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 32 of 33.
“Somehow, Bushmills is now ranked fifth and four to five centres are earmarked for closure. There appear to be no other options presented by the review or the Education Authority to avoid the closure of these valuable centres. It could be argued that minor changes to charges, staffing and resources could address the Minister's concerns about savings. Additionally, the centres can be and are used for teacher and part-time youth work training, and that will be totally lost if the planned closures go ahead. Who will the Education Authority pay to run all these courses? Will the same standards of safety apply? Will they be more expensive in the commercial world, as is the case with mountain centre courses?”
“That argument is used to justify the closure of the three centres in County Down. I disagree with it there, but, as I said earlier, there are no other centres around Bushmills. <BR /> <BR />In all the facts and figures presented about the low capacity, never once highlighted was the one factor that controls capacity; namely, the number of staff available to work with groups. The more staff that there are available, the more groups that you can work with and the greater the capacity of the centres, yet staff capacity has been cut by the Education Authority. That is a very important point. The centres should be allowed more staff and to maximise capacity rather than be closed. <BR /> <BR />Most confusing of all, however, is the fact that, in the initial review, Bushmills ranked third, and only three centres were earmarked for closure.”
“Conspiracy theorists could easily make arguments about the whys and why nots of that. I want to believe that people, and the Minister in particular, are coming at this with an open mind. <BR /> <BR />I will not even get into the use of SurveyMonkey nor the misleading and closed questions contained in the consultation. I want to talk about the information in the review that was used to take us to the point at which Bushmills could be considered for closure. In the first instance, it was stated that any savings accrued from the review outcome will be directed towards front-line services, yet Bushmills and other front-line services are being closed or proposed for closure. That makes no sense. The review concentrated on over-provision and included voluntary centres funded by the Department of Education.”
“They are delivering award programmes and accredited training courses for young people, providing them with alternative routes to achievement. <BR /> <BR />Minister, if the Programme for Government is serious about all the things that it contains about children, education and poverty, and if we are serious about outdoor education and having fully trained staff in a safe environment at a cost that parents and schools can afford, we need to look again at the proposals. Some 150,000 children across the North benefit from outdoor education every year. In my view, that service is well worth funding at its current level. The consultation process is flawed. I know that that was touched on a lot in last week's debate. It is flawed, and it is based on flawed information.”
“<BR /> <BR />I also want to highlight the implications of the range of proposals to reduce the remaining four to five centres from a seven-day-week service to a five-day-week service. The losers in that arrangement will be youth organisations, which will no longer be able to use the centres for weekend residentials or day visits. Those are non-formal-education youth services, such as local youth clubs and projects dealing with the most vulnerable and disadvantaged young people in our society. Currently, those young people can access the centres 48 weeks a year. That will now be reduced to eight summer weeks only. The centres are also providing youth skills training for part-time staff and outdoor leadership courses for our youth workers and teachers.”
“In 2015-16, even with enforced staff reduction, there were still 190 groups — 58 schools, 54 youth and church groups, as well as 78 day groups — that used the centre. That means that, overall, there were 7,500 overnight stays and 30,000 activity sessions last year. The planned closure of all the centres will remove 60% to 70% of our residential places. It is important that we compare the proposed reduction with acceptable standards elsewhere. Local education authority centres provide a ratio of 1:4,500 beds per head of population, while here in the North the ratio is currently 1:3,500. If the proposed changes take place, our ratio will decrease to 1:12,000. That is an unacceptable reduction.”
“If it closes, it is not just that schools that currently use it will go to another centre; geography and distance will dictate that. It is also true that, if Bushmills had to turn away 40 groups last year because of being over-booked, which it did, then, even if geography and distance were not the deciding factors, the availability of other centres would be. In my opinion, the loss of Bushmills cannot be subsumed into the rest of the outdoor education sector. Therefore, future generations of children will lose out on vital life-learning skills and experiences. That is a sad reality. <BR /> <BR />Who are the children who will lose out? A very small percentage of the Minister's budget to ensure the survival of Bushmills would allow 240 schools and youth groups to visit, adding up to over 8,500 children, as was the case in 2014-15.”
