David McNarry
Strangford · Ulster Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“I am somewhat astounded — actually, flabbergasted — by the amounts. These are fines and penalties. The Minister said little about the reasons or whether there had been repetitive failures. Given that she might elaborate on that, can she also tell us what, in fact, she is doing to stop future fines and penalties of this nature?”
“Being ahead of the Minister is certainly something. Will he say that, as the Housing Executive cannot borrow money and housing associations are already heavily committed financially, he will not propose high rent increases, regardless of whether he has got this report today?”
“I suspect that most if not all people in pain do not give a toss or care who does the procedure at the end of the day. Will the Minister tell the House what the cost differences between the private sector and the public sector work out as?”
“Unlike some, those parents, knowing fine well what the opportunities may have been for their baby but nevertheless facing the shock of stillbirth, wanted to give their baby a chance. We have no right to bestow on ourselves as legislators the making of laws that promote terminations, as listed in this amendment.”
“It has not required, and still does not require, a new meaning, as some would want to give it today. What has altered? It is emotional, and, at times, that is understandable. Emotions have sadly been drawn into it.”
“This is where the fancy-worded tampering amendments like this, and others that will surely follow if we pass this, will end up. <BR /> <BR />Mr Speaker, just digressing for a moment, with your indulgence, it is close to the subject for the Health Minister's proposed task team, which I welcome.”
The complete record
Every one of 216 lines we hold for David McNarry, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 5.
“Again, I thank Ms Lo for bringing this to our attention.”
“One day, we will recognise greats when they are alive. I appreciate Ms Lo bringing this item to the House today. It is a timely accolade that we remember this great at a time when, I am sure, his family are in mourning for him but deeply appreciative of the response that there has been not only to him as a great person but to his great work. Of course, many do not become great or are not recognised as great until the time of their passing. That was not so in the case of this great, who is named Brian Friel. I hope that his work will be lasting — I am sure that it will be — and that it will go forward throughout our education system as something worthy of being taken on board. UKIP supports the arts and the extension of the arts throughout our nation, and I hope that Brian Friel's name will be synonymous with what we do in the future.”
“Thank you. I have to be precise and tell the Member that I do not have a party colleague in South Down. <BR /> <BR />As I was saying, it has to be about public perceptions based on accurate facts and proper information. Regrettably, too often misinformation, rumour and gossip have led to action based on ignorance. We have seen it on our streets. We have seen it particularly in Belfast. In that regard, neither this House nor anyone who is active in politics can afford to avoid the issue of resentment. It is something that we, too, will have to deal with appropriately and properly. There is a problem with immigration: the criminals who visit us on the back of it; the benefit tourists; and so on. However, for genuine refugees, the motion has my support.”
“<BR /> <BR />I remind the House that the mass migration of whole populations from North Africa and the Middle East is a long-term problem. It has been driven by water, by poverty and now by war. It is going to need a great deal more thought and strategy than the simple but well-meaning humanitarian response that we all share and that the motion rightly calls for. In that regard, I invite Members to attend a talk given by UKIP's immigration spokesperson, Steve Woolfe, in the Skainos Centre on the Newtownards Road on 2 October, where those major issues will be addressed.”
“In that regard, I believe, as I said before, that many Arab countries, particularly rich countries like Saudi Arabia, should do far more to help refugees from Syria. I also believe that the United States — now that, at long last, it came forward yesterday and said that it will take refugees next year and the following year — should be explicit about the numbers that it will take. <BR /> <BR />My own party leader, Nigel Farage, has drawn attention to the particular plight of Christian refugees from Syria, who stand in the greatest danger from those ISIS fanatics. For Christians, there are no safe camps that they can enter. That is something that a country like ours, with our Christian heritage, should be especially sensitive to.”
“On the other hand, in this debate the question has to be who can afford them? <BR /> <BR />We must follow the lead of Her Majesty's Government in taking 20,000 genuine refugees over the next four years. Of the 20,000 that the United Kingdom is taking, how many will be allocated to Northern Ireland? Where in Northern Ireland will the planned reception centres be located? Decisions on that will enable the proper level of forward planning. I see an absence of forward planning at this crucial moment, but that is so important in a refugee emergency situation. It is vital that all of those given refugee status are properly assessed so that they know where they stand, and that they are properly catered for and looked after.”
