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 4 of 5.
“In doing so, perhaps the Assembly should urgently address the potential of an energy supply crisis when it next talks so boldly of rebalancing our economy. <BR /> <BR />The 'Sunday Telegraph', no later than February, dubbed the matter "The Great Wind Farm Farce". It said:”
“That is true in all communities, just as it is in County Tyrone. Wind power has already exacted a heavy cost: it has caused divisions in rural communities and done nothing to decrease fuel bills. However, it has given rise to serious health concerns that require a moratorium until the true impacts on people's health are known. <BR /> <BR />This turbine lobby is yet another example of the arrogance and shortsightedness of those intolerant, self-important people who have few or no ideas except massive cost initiatives that are not about green jobs but green unemployment. UKIP has consistently exposed the failures and the money wasted by plying it into wind energy. Rather than adopting this report to satisfy the tree-huggers, we should get the super-councils to ratify an across-the-country policy of stopping wind power development.”
“These subsidies are profoundly regressive: they take money from poor consumers, including pensioners, to give to cash-rich cooperations. We are being asked to adopt a report that has strayed from legal disputes and potential judicial decisions, favouring the placement of turbines where they simply are not wanted. Owen McMullan, the spokesman of the Tyrone-based Windwatch group, puts it rather neatly:”
“Critics of wind power, like me, believe that granting planning permission for wind turbines has become little more than a rubber-stamping exercise. In some areas, approvals have hit 100%. In County Fermanagh, the county where fracking was outlawed by anoraks in green hats, 106 of 108 applications were given the green light. In the Omagh council area, 88 of 92 were approved. Through my recent research, I found that not one local council had a policy on wind farms — that augurs well for the new powers given to the super-councils, does it not? Yet we see these ghastly monsters mushrooming and destroying the lives of people who live near them. <BR /> <BR />In the last three years, some £140 million has been paid out in subsidies to the renewables sector in Northern Ireland through the renewables obligation.”
“The conundrums of this Budget are exactly what I have said they are.”
“I am very glad that you are probably the only intelligent person who picked that up.”
“You just need to stick to principle, but in that area you have also proved yourself to be falling well short. It is your Budget, not mine. It is not being sold or bought in UKIP's name either. You will sow what you reap, but the financial harvest for our people will be a poor yield. It is not regrettable; it just cannot be defended.”
“Perhaps it is no wonder that they have not got the guts or the integrity to pull out and go into opposition with UKIP. <BR /> <BR />Let the people know, and they will be told, that this Budget is not Simon Hamilton's work alone. They are, as someone recently said and as I have heard tonight, all in it together. They are in it together and already sidestepping issues and trying to master the "Not me, guv" defence, yet they are unable to unhinge themselves from their Executive masters the DUP and Sinn Féin, who sit right under their noses as a brazen double act in a coalition all of their own. You do not need to be in it. You do not need to oppose it. You do not need to form a strategic official opposition with perks and brass knobs.”
“They should be here with UKIP, denouncing this Budget and fighting with UKIP to expose this Budget's incredible assumptions and inescapable spending as nothing more than a Budget for the hangers-on. <BR /> <BR />Yet it is they who are hanging on and clinging on to office. Like the people looking in from the outside, as UKIP currently does, there is not a hope of the losers — the Alliance Party with its two unbalanced Ministers, unbalanced in the fairness of their appointments, I would make clear; the SDLP with its single Minister representing its sister party's leader Ed Miliband; and the hear-no-evil, see-no-evil, speak-no-evil, if-it-is-85%-then-count-us-in Ulster Unionists with their one Minister staying put in case his departure sparks a leadership crisis — even being a success in opposing inside the five-party coalition.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. The DUP and Sinn Féin can well do — and are entitled to do so — as the power players in this coalition, but what on earth are the Alliance Party, the SDLP and the Ulster Unionists doing backing this Budget? These losers should not be in a coalition of Government.”