“They also know that children can go to Bushmills and have a first-class experience at a fraction of the cost of similar places in the private sector or other types of school trips. That is something I hope the Minister understands: the potential pressure put on parents and families who may not have a place like Bushmills to go to and the possible division that that can place within classes between those who can afford trips and those who cannot. <BR /> <BR />I know that Bushmills is not the only outdoor education centre proposed for closure, but I have no doubt that the Minister will know its location in comparison with the other centres. I have no doubt that he will know that Bushmills is the only residential outdoor education centre in North Antrim, in County Antrim and, indeed, in the north-east.”
“<BR /> <BR />I know that the Minister is going to say that his budget is finite and decreasing, and I understand that. In fact, I empathise with him on that. That said, any saving from the closure of Bushmills would be miniscule in his overall budget. It would be a false economy in the value to education and in what Bushmills Outdoor Education Centre can save other services in the short, medium and long term. <BR /> <BR />As I said, I have been contacted and lobbied by numerous schools and teachers in North Antrim, but also beyond, in the rest of County Antrim and Derry, and by even the Principals' Association in Mid-Ulster. I note that Members from other constituencies have stayed behind to take part in the debate. <BR /> <BR />Those who use Bushmills know its value.”
“Children may discover talents that they would otherwise have had no opportunity to discover or develop. <BR /> <BR />These centres are also seen as hubs, where schools and children from different backgrounds and communities can come together in a safe environment and share and learn. A number of MLAs, including myself, were invited to the Bushmills centre recently by Knockloughrim and St Brigid's, Mayogall primary schools to witness at first hand how those two schools have been using the Bushmills Outdoor Education Centre for the past 15 years for a shared residential. Anyone who saw and heard the principals and children from the different schools talk about their experiences whilst staying in Bushmills will know that you cannot give it a monetary value.”
“If he has not, could I ask that he gets an official to let him see some of the testimonies on it from people sharing their story of staying at the Bushmills centre and the impact that it had on them. That is why I share the frustration of those in the Gallery and in the local community about this proposed closure. <BR /> <BR />Bushmills Outdoor Education Centre provides experiences for young people. In an age of Xbox and iPhone, when too many of our children are spending less time outdoors, the special experience that Bushmills and the other centres are providing becomes even more important. Education is about more than exams and books. Not everybody wants to follow an academic path, and even those who do need to be exposed to other life experiences.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. I said that the two Members have expressed concern. We are in the consultation process. I do not want to pre-empt what they are going to do. Hopefully, we may not need the Education Authority to do anything. That is the purpose of this debate. <BR /> <BR />People have relayed to me their sentiments about Bushmills. They have been relayed by principals of primary and secondary schools, teachers, pupils, the parents of pupils, community groups, church groups and people who went to Bushmills in years gone by and had such a positive experience that they took the time to call, email and text to show their support. <BR /> <BR />I am not sure whether the Minister has seen the online 'Save Bushmills' petition, which I think has now well over 2,000 signatories.”
“Those sentiments, which are contained in the Education Authority's own document, will run through everything that I say here today, because those sentiments and that sentence have been relayed to me time and time again over the past few weeks in relation to the Bushmills Outdoor Education Centre.”
“Sinn Féin's two appointees on the Education Authority board have expressed their concern about the closures. <BR /> <BR />The proposal for the closure of Bushmills and the other outdoor centres and the resulting consultation document, which I will come back to later, have come on the back of a review of residential and outdoor education. The document is 84 pages long, but, for me, the key sentence is on page 3 in the executive summary. It states:”
“<BR /> <BR />I listened to the debate last week and support the arguments made for the retention of all the centres earmarked for closure. Obviously, I will mostly concentrate my remarks this afternoon on the specific case of Bushmills, which rests in my constituency of North Antrim. I do not apologise for repeating some of the very good arguments that were made last week: this is such an important issue, and the arguments need to be repeated and reinforced. <BR /> <BR />The Minister and other MLAs will say that this is not an issue for him and instead is one for the Education Authority. That is quite true and I understand that, but I also understand that it is true that the Minister is not powerless either and can act or use his influence.”