“It is an expression of heartfelt human sympathy that, I believe, the House can rise to and unanimously support. How can we feel anything but the deepest humanitarian sympathy for genuine refugees caught up in an appalling war situation, in what, for them, is a no-choice situation? It is a situation characterised by the most appalling levels of violence and brutality that has been visited on ordinary, innocent civilians. <BR /> <BR />Who would not try to do their best for their families, especially for their children, when deprived of a future by warring savages, who are destroying Syria's past, present and future? It is said that the grass is always greener for those who see, for example, a minimum wage in our country that is nine times the amount they could expect to earn in their own country, and who would fault them?”
“I, too, welcome Andy Allen's contribution in his maiden speech. I also welcome it because I noted the criticism of the EU countries in the debate. I welcome that criticism because it is likely to impact on our exiting the EU in next year's referendum. <BR /> <BR />In this debate, we enter the realms of a definition. We have been here before with definitions, and here we have the definition of the word "migrant". That is why this motion is highly commendable.”
“I thank the Minister for fully understanding my question and for giving an appropriate answer. To develop that, is he in a position to explain to the House what improvements could be made to those direct links to employment that have been identified as being needed in the economy and the wider United Kingdom economy?”
“As we break for the recess with no questions and, therefore, no answers until September, I thank the Minister for his detail there. He talked of demands. Will he outline the Department's policies for future GP services and the availability of new life-saving drugs?”
“I trust that the House will unite in that condemnation and that our message will be carried forward by you and your office, Mr Speaker, to the rest of the world.”
“Our hearts, prayers and thoughts are with the injured and the bereaved families cast into darkness, but so, too, must the outright condemnation from the House of ISIS and its warmongering be listened to. <BR /> <BR />Last Friday, at 7.00 am in France, 12.00 noon in Kuwait and, in between, at 11.45 am in Tunisia, ISIS terrorists struck, and they shook the free world. Thirty British and three Irish holidaymakers, along with others, were cut down by an IS extremist murdering innocent people on a Tunisian beach. It is unforgivable. Islamic countries must now decide to disown IS, to reject and repudiate it. They cannot host tourists and harbour terrorists at the same time. Our Government must also act by informing us all of the level of threat existing in our United Kingdom.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. For the sake of clarification of his party's position: when you talk about creating new space, is that new space to continue the argument that you are now involved in with the current welfare reforms, or is it new or agreed space to face up to the measures that are likely to come from 8 July, where, I think, there is a unity of purpose? Are you creating space for that only, or are you merging the two?”
“It will keep us afloat for a while. It will keep us honest, I hope, until the decisions are based either on pulling the shutters down and handing over all we have worked for to Tories who do not give a hang about us or on the idea that there is a genuine confidence building in our own abilities taking us forward. If the confidence is there for majority decisions, show that confidence and show it to the people today.”
“Welfare reform has simply exposed the underlying weaknesses in our budgetary system and how it is managed. That some have not just abused the weakness but rushed to lay out unreasonable conditions sets today's context in this debate. There are issues that must be addressed by telling people where we are going, and if it is good enough to bring the people with us, let us do it. <BR /> <BR />I will support the passage of the Budget to a conclusion not because it is a brilliant financial script — the script was not there for the Minister — or because it delivers a panacea for an economic miracle to deal with our problems, because it does not. I will support it because, until we get out of the quagmire that we are standing knee-deep in and can position ourselves in a better place to talk to the Treasury, it is all we have.”
“Is the Civil Service merely reactive in the situation, rather than proactive? Some might even argue that the Civil Service, still steeped in the "no questions asked, no accountability given" traditions of direct rule, is itself part of the problem. <BR /> <BR />Few in the House would argue with me that the hands organising departmental policies are not, in every case, the Ministers' but the hands of departmental directors. After all, the budgetary practices of the Civil Service, which led directly to the censure of one major Department, DRD, two weeks ago, certainly seemed to underpin the culture of big spending and lack of proper financial control that has played such a major role in creating that Department's serious and present financial shortfall. <BR /> <BR />As I said, this financial crisis is more deeply seated than welfare reform.”