“Spending on capital terms that have not been costed, such as a rail track estimated at £20 million and repriced at £40 million, is not good for you. I wonder: where was the ministerial photo shoot for that one? <BR /> <BR />This Budget is the corporate work and agreement of a coalition of losers. The DUP and Sinn Féin can well do —”
“<BR /> <BR />Why are we funding the not necessary and the not urgent when we have a procurement system that is upside down and lamentably ineffective? Why are we serving up downright expensive indulgences that are so obvious as photo shoots for camera-seeking Ministers when we cannot recognise either the purpose or the cost of their value? In an Executive with too many questions over procurement, contract placing and financial impropriety, why are we watching over a Programme for Government that is being written as we trundle along? That is what this Budget will trot out this year — an election year. <BR /> <BR />It is a Budget punctuated and highlighted by the outcry of austerity, with the Executive's spin doctors out-working that the cost of spending is good for you.”
“The jury of the public, and public opinion, is out on these Ministers. The public are watching to see if they can make a better job of living within their means this time. They are waiting to see if there will be any more solo runs on spending. The public are waiting to see if the Ministers can do the job of governing Northern Ireland as opposed to greedily looking after their narrow, party self-interests. <BR /> <BR />What is needed is a new politics for Northern Ireland; a politics based on vision, on planning, on the public interest and public engagement in those decisions and on delivering the real benefits to be had from devolution. This will only be achieved when parties are willing to bury the plethora of political correctness that is drowning real decision-making in a sea of meaningless double-talk.”
“Are we are told what it is, what its targets are and how they are costed, and how the Budget links up to something other than keeping the Executive afloat, in much the same way as the Government in Greece are kept afloat on a hand-to-mouth basis?”
“Of course, the rampant big-party domination and carve-up that the Assembly has become is not really a Government; it might be a cipher delivering Tory policies at arm's length. It might be a back room somewhere in Stormont Castle where the DUP and Sinn Féin decide things and cut their deals without reference, it seems, to their junior partners. It is not a Government taking real transparent fiscal decisions that they link to a Programme for Government in an open and honest way that can be openly debated on the Floor of the Assembly, where the people are represented. <BR /> <BR />Do we have a new revised Programme for Government?”
“What are the new policies? Where are the new targets against which we are to measure the success of its delivery? Has Assembly approval been sought? Has it been given? I think not. However, given the mushroom politics of this place, bathed in darkness and fed a diet of — I must be careful to use parliamentary language — non-information, it is hard for any of us, if we are honest, to tell where we are. <BR /> <BR />Government is not about maintaining departmental budgets and the oversized bureaucracies that feed on them; it is actually about having a programme and policies, costing and delivering them and then assessing the extent to which you can deliver them. A Government of Departments should not be what we have; we should have a real Government. They would call it a coalition.”
“<BR /> <BR />I am pleased with the one Treasury decision that took on board my idea, given at no cost to it, to put in place a Treasury-appointed Budget control overseer to monitor the recklessness of the Executive's spending. Over the last few years, these Ministers have openly bragged about the highly dubious practice of in-year monitoring as a means to sustain their departmental budget. They were actually saying that they were being saved by their own inefficiency in spending money voted by the Assembly. Where, I ask, was the clarity of vision in that highly questionable system? <BR /> <BR />I now turn to the core reason why we have a Budget in the first place: the Programme for Government. Where is it? Is it lost? Is it in the quicksands of budgetary change? Has the Programme for Government been amended? If so, by whom?”
“A decision by the Employment and Learning Minister became a non-decision by the Executive. You understand, Mr Deputy Speaker, that I am not commenting on the correctness or otherwise of his decision; what I am saying is that the age of political fudge is still alive and kicking around the Executive table. The new tough decision makers, sprinkled with financial reality dust from the Treasury and monitored by the same Treasury, came out with another non-decision. The omens are not good. The age of no decision-making lives on. You see, old habits die hard. Are we in for another four years of dithering, procrastination and delay?”