“I am glad to have the opportunity to raise this subject and to show my support for Bushmills Outdoor Education Centre in the Assembly today. I thank the Minister for being present to listen to the arguments. I also welcome the elected councillors, members of staff and members of the public from in and around Bushmills who are in the Public Gallery to listen to the debate. <BR /> <BR />I am aware that there was a similar debate last week, so the Minister will be well versed in all the arguments. Perhaps, with a week's reflection since the last debate behind him and the Christmas break in front of him, he may be minded to end the 2016 Assembly term with a good news story for us all and announce the retention of the Bushmills Outdoor Education Centre.”
“<BR /> <BR />On top of that, I would not want to elevate the rights and entitlements of British soldiers over and above doctors and nurses, firemen and firewomen who risked their lives, people with disabilities or long-term illnesses, members of the PSNI, teachers, community and voluntary workers — the list goes on. <BR /> <BR />My answer to all that is no, and, for that reason, I will be opposing the motion.”
“Nor is it based on my antipathy to the actions and wars engaged in by the British Army across the globe in recent years. <BR /> <BR />I will not say, however, that my opposition is not political, because that is not the case. It is very political. It is political in the sense that my opposition to supporting this covenant is based on the protection of right and entitlements and fair access to services for every citizen who lives here in the North. <BR /> <BR />I, as an MLA, want to represent everyone as best I can and make laws and support legislation that are based on equality. Gerry talked about the issue in relation to victims and survivors. I would certainly not want to agree to anything that would elevate the rights and entitlements of British soldiers over the rights of victims and survivors of the conflict.”
“I want to continue. <BR /> <BR />I do not claim to be an expert on the employment obligations or additional services of duty of care provided by the British Army to its members. I have only my personal experiences and that of my community of contact with and knowledge of the special consideration that the British Army meted out here in the North. <BR /> <BR />I recognise, like others, the tone and content of Mr Beattie's contribution. For that reason, and for the reason that I have only five minutes to speak, I will not dwell on that experience because it would require much longer. <BR /> <BR />I want to assure Members that I did as Doug Beattie asked and listened to his and others' contributions. I want to assure everybody that my opposition to this motion is not based on my own very negative experiences of the British Army.”
“I cannot agree with that. I know there are Members who want to create hierarchies. Unfortunately, that is what this debate is about — in some way elevating the status of the British Army and its members in the North.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention, but he stopped me short of what I was going to say in relation to what the second principle contained, which Gerry also addressed, and that we could not support. I cannot support it because the covenant itself states:”
“Unsurprisingly, I will be opposing the motion. I will be doing so on the basis that this Assembly needs to deliver for the whole community and all citizens in the North and not elevate particular groups for special treatment. On that basis, I look forward to the day when the Members who tabled this motion table a motion on an equality Act and a bill of rights for the North, and the implementation of both being supported by all parties and Members. That is the way to address inequalities if and where they exist, and I could support that. <BR /> <BR />To be honest — and Gerry mentioned this — I could support the first of the two underlying principles in the covenant that we are debating, that is that no disadvantage should be faced compared with other citizens —”
“I look through the projects across the nine delivery zones of the social investment fund and wonder which of those projects the Opposition think should be halted or stopped. The social investment fund is a noble attempt to address years of underinvestment, and its delivery is making an impact. That is why I support it and wholeheartedly want it to continue.”
“Go raibh maith agat. I have addressed the issue of "deep public concern", which, I think, is imaginary. <BR /> <BR />I should have thanked the research facility for putting together this information pack. It quite clearly demonstrates that the social investment fund is an additional fund, going beyond what has already been provided and married towards that, to give added impetus to socially deprived communities. <BR /> <BR />As I was saying, while the Opposition want to talk about something that was decided upon a number of years ago, I want to support the targeted £80 million of funding going to socially deprived communities: £44 million to improving 116 premises and £35 million to employment, education, early years intervention and the social economy, mental health provision, fuel poverty and community capacity.”