“There is another thing that troubles me about the present developing situation in the Budget. Let me explain it this way. When a general election occurs, the Civil Service analyses the policy manifesto of at least the two main contending parties and prepares a legislative programme based on those policies so that a Government can work quickly, smoothly and seamlessly and the business of government is carried on. In short, it plans ahead. It is my understanding that the Civil Service even prepares for a cross-party national Government, should that prove necessary in a national crisis. <BR /> <BR />I believe we need to look more carefully at the role the Civil Service in Northern Ireland plays in producing policy options that bridge the admittedly substantial gap between major parties in our Executive. Is enough being done, dare I ask?”
“There is no one, I fear, who would disagree that there was failure at every agreement process to demand that a proper peace dividend is paid out in real money, real cash value and that it is long overdue in settlement for 30 or 40 years of terrorist turmoil. What is a peace process without the cash to stabilise it? Is that why, in this crisis and in this debate, we have found the peace process being used as a kind of threat?”
“I listened with interest to Mr Alastair Ross's contribution on Monday. We need to apply imagination to address the difficulties. Even that might provoke a crisis in this place. Should we approach the Westminster Government with, for example, a 10-year rolling programme to cut the costs of division in our society? When negotiating a financial package with Westminster that would keep us solvent, should we use a 10-year rolling programme to cut the costs of division in our society as a necessary leftover that was left out of previous agreements?”
“Last week, I said that that meant that DRD should cut the grass, repair the roads, clear the ditches and, if anything was left, only then consider other pressures in that sector. That applies to all Departments that may fear what a zero-based budgeting approach would throw up. It could throw up serious overmanning — likely as not, it will. It could throw up bad planning. It could radically reshape how we deliver government services in Northern Ireland and, more than likely, would expose all the bad practices. The crisis that we find ourselves in is of the order and dimension to demand a zero-based budgeting reassessment of government and government programme delivery. I believe that it can be delayed no longer. <BR /> <BR />At the same time, we need to apply imagination.”
“Once the size and scope of our government task is determined, we should ask the following questions. What does it take in manpower to deliver? What is the business that we are in? What money will it take to secure that delivery? <BR /> <BR />There is one point to make, which I raised last week. The entire Department for Regional Development was censured by 67 votes to 13 in the Assembly, and I regarded that as a very serious matter. That is where I found that there is a financial crisis. Departments in that position need to go into what I call a pay-and-take-away delivery service. That means that they deliver only those programmes that they are obliged to deliver by statute and hold back on big new costly spending programmes.”
“We were not listened to until the black hole that was prophesied for years suddenly materialised when Departments failed to earn the projected revenues stipulated in their budgets. That is when the first cracks began to show in our budgetary planning process. What is happening today is not just down to welfare reform but down to a bigger and deeper problem. It is a problem that was years in the making. <BR /> <BR />What is needed is root-and-branch reassessment of how we run government here. I have often said that we should apply a zero-based budgeting approach to our delivery of government programmes here. We should be asking what the purpose of business is, what the business of government is and what programmes are government obliged to deliver by statute.”
“For years, the Stormont departmental budgets have lumbered on with very little adjustment and were mainly based on historical data that was moderately adjusted from year to year as new programmes were taken on by Departments and old ones were dropped or modified. During the year, in-year monitoring was widely used to balance the books, but that system has been violated by lazy departmental senior officials. Through time, in-year monitoring became the basis of budgeting, and departmental deficiencies, bad planning and ineffective delivery were covered up in the process. As long as the money flowed out of Westminster, that seemed to be OK. Many of us thought that it was not OK and said so repeatedly.”
“<BR /> <BR />As we sit, Ministers are roaring like pussycats over cuts, selling out students and university staff, scaremongering and even begging for money for street lights, potholes etc, and even promoting a winter of discontent, to think of a couple. They are all at it. How they can remain in office, presiding over failures in money management created way before the Stormont House Agreement came along to hide behind, is beyond me. Mr Speaker, that is a view for another day, perhaps when honour might be debated and incorporated into the ministerial code. <BR /> <BR />Let me turn to the potential opportunities offered by the current difficult financial situation that we find ourselves in.”