“He is now telling us that Theresa, the Christmas fairy, waved her magic wand and these fiscal geniuses have now become fit for purpose, and he is fully in charge of them. Are we seriously to believe that we can expect fiscal prudence, tough decisions and political wisdom from these former big spenders? If anybody believes that, they obviously believe that the age of miracles is not dead and that the tooth fairy is alive and well and living in Stormont House. <BR /> <BR />Look at the evidence of one recent issue. A tough decision beckoned: the Minister for Employment and Learning said that teacher training had to be rationalised. He talked tough. Then, Ministers clustered around the Executive table and emerged with another non-decision. There was to be no change, and subsidies to teacher training colleges were to continue.”
“What we really have before us this evening is a marionette Executive in hock to the Treasury, delivering a Tory Budget at the behest of their Tory paymasters. Having lived beyond their means for years, these irresponsible Ministers, who allowed the crisis and the Budgets that they managed previously to get out of all proportion because of irresponsible spending on pet schemes to the extent that they have had to be bailed out, now ask us to believe that these former incompetents have become paragons of political and fiscal rectitude delivering responsible finance and real political leadership and direction. <BR /> <BR />The First Minister said before Christmas that he was in charge — in charge of an Executive that was not fit for purpose.”
“<BR /> <BR />Mr Deputy Speaker, this is a Tory Budget. This Budget offers a magic wand solution to the carelessness of the Executive, and nowhere is the effort by Ministers to up their game evidenced in this Budget. They will all have a role to play, but it is a Budget to ignore, should they decide — they will — to spend money that they do not have. There are no disciplines, no dismissals, no sanctions to prevent any Minister doing a solo run. This is a Budget patched up by borrowing and rising debt. It is an indictment of an Executive not fit for purpose and now hanging on to power by the flimsy thread of the Stormont House Agreement, which unravels daily as the five-party interpretation of this cobbled-together agreement exposes their differences. Some, it is clear, are not even sure what they signed up to on Christmas Eve.”
“I was won over a long time ago, Mr Deputy Speaker. <BR /> <BR />This Budget is, as we know, a freak Budget, given a year longer to run than anticipated, because elections to the Assembly have been postponed. The cynic would say that this is also a freak Assembly, because the parties in the coalition today will be the parties in the coalition next time. We will have to see about that. All I can say is "Keep going. You are wasting money; you are devaluing development; you are hurting people in pain; are you are turning what was once the best education system in the world upside down, with neither teachers, parents nor pupils knowing what is going on. And do you know what? Despite the potholes that you cannot afford to repair, the dual carriageway back to power just ain't going to be that easy next year".”
“I appreciate the timing of the Minister's entrance there when I caught her orange glow out of the corner of my eye.”
“Yet the Executive have already opened the floodgates on parity through the sell-out or the sell-off between them, depending on whom you believe. The point is that no one believes in them any more; this is only a Budget for the Minister's fiefdom. They play at running our affairs, vying to be the Minister of this and that, when, in many cases, kudos is the only game. One Minister stands head and shoulders above the rest because she tries. She tries because she cares, and she cares because she knows and respects the importance of her job. That is Minister Foster. She sets a good example, but she stands alone and, I suspect, on her own.”
“They are right to say to the big spenders, the wasteful spenders and the negligent spenders, "You don't know what you're doing". And they do not. <BR /> <BR />This is not a Budget for the in work, the out of work, the better off and the not so well off. It is a Budget for the hangers-on, and you will find them in the Executive. This is not a twist-and-stick Budget; too many low numbers and then they hit the last card in a five-card-trick gamble. This is a Budget that is taking a gamble, with the dealer George Osborne holding all the cards. What negotiations have taken place with that paymaster? On the evidence of this Budget, there have been none of benefit. What contingency is in the Budget for when the Tories launch more ruthless austerity measures? None.”
“It is not a Budget to protect community transport, let alone deliver signature transportation that is cost-effective, arrives on time or even has a rail track to run on, nor is it a Budget to reward our farmers or fishing fleets and assist them to stay afloat against a tide of nonsense EU directives. Above all, this will not be a Budget that restores confidence in many people's spending power. <BR /> <BR />As for our elderly, the pensioners and the many hard-pressed families and single parents, artistic licence has been taken to say to them, "Things are tight, but stick with us because we know what we are doing. Tighten your belt; it will get better soon". Bunkum. Despite the cocoon of the Executive's cosy, arrogant, cavalier fiscal policies, people out there are not being fooled.”