“It is an investment fund that is designed and targeted to support some of our most disadvantaged communities by increasing employment opportunities, by tackling issues such as mental and physical health, by increasing and improving community services and facilities and by addressing dereliction to make areas more appealing for investment.”
“I also accept that all organisations that benefit from SIF funding are subject to all the normal checks and balances of public funding constraints. <BR /> <BR />I do not want to ignore the fact that there is a difficulty around an individual in east Belfast, but I have to say that the social investment fund goes far beyond east Belfast. I do not want to — as others in the Chamber seem to want to do — let that individual distract from what the social investment fund is all about, nor do I want to allow either that individual or Members of the House to put a halt to the good work of the social investment fund, which is helping people's lives right across the North. That is the second reason why I will oppose the motion. The social investment fund is not about an individual or an organisation in east Belfast.”
“The facts state that all the major parties in this Chamber took part in a process not just around the formation but, in the intervening five years, in the implementation and operation of SIF. As has already been mentioned, they have released the congratulatory press statements and stood in the congratulatory photographs. <BR /> <BR />SIF is different from other funds. Its delivery model represents a unique, innovative and joined-up approach to tackling disadvantage and enhancing prosperity. That approach of bottom-up engagement with stakeholders from across the community, statutory, business and political spectrums in the steering group demonstrates confidence in the collaborative approach to identifying and delivering what local communities want and need.”
“I have listened to them ask the questions, make their points and table their debates frenetically like a disorientated boxer swinging wildly for all his might and hoping to get lucky and land that knockout punch, but I also have listened to answers from Ministers and others who have responded to all of this with cold, hard facts. The facts say that SIF was consulted on five years ago. In fact, as the deputy First Minister said in answer to one of those questions in this House:”
“I rise to oppose the motion, and I do so for a number of reasons. The first of these reasons is that, unlike my colleague to the left, I cannot agree with the assumption that there is deep public concern out there. That just does not stack up in my eyes. I know that I do not live in east Belfast, but I do speak to people, and, in the conversations that I have had with the public, with constituents and with friends, not once has the issue of the social investment fund been raised to me by them. <BR /> <BR />I do get that the Opposition have a role to fulfil and need to raise issues to make themselves relevant. They have valiantly tried to use this issue to do so.”
“Following on from the last response on monitoring hate crime, I ask the First Minister for an update on the current Executive response to hate crime.”
“<BR /> <BR />In conclusion, and without predicting the outcome of any review process of arm's-length bodies, I am mindful of the need to ensure accountability and for the public to get the best value. Thus, where savings can reasonably be made while still providing the best outcomes, that is something that we need to do.”
“As has been pointed out, given the nature of appointments and the number of current, silent or ex-political party members appointed to some public bodies, I doubt whether the public would agree with that assertion either. My colleague coming after me will touch more on the detail of that, as well as on other important questions of how the make-up of some of the bodies is reflective of society. <BR /> <BR />I want to address another point regarding Sinn Féin's position on defending equality and human rights. Our position on both issues is quite clear. Regardless of the position of other political parties in the Chamber, we can state that we will be standing four-square behind equality and human rights in any review process.”