“That stupid promise could not be kept, and this incompetent thinking outside a caged box has plunged all of us into a deep sea of public perception of dishonesty. <BR /> <BR />When I talk of the next step built on corporate action, I do mean us. I mean Northern Ireland plc. I mean the collective, all-inclusive stakeholding population, who have placed in our hands their economic and social future. I mean proving to that public that we are capable of governance and that we have confidence in our abilities to strengthen our case, rather than continuing the fragility in here, which could tip this place over the edge.”
“Not just an Executive, but hopefully a genuinely united Assembly, must put the case to London for an easement of pressures caused by further announcements of depressing fiscal damage to our own needs to govern, which, by all accounts, we will be unable to take. <BR /> <BR />Corporate reasoning against further disproportionate reductions, which will damage our attempts at economic recovery and our entitlement to develop economic growth on a par with all other regions, seems to me to be a far better weapon to go into battle with George Osborne than the tactically inept, doomed to fail, Sinn Féin crude job of putting vulnerable people on the front line, as if somehow our vulnerable people were different from anyone else's.”
“<BR /> <BR />It seems that the negligence of passing over these current welfare reforms has passed some people by. Make no mistake: such negligence continues to prove costly and does nothing for the vulnerable. People can go over hurdles, but not hoops, worsening, not fixing the problems we have. This takes me to the question of how one moves this dysfunctional Executive, made up of two dominant parties and three makeweights, beyond this repeated falling out? Perhaps leaving two to their own devices might make more sense. It seems to me, however, that if we are to move beyond today, with only a bandage and sticking plaster result, the outcome has to be based on satisfaction, or on holding the party line without wrecking the advancement forward.”
“When it came to bullying over putting a welfare albatross around our economic necks, the Executive proved to be then, as they sit now, not fit to govern. The very essence of the hype and scaremongering over this Budget typifies how dangerous it will be in the future if tug-of-war tactics became normal. It is a future doomed to failure. <BR /> <BR />At this point, without embarrassing her, I would like to put on record my appreciation for the precise timing and stoic action of the Finance Minister, who stands out, not just in defiance of stupidity, but in defence of the vulnerable and the standards our economy must protect overall. Unfortunately, the vote or decision to adopt her Budget fails the scrutiny radar because the issue of welfare reform, which has been hanging over us since last year, has taken centre stage.”
“What that means is never defined, and it was not defined on Monday either. It has been our consistent inability to think inside the box that has put the lot of us in the dock, guilty as charged by public opinion for pursuing a fraudulent economic hijack robbery. Not all of us are factually guilty, but the accusation of negligence by association is difficult to defend in public.”
“<BR /> <BR />If we are really committed to policies of no additional water charges — all except the Alliance Party — and if we are intent on keeping free prescriptions and retaining the SmartPass for buses and trains, which are the envy of other regions in the United Kingdom, and if we support our students with low tuition fees, then add it up. Which do we remove? What do we take away in order to guarantee anyone a lifetime on benefits? Bust this place over this argument and you bust your credibility. Bring in the direct-rulers. They would not countenance this Assembly's Budget distribution. The Treasury would bring us into line with Westminster policies and ensure that there is no difference between benefit allowances here and in other United Kingdom regions. <BR /> <BR />On Monday, I heard the loose talk about thinking outside the box.”
“It is absolutely ridiculous to poison public opinion by claiming the moral high ground, as some parties do, as saviours of the vulnerable as if they had a monopoly and no other parties cared about vulnerable people. The vulnerable need health, education and services as much as anyone else. Sacrifice these services and you hurt the vulnerable, the very people who, because of their situation, require access to services more than many others. It matters that we care because we understand hardships and because we believe in the people we serve.”
“<BR /> <BR />Can the House say today that, laid out in front of us, we have an outcome or even a sense of direction based on confidence, based on togetherness and not shafted by division? Have we got leadership in this House? I think not. Frankly, the public do not think so either. They have not got the message because no clear message is being sent. Confusion reigns and frustration rules in the public's perception of this place today. At this moment, people are angry and cross, because they do not like division, least of all over money. They are right to think that we, including me, are a bunch of amateurs who could not organise whatever it is you do in a brewery. That is not good for them or for us. <BR /> <BR />We are failing people when we fail to do what is expected, which is making a proper fist of governing our country.”