“This is not a Budget for the faint-hearted; they passed out ages ago. It is not a Budget for economic growth or stimulation. It is not a Budget for employment, nor is it one to neutralise unemployment. This is not a Budget to reduce hospital waiting times, to pay the nurses the salary that they deserve or pay up the pay increases that are being held back. This is not a Budget to encourage investment or attract the long-awaited tourists queueing at the airports and ferry terminals eager to rush in and enjoy our fresh air and spend their euros, for is that not what we have been told? It is not a Budget to build its way out of recession with much-needed affordable homes to buy or rent. This is not a Budget to develop our grammar schools or make every school a good school; that soundbite hit the rails a long time ago.”
“I appreciate the Member giving way. I wonder whether, for clarification, the Member could explain to others outside the West Belfast constituency why the percentages that he quotes exist. An explanation would do quite a lot of good and would help those who sit outside West Belfast. Is it the failure of its representatives over these long years? Why are those percentages being quoted, and why are they so obviously different from those in other parts of Northern Ireland?”
“Minister, as with many things these days, it appears that the Victor Meldrews and the Sir Humphreys are performing to their best. What is your assessment of the change in the balance of the health service between front-line staff and back-room bureaucrats? What obstructions, if any, are you encountering with interest groups acting to block the pace of reform?”
“I accept that the Minister will forward the information to me. I look forward to receiving that and thank him for what he said. Does he accept that part of the solution will be the replacement of the big-college model with expensive big bureaucracy with small, lightly managed, responsive colleges with minimal bureaucracies?”
“I must say, I liked the Minister's response to the first topical question. We will see how we go from here on.”
“This is a duck-and-dive Budget, with wide-eyed boys willing to put extra stress and strain on those in work and to pull apart those who are out of work. Frankly, it is not a Budget for a Government fit for purpose. This is a Budget of desperation to cover up years of bad departmental accounting. This is a Budget of reckless disregard for the future. Do you know what? It is exactly what the Tories asked for, and you have given it to them. They have got what they wanted. Frankly, people no longer trust this Executive, and you will hear about that later.”
“I have to say that, resulting from their negligence, Ministers are talking of pain for workers today as if it were some kind of toothache. So far, there appear to be no realisable proposals in the Budget and no specific targets on asset sales or revenue intakes. Assuming that the Welfare Reform Bill reaches us before the Budget Bill does, where are the drilled-out, bottom-line calculations on the new welfare fund that the Budget will finance? They are not there. <BR /> <BR />Not only is this a Budget for departmental trade-offs, it is a Budget for a trade-off on welfare reform. Shame on those who will do it. Some have called it a Budget to catch up on Tory cuts that were implemented elsewhere. I wish that that were the only reason.”
“I warned that the receipts assumed in the Budget projections were simply not coming in and that departmental spending was going out of control. I warned about relying on Departments' efficiency in spending their allocations and about the brazen use of the in-year monitoring process, and I warned about the lack of control at the centre over indefensible spending on what were and are pet ministerial projects.”
“Five thousand workers will be knocked out of a job every year for the next four years. Is it social engineering? Is it discrimination built on the premise of age, not ability? Is it a Budget attacking the over-50s for wanting to stay at work? There are 60,000 unemployed out there now, so what is the plan to find them work and which end of the queue do the voluntary exits join? <BR /> <BR />Years ago, I warned of a black hole in our Budget.”
