on behalf of the British state, should person K be brought to justice?”
“Minister, the Police Ombudsman's report demonstrates that there was collusion between state agencies and loyalist death squads, which resulted in a campaign of murder that went unchecked across north Antrim, County Derry and beyond. Person K, who was alluded to in the report, was a key suspect in the murders of Gerard Casey, Councillor Eddie Fullerton, Thomas Donaghy —”
“Obviously, the Minister's party is against it and thinks that, if it comes at all, it should be after consultation.”
“The Minister does not support amendment No 60 and feels that it needs further consultation and engagement. With regard to amendment No 68, which was tabled by John Blair, he felt that the office of environmental protection that is being established will carry out that role for the North and therefore the amendment is unnecessary. <BR /> <BR />With regard to amendment Nos 70 and 74, the Minister felt that the climate action plans were unnecessary and that the duty would be carried out under clause 16, which would do the same job in relation to air quality. He said that those were important targets but they were done elsewhere. <BR /> <BR />By and large, it was a useful debate that provided extra detail on individual MLAs and parties' views on the role of scrutiny. The majority of Members and parties are in favour of it.”
“He talked at length about the importance of the CCC in carrying out a similar role and providing scrutiny here, but he was not against additional scrutiny and suggested a couple of options.”
“She went into detail about her party's amendment No 60 and said that the climate commissioner was the appropriate body to oversee the public duty and said that her party would table an amendment at Further Consideration Stage. <BR /> <BR />Those opposed to the idea and concept of a climate commissioner included William Irwin from the DUP. He supports amendment No 67 tabled by the Minister, as does Tom Buchanan, who said that otherwise it would be an extra layer of bureaucracy. Jim Allister was not particularly enthusiastic about the idea either. He felt that it was unnecessary and said that he would vote against it. <BR /> <BR />In summing up, the Minister, by and large, gave the same position. He gave the details of his amendments and their purpose and, with regard to amendment No 67, said that he would consider the results.”
“My colleague Dr Caoimhe Archibald supports the concept of the commissioner for scrutiny and raised concerns about amendment No 60, as did I. My colleague Colm Gildernew said that the role of climate commissioner was essential. My other colleague to my right, who is Chair of the Committee for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, gave the Committee's view and talked about the support that we had received in the Committee. <BR /> <BR />Rachel Woods from the Green Party spoke in support of a climate commissioner. She said that a climate commissioner and office is a major component of any climate legislation and that it would add trust and transparency. She gave examples of other countries that do that.”
“Rosemary Barton said that proper scrutiny is a necessity and that her party will support a climate commissioner. <BR /> <BR />The Alliance Party's amendment is slightly different. That party is talking about not only a climate office but an office of environmental protection. John Blair talked about that being a requirement and a commitment in NDNA, about the fact that we have been waiting a long time in the North for various environmental strategies and about the fact that we lack enforcement. He felt that the office that his party is proposing will be able to deal with climate change advice and scrutiny, as well as providing environmental protection and enforcement.”
“My remarks will be brief. Two views were expressed on the majority of the amendments throughout the debate, and both views were similar among the Members. The majority of Members, across most of the political parties with the exception of the DUP and the TUV, accept and recognise the need for a climate commissioner who will give local advice to us in the North. Each Member obviously supported their own party's amendments, but, by and large, there was broad agreement about what should happen. The reasons for that are basically all the same. For example, Patsy McGlone talked about the climate commissioner being a person who will be able to connect to local politicians and thus to the community and the sectors out there. He said that it was vital.”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. Minister, you have said that you will carry out the consultation and implement its result. A number of Members have stated that they feel that amendment No 67 is an effort to kick the can down the road, stall, delay and probably thwart the demand for independent advice. That fear was increased by your party colleague, Tom Buchanan, who said, time and time again, that it was a waste of time, there was no need for it and all the rest. Which of you is giving the DUP's position? If there were a positive result in consultation, would the DUP listen to it?”
“As I said, my colleague will go into more detail on that, but I envisage that, by and large, we will look at other examples. The Scottish example shows the powers, make-up and duties that can be placed on a commission, and we will look at that. <BR /> <BR />Essentially, that is my party's position and a round-up of the amendments.”