“I want them to take a while and listen, to take help from the experts out there when they are clearly out of their depth. I know that economists are like lawyers and consultants: you rarely get a clear answer from them. You rarely get a definitive answer on which you can hang your hat, let alone your country's future. For every solution saying to go this way, you have another telling you to go in a different direction. The whole point is to tell them the direction that you want to go. That is what we call leadership. Identify the reasons to go there and weigh them up against the reasons not to go there. It is called leadership. Once you have solid information in front of you, take the decision and use it. Sadly, in this case, Martin McGuinness did not do that. He has shown a lack of leadership.”
“Tell them the things rejected by Sinn Féin and the SDLP, and yes, who else, although they are not here, but the tree-hugging Green Party. When is an agreement not an agreement? Tell them it is when Sinn Féin and the SDLP sign the paper with vanishing ink. <BR /> <BR />It is not a bad thing to admit that you got it wrong, even something as serious as handling the economy; handling expenditure, income, growth and instructions. It is much worse when you cannot or will not admit your errors, keep digging a deeper hole for yourself and go into self-denial.”
“They are, more and more, looking like losers and rejects in backing their fellow travellers in hurting the very people who, Mr McKinney came close to acknowledging on 'The Nolan Show', had been caught up in the consequences of their crazy partnership with Sinn Féin. They are intent on self-destruction. How many financial casualties will there be in the SDLP as a result of their crazy partnership? Like the DUP did and will continue to do to the UUP, Sinn Féin will gut them and toss them overboard once the voter catch is weighed. Their stance on Monday has changed nothing. <BR /> <BR />What is there on offer that cannot be turned into advantage and opportunity for by far the greater number of people investing in their own futures in our country?”
“Including UKIP's four million votes, it is an overwhelming, massive 27 million. That is 27 million to two million, so when it comes to respect and mandate, the figures themselves make my case for me. <BR /> <BR />Let us not forget the party that, as you announced this morning, Mr Speaker, is sending its leader packing to Westminster, London, hoping that it was Coventry. Let us not forget the Labour Party's sister act, the SDLP. Their health spokesman knows a pickled party when he sees one, even when the pickle is not vinegar and the party looks more like an onion. He knows that the SDLP are losing credibility in carrying Sinn Féin's bags for them.”
“People are being told — not asked — to forfeit what little we have because Martin McGuinness pushed too far with a promise and is not big enough to admit that it was impossible to deliver. That is what Sinn Féin wants, along with respect. Take account of our mandate, they say, which I gladly do. To their 176,232 votes, I add the SDLP's 99,809 and the local Greens' 6,822. That is a grand total of nearly 283,000 votes. I would go further and put in the SNP and Plaid Cymru, that accumulation of the Celtic coalition, which comes out at an impressive two million votes, to be respected as a mandate. However, no mention do they make of the other votes, also to be respected — the votes that did not go to Sinn Féin or their local sidekicks and fellow republicans in Scotland and Wales. It is called a majority, and substantial it is, too.”
“What do people caught up in this unedifying morass of financial chicanery and ransom ask? What does everyone, except those in whose name all this is being done, ask? <BR /> <BR />Let me make one thing clear: it is not being done in my name. Choking the Welfare Reform Bill does not have my support. Nor, I suspect, is it being done in the name of by far the greater number of people in this country — and why would it? Why would the vulnerable be put in a more vulnerable position? Why would Sinn Féin be putting the so-called more fortunate in the demonising dock? After all, they are not to blame, so perhaps we will have an explanation. <BR /> <BR />The simple fact is that there is not enough money to spend.”
“Having caused the crisis in the first place, stumbling from one ard-chomhairle to another, revising tactics and stalling on dates, Sinn Féin has effectively stopped the clock. It is nothing other than manipulative, careless sidestepping that is designed to keep afloat their dreams of knocking the Treasury back through an all-singing, all-dancing unity chorus in adopting what they, and only they, called a "fantasy Budget". It is clear that, when it comes to fantasies, Mr McGuinness, on this issue, is right up there, high in the clouds. <BR /> <BR />What do Mr and Mrs Ordinary Person in Northern Ireland ask? What does the worker who is thinking of retirement ask? What does the lifelong carer at home ask? What do the nurse, consultant, teacher, student and the whole lot of us ask? My apologies to anyone I have left out.”