“as is stated in the amendment, without any call for a review of the number, make-up and functions of those bodies in the first instance. Surely that is putting the cart before the horse. In all honesty, it is probably allowing two horses to pull the cart when only one is required. As Kellie Armstrong pointed out, if the amendment about resources had been added to the motion in the aftermath of a review instead of completely ignoring the need for review, it would have made more sense. <BR /> <BR />I am not sure that I can completely agree either with the sentiments in the amendment that the make-up of arm's-length bodies in all cases allows decision-making to be totally independent and:”
“— that is contained in the amendment — and the honest work of individuals who sit on them. I do, though, have to question the rationale of calling for:”
“Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I would not suppose to answer questions from other political parties. <BR /> <BR />As I was saying, I was baffled by the contribution of Mr Attwood. He said that arm's-length bodies need to be reviewed, yet there is no indication in the amendment that they need to be reviewed, and the only things that the amendment suggests need to be reviewed are finances and resources. <BR /> <BR />I certainly acknowledge the:”
“I will not argue with the reality that we need arm's-length bodies to provide support to government. I certainly do not envisage a situation in which we do not have any groups or bodies that assist that work in certain circumstances. <BR /> <BR />As the amendment states, there will be instances when "technical and specialist capacity" outside of government is required. Let those instances be determined by a review that is based on our current and future circumstances, not on our past structures and needs. I have to say that the sentiment of the amendment baffled me, and I was even more baffled by the contribution of —”
“<BR /> <BR />From my point of view, there was a time when it could have been argued that we needed the number of arm's-length bodies that have accumulated here in the North. That time was when there was no functioning Assembly, but direct rule has long gone, thankfully, and will not be coming back. The work of these institutions and the changes to local government have brought about enhanced democratic accountability, and, as a result, that surely means that we will need to reduce, reconfigure and adapt some of our arm's-length bodies. We need to bring about even more democratic accountability to those charged with decision-making, ie elected politicians. The motion quite rightly points out the recent reduction in Departments, so I think that this is a timely opportunity to look at and review arm's-length bodies again.”
“Like my party colleague, I support the motion. I see what it suggests as the sensible thing to do to ensure efficiency, public accountability, good governance and, hopefully, value for money when it comes to arm's-length bodies. It was a Sinn Féin manifesto commitment to have a review of arm's-length bodies, and it is one that I wholeheartedly agree with. This subject, as has already been pointed out, and as is clear from the briefing pack, has been debated before in the Assembly Chamber, and there have been questions on it many times. The majority of the arguments that we have heard so far today and will continue to hear are similar to the arguments that were debated in the last debate, in 2010.”
“I am a wee bit confused about Mr Attwood's contribution on the amendment. He seems to be talking at odds about the amendment, which is calling for only a review of the finances of arm's-length bodies; it does not call for a review of arm's-length bodies.”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. What steps is he taking to simplify Budget information?”
“I thank the Minister for driving forward the economy in the North.”
“I welcome the Minister's statement and the positivity that emanated from the meeting and has continued since, particularly with regard to the discussions on the EU referendum result. The deputy First Minister said in response to the previous question that the ongoing work between the Executive and the Southern Government will be guided by common principles. Perhaps he could elaborate on those common principles.”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. Following on from that, given that the availability of drugs has led to bullying and victimisation, what support is available for those in Ash House who suffer because of that?”
“I thank the Minister for her enthusiastic endorsement of the project. Does she intend to be at the launch later this month?”
“A Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle, I begin by apologising to you and the Minister for not being in my place when I was called earlier.”
“— to put the commission in place before the end of the year. I support our amendment to the motion.”
“He said that proposals would be brought forward —”
“A cross-departmental programme board has been established to drive forward commitments made in the Fresh Start Agreement and delivery of the action plan. I note the deputy First Minister's comments here on 17 October on the Independent Reporting Commission:”
“<BR /> <BR />Given that four debates on the past will take place here over two days, I also note and agree, as stated in recommendation D3, that there remains a need to resolve the outstanding issues relating to the past. That is a key recommendation to help everyone to move forward, and I hope that it is resolved satisfactorily. I take the opportunity to welcome the Ballymurphy families who are here today, and I wish to show solidarity and support to them and their campaign. <BR /> <BR />I agree with all the contributors today who pointed out the seriousness of the issue. I do not, however, agree with the negativity attached to the motion or shown in the Chamber. It is clear that the Executive, in words and actions, recognise the importance of the issue and have a commitment, with actions and accountability to implement it.”
“I also welcome that the Department of Justice will carry out a feasibility study to identify best options for a new centre for restorative excellence. <BR /> <BR />Common throughout the report and plan is the importance placed on working with and in communities to achieve transformation. As has been stated by everybody, community input is vital, and resourcing community initiatives that help to tackle economic deprivation, unemployment, educational underachievement, lack of social cohesion and other things that create the conditions in which young vulnerable adults can be lured into thinking that gang activities are an easy option are vital as well. The plan identifies not only that but the need to work with education and statutory services to focus on the vulnerability of some young people who join groups and engage in criminal activity.”