“Amendment No 78 would add a paragraph to require the Department to take account of the views of the climate commissioner, should that post be established, and of the just transition commission. Our thoughts on the just transition commission will be spelt out in more detail in the debate on the next group of amendments. I was pleased to hear that the Minister supports the just transition commission in the context of the green growth strategy. I urge the Minister and his colleagues to support the just transition commission by putting it into legislation. I think that we all have recognised the importance of a just transition being in the Bill for the future so that we can achieve targets that leave no one behind. <BR /> <BR />Another important leg in that stool is a just transition commission.”
“Bringing forward a plan within one year and every year after that is too onerous. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 74, which is one of our amendments, would insert a new clause that requires the Department to lay before the Assembly and publish a climate action plan within three years of the Bill being passed and then to publish such plans every five years. Obviously, we agreed to sectoral plans earlier today, so there may be a bit of overlap between those and our proposed plans. Certainly, during the deliberations on the Bills, there was widespread support for climate action plans. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 78 is also in our names, and it would amend clause 31, which aims to have regulations that would amend or add emissions targets or amend carbon budgets.”
“<BR /> <BR />Amendment No 70 would insert after clause 28 a new clause to require the Department to lay before the Assembly a climate action plan within one year of the Bill becoming law and, thereafter, to bring forward an action plan every year. It may be a bit onerous to be asked to bring forward a climate action plan every year. Essentially, you would just be making plans and not doing the work in between.”
“There are variations on the theme in respect of the length of time to bring it forward and different aspects of it. By and large, however, the amendments are all pretty much the same, although, obviously, we think that ours is the best. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 68 would insert after clause 28 a new clause to require the establishment of an independent office of climate change and environmental protection by 2025. Amendment No 69 would insert a new clause to establish a climate commissioner within 24 months of the Bill becoming law. Amendment No 71 would insert a new clause to require the establishment of a climate office and climate commissioner within two years. Amendment No 72 would insert a new clause stating that the Department shall appoint a climate adviser. All are based on the theme of independent oversight and advice.”
“We welcome the fact that the Department tabled the amendment as a compromise during the Committee's deliberations, when it was clear that there was widespread support for a climate commissioner. The Department said that it would be required to consult, hence the amendment. We do not think that consultation at this point is necessary, given that we have had seven months of evidence-gathering sessions and it is clear from the widespread responses that there is a requirement and a popular demand for that. <BR /> <BR />As I said, amendment Nos 68, 69, 71, 72 and 73, essentially, do similar things. My party submitted amendment No 73, which would insert after clause 28 a new clause to require the Department to make regulations to establish a climate office and commissioner within two years.”
“<BR /> <BR />Amendment No 62 to clause 21 would require public bodies to have regard to the desirability of coordinating policies and proposals with those in the South, across the water in Britain and elsewhere. We welcome that and think that it is a good inclusion. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 63 requires regulations under the section referred to in amendment No 61 to put in a time frame to bring that forward within 18 months of the Bill becoming law. <BR /> <BR />We support amendment No 67, which would insert new clause 28A after clause 28. That would require consultation on whether — sorry, I need to row back on that. We do not support amendment No 67.”
“Amendment No 60, tabled by Ms Clare Bailey and Ms Rachel Woods, is about placing a climate duty on the public sector, and it would insert a new clause. In principle, we support the amendment. Public authorities are, however, defined in the Public Services Ombudsman Act 2016, and we have concerns that the amendment may put an onerous requirement on some of the groups listed unnecessarily. I suggest that the proposers look at that and revisit the language at Further Consideration Stage. Maybe they could do so in line with the Minister's amendment No 61, which puts that into regulation. We should not put an additional, unnecessary onus on to a group. <BR /> <BR />We support amendment Nos 61, 62 and 63, tabled by the Minister, which strengthen the requirement on the Department to make regulations to require reporting by public bodies.”
“The climate commissioner is an important inclusion in the Bill when it comes to independent advice and scrutiny. That is certainly our view.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is important that the various plans, whether those are carbon budgets or sectoral plans, the policies that flow from those plans and the proposals in the Bill are evaluated by an independent climate commissioner and climate office as they progress through various stages so that the climate commissioner and office can offer us advice on what is and is not working, why that is or is not working and what could and should be done differently. Whatever version of the commissioner is established through the passing of these amendments, they will interact with Departments on the targets and plans and will make reports. <BR /> <BR />The climate commissioner and climate office will also be expected to work with the advisory bodies across these islands to ensure harmonisation, where that can be achieved.”