“The disciples will not recognise the ruse to save McGuinness's face amid the talk spun about his resignation should ever his London paymasters step in and do us all a favour by doing welfare reform for us, an option that he has only bought time on but not prevented. <BR /> <BR />On top of the conditional agreement — do not hold your breath waiting for an explanation or detail of what "conditional" means — Mr McGuinness then threw in for good measure glib talk of a united coming together on the Stormont House Agreement and tactics to confront George Osborne after 8 July. Is that code for a put-off until the autumn, with the prospect of another Christmas Eve special still to come?”
“<BR /> <BR />Then, we came to the Stormont House Agreement, incorporating the former Tory/Lib Dem United Kingdom Government's latest financial package for Northern Ireland, which, going back to the song in the pub, will no doubt be heralded in folklore as the one that Martin McGuinness received orders from the high command in Dublin to choke on and deliver another wasted promise of an all-Ireland anti-austerity campaign. Only, this time, on Monday, following a weekend huddle, he has done half a U-turn. He brought forward his conditional agreement to proceed with a £600 million black-hole Budget. Sinn Féin's temerity knows no bounds. All that it does is perpetuate and dirty the deceit, which many will see through, but, unfortunately, the brainwashed will fall for.”
“None other than the Provo protégés out there and their worn-out tactic that, if the Brits agree, the unionists — the other Brits here — are up for it and even the Alliance Party are with them, then something is not right; they have to be against it. That is what is wrong with the mentality of some, especially those in the moving-on movement who have not yet worked out where they are moving to or where they want to take others.”
“Let us tell everyone, including those who work for the minimum wage or living salary, those who work for less than the £23,000 cap that will be introduced on what is paid to some for lying in bed all day, those who pay rent from earnings or are paying a mortgage — the so-called more fortunate — that the less-well-off are blaming you for the cuts in their benefits, and, in doing so, wipe out the hypocrisy that the cuts that we are in a stalemate over are Tory measures. The position that some are sleepwalking into is actually the sole work of those renowned economists, business tsars and fiscal innovators from a party of mass employment who, at taxpayers' expense, use their political payments from Stormont and Westminster pots to fund a growing army of economic migrants. Who am I talking about?”
“Another fantasy that will no doubt be sung about in the bars one day, telling how the war against the Brits was lost not once but twice and lamenting how the financial gurus of the combined forces of republicans failed to convince the wider representation of pro-people parties that not only should they grant a scheme for a fiscal UDI but that Her Majesty's Treasury should pay for the transition into fiscal independence. <BR /> <BR />We pay for the carnage of financial ruin, we pay for the rejection of the Welfare Reform Bill and we pay for a tactical readjustment of corporation tax, all because, in a bout of madness, politicians made a promise that they could not keep when they failed to deliver the biggest handout of all time, promising everyone on benefits that not now and not ever would they find their benefits income reduced.”
“Such is the system in here that, having seldom had the opportunity to be given time to speak in numerous debates, this is an occasion not to be missed. I appreciate the Minister's attention after her long stint on Monday. <BR /> <BR />There are those who would proffer the idea of placing Northern Ireland outside the United Kingdom in some kind of financial renegade state, joining up with Scottish and Welsh nationalists in a contrived Celtic coalition.”
“On a point of order, Mr Speaker. In fairness, could you rule that the Members next in line on the Speaker's list will be taken first on Wednesday, if that is your choice today?”
“Just for the record and clarity, will the Member confirm that he believes everything that he reads in the newspapers?”
“Taking that matter further, I ask at what stage the First Minister will move for the dissolution of the Assembly, or are we to sit here in limbo until May 2016?”
“I congratulate junior Minister McIlveen on her handling of questions today.”
“I trust that the messages that are being genuinely expressed in the House will be conveyed, perhaps through your kind offices, Mr Speaker, to the families and citizens of Berkeley on our behalf.”