“As a member of the AERA Committee — my colleague, who is the Chair of the Committee, will probably refer to this in his deliberations — I can say that it was very popular throughout the responses to evidence-gathering sessions and reports in Committee. It is important that the Bill provides for a source of independent evidence and evaluation on the issue of climate change that is specific to the North, over and above the CCC and other organisations.”
“This group of amendments is essentially about the oversight and governance of the Bill. It is clear from the amendments that a lot of parties have the same way of thinking. A number of the amendments are different versions of the same thing, particularly those in relation to the establishment of a climate office and a climate commissioner. Our party amendment, amendment No 33, is from an earlier batch in which we said that, with regard to the budgets, there should be consultation with, among others, a climate commissioner. <BR /> <BR />The establishment of a climate office and climate commissioner has widespread support. That is clear from the number of amendments in a similar vein that propose its establishment.”
“I appreciate what the Minister says about the green growth strategy, and I welcome his support for a just transition commission. Given that he is now on record now as supporting a just transition commission, will he put what is in a strategy, in his words, into legislation today?”
“That is vital. <BR /> <BR />My colleagues will go into detail on this, but I note that there are similar amendments on the climate commissioner. It is clear from the amendments and from the discussions that there is the will in the Chamber for having some independent climate commissioner-type body and office to oversee whatever plans and targets we have and to ensure that we have local accountability and independent advice for the North. That will ensure that, every step of the way, we do what we are supposed to do and do it properly.”
“Subsection (3)(b) of the Minister's new clause is about:”
“All of that is important. There is also amendment No 37. We will support amendment No 38, which is the Minister's amendment. It is a useful amendment. For example, it mentions that, when making policies and proposals, there will be a requirement that we look at policies across these islands. We have said and will continue to say time and time again that we cannot deal with the climate issue or any environmental issue on this island without consulting and coordinating and without ensuring that our policies align, particularly, with those in the South. That is important. The Minister has also included the just transition principles. Another thing that came up during Committee discussions on both Bills was the fact that it is desirable to use and support nature-based projects as we move towards net zero.”
“I cycled it at 1.30 am, so there were not an awful lot of cyclists on it at that time, but I imagine that, during peak times, it is very useful and very busy. Those are the kinds of things that, overall, we need. It is disappointing that we did not use the opportunity of the pandemic to make some of those changes. We perhaps should have gone much further, because some of the things are cost-effective and efficient to introduce. As I say, the key point to make in all of this is that we do not want to have unintended consequences. <BR /> <BR />My colleague Caoimhe Archibald will go into more detail. I will talk about some of the other amendments. Our amendment No 36 states:”
“For example, the Member who spoke previously, Steve Aiken, talked about rural transport issues and active travel. I certainly agree with that. It is important that some of the sectoral plans be rural-proofed, because we do not want unintended consequences. If we are trying to do something for the right purposes and achieve climate targets, we do not want unintended consequences in our rural constituencies and in rural parts of the North where public transport is perhaps not up to standard. It is the same with active travel. I am a fervent supporter of active travel, and Dr Aiken mentioned my trip to Scotland. He is right: for about 10 miles outside Glasgow, I was on a wide, segregated cycle lane that was safe and secure.”
“As we move towards the green new deal, the important thing is that we take along with us workers, particularly those who are most vulnerable, so that they are not the ones who are made to pay for that move. <BR /> <BR />We have no difficulty with the detail of the new clauses that are inserted by amendment Nos 19 to 28; in fact, I agree with most of those things. However, given some of the things that we said earlier in the debate about consistency and the need for consultation and to work with the sectors, we are perhaps a wee bit unsure about the process.”
“I was literally just going through it. Obviously, the headline is about the overall target and objective of net zero, and that has been achieved. Today's debate has to be about filling in the gaps and details to ensure that we achieve all the things that we talked about yesterday such as the smooth operation, the just transition, leaving nobody behind and consultations with the public and the sectors. All of that is vital. It is important that we get that right. <BR /> <BR />I turn to some of the amendments in group 2. Certainly, we will support amendment No 18 on sectoral plans. We think that that is important. That amendment clearly identifies the need for all that to be done along with the just transition and tackling and breaking down inequality.”
“My comments were to be brief. I assure you that they will be even briefer now”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I really was not expecting to be called.”
“On a point of order, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I listened while travelling in this morning to the AERA Minister being interviewed on 'Good Morning Ulster' about the Climate Change (No. 2) Bill. Is it appropriate for the Minister to indicate that he is considering defying the democratic decision of the Assembly taken last night on the Bill? Furthermore, is it appropriate for the Minister, after seven months of Committee scrutiny and almost eight hours of debate in the Chamber yesterday, to label that democratic decision as "stupid"?”
“I am not talking about the Irish Farmers' Association; I am talking about the Minister.”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. I wonder how he responds to the fact that, in the North, agriculture is responsible for 27% of our greenhouse gas emissions. In the South, it is over 30%, yet they have a target of net zero by 2050 and have just produced their plan, which does not call for anything like what the Minister is outlining would have to happen here. In fact, the Agriculture Minister in the South has expressly said that there will be no cuts to the herd in the South.”
“Obviously, I have picked out some amendments that we support and other consequential amendments that we do not support. I look forward to the rest of the debate and to debating the other sections.”
“I thank the Member for the intervention. Setting carbon budgets, along with all the other things, is an important factor that we need to take account of. Some of those are interlinked. Without repeating myself, it is important that we take into account the economic capabilities of our agriculture sector and the fact that we do not want to invite policies that allow for carbon leakage or displace people from rural communities. The important thing with regard to all of those is that, when the policies are developed, an added protection for all sectors of society is that they will be brought back, if our amendments are passed, and MLAs can scrutinise them and vote in favour of them. <BR /> <BR />That is pretty much me for going through the amendments.”
“Again, in setting the carbon budgets, social, environmental and economic factors need to be taken into account, such as the competitiveness of particular sectors of the economy, small and medium-sized enterprises, jobs, employment opportunities and social circumstances, particularly the likely impact of the target on those living in poor and deprived communities.”
“<BR /> <BR />Perhaps amendment Nos 29 and 30 should have been the other way around, but, regardless, on amendment No 30, we think that, in setting the carbon budgets, all Departments should take advice from the CCC, but, given the nature of this island and our integrated air, environment, rivers, lakes and land, among other things, advice should be sought from the Climate Change Advisory Council in the South too. All that local advice needs to be put in the context of what the IPCC is saying. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 32 is lengthy. I read some of it out in response to an intervention from Patsy McGlone. It is a vital amendment. We have put it together taking bits from climate legislation in other jurisdictions, including the South, Scotland, the EU and the United Nations.”
“We also believe that a climate office and commissioner are important to bring local independent oversight and advice to the legislation and all its processes. The carbon budgets are obviously a key component of the Bill, so, when they are being set, we should consult the commissioner, the other Departments and a just transition commission, which we have proposed to set up in amendment No 53. A just transition is absolutely pivotal to the legislation to ensure that no sector of society is left behind, and it follows that we need to ensure that the just transition principles and protections are taken into account when setting carbon budgets. We propose that the Assembly gets to vote on the budgets. That is an important protection.”
“We have proposed amendment No 15, as we believe that we should be able to explore options for the removal of gas beyond land use and deforestation. There are methods of removing greenhouse gas, including methods of direct air capture. While the technology is expensive, making the amendment will keep our options open, should, as, I expect, will happen, science and technology advance and make progress on cost-efficient methods of reducing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. <BR /> <BR />In amendment No 29, we have again inserted a duty on the Department to carry out a consultation on its carbon budgets. It must consult the public and the climate commissioner, which is a role that we propose in amendment No 73. I will go into detail on that in that section.”
“<BR /> <BR />As I have said, one of the issues that we have with the Bill is the amount of power that the Department and, therefore, the Minister will have over all aspects of it to the detriment of future consultation with the public and sectors and certainly to the detriment of accountability to the Assembly and its 90 MLAs. We have sought, by amendment, to address those deficiencies throughout the Bill and have done so in amendment No 6, so that whatever targets the Minister brings for 2030 and 2040 must be approved by the Assembly. <BR /> <BR />We will support amendment No 9, tabled by the Minister, which will allow for ambitions and targets to be brought forward, should that be agreed.”