“<BR /> <BR />The same incompetent ministerial collective is attempting to crawl out of the financial black hole it created by plunging us into a debt-ridden future. Maybe somebody is thinking, "Well, what would UKIP have done?" My answer is this: we were not invited, even though they called it "all-party talks". That is the reason why this a Tory/DUP/Sinn Féin plan. It is a plan A without, it seems, a plan B. <BR /> <BR />What of the others from that fabulous five — the three amigos? They did not sign up to anything, but they did not resign. They tell us that there were talks, and then they tell us in the same breath that they were not at those talks. That sums up their integrity, so I am not going to waste any more time on them. <BR /> <BR />That soothing spin doctor's term "a voluntary exit scheme" is brutal.”
“I appreciate this opportunity. Some weeks ago, the Executive were in turmoil. They were dubbed as being unfit for purpose, yet here we are with the same Executive — there is no change — up and ready and allegedly fit for purpose on the back of economic direct rule. It is a Tory-led Budget, contrived with the DUP, Sinn Féin and the Treasury. The rollovers have hung their hat on borrowing £700 million to put 20,000 people out of work, but what of the toughies — they seem sparse in their seats — who have backed the Tories into putting 20,000 people out of work? What of the toughies holding out for better terms, more money and no welfare tax? So much for their bravado. They will implement and vote for welfare tax, they got lousy terms for borrowing and they have put the whole country in hock for the next 10 years.”
“I appreciate the Minister's answer. Could he now give a timescale for the rationalisation of Departments down to nine and, perhaps, outline their envisaged central functions?”
“The Minister says he will not put the public at risk, and we are greatly relieved to hear that. How much money has he set aside for compensation liability claims due to failing maintenance and public roads not being properly fit for the road user?”
“I ask the Commission to ensure that there will be no similarities to the investigation into the Northern Ireland Events Company, which was about a £1 million loss that cost over £1 million to investigate. After seven years, there has been no report and no sight of any PSNI involvement. Will the Commission give assurance to the Assembly that it will not be hooked on delays awaiting a report that could take longer than this Assembly's remit? Will she give an answer as to the timescale in which this Assembly will be presented with a factual and concluding report?”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. I have just a couple of points. I would be indebted to the Minister if she could relate more to the cost of £128,000 for temporary staff and what they were doing. I think that the figure is high. Has the Minister considered sharing some specialist functions in her Department, such as finance, with other Departments to save public money?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Let me tell him that, in Strangford, we too very much support the Dalriada campaign. My question to him is this: does he agree with me that what is happening in Dalriada is causing great worry and concern to carers throughout every constituency in Northern Ireland because of the respite problem? Does he also agree that if Dalriada can be fixed, there will be great relief to carers throughout the country?”
“The Minister may have the answer to my supplementary question, but I am sure that he will come back to me if he does not. What opportunities for sharing non-specialist administrative staff has the Minister sought out with other Departments and agencies?”
“This is my first opportunity to congratulate the Minister on his appointment, and I do so willingly and trust that he will endeavour to look after my Strangford constituency.”
“I thank the Minister for his answer, but I remind him that, after he left, the Committee, having heard from him and his officials, also heard from Translink. That was why I asked the question. <BR /> <BR />Has the Minister any doubt that £40 million will be the final cost of the project? If it is not and if it spirals again, what percentage increase will he tolerate? Will he hold to the £40 million as a fixed sum? Can he tell us just how he intends to get this £40 million?”
“Well, I was in the middle of it. To conclude my question, Deputy Speaker: what are the lending terms for EIB money? Are they attractive enough to ease the savagery that he says was imposed on him by the Finance Minister?”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. I am sure that he will agree that, until UKIP liberates us all from the cost of £54 million a day just to be Europeans, we should retrieve our own money from the EIB. Can the Minister categorically say whether he has put forward any schemes, other than those he referred to, that would qualify? I take exception to him saying that his Department does not qualify. I believe that there are areas where he should find out more about that.”
“I thank the Minister for his answer and for making me aware of certain things that, I can assure him, I am aware of. In light of his answer, will he agree — I will press him — to develop a technically based vocational curriculum in our secondary schools that is dovetailed into post-16 vocational education and apprenticeships?”
“I hope that we can walk through the door together, Minister. Having heard what you have said — I appreciate what you have said — I need to ask you this: what steps will you take to prevent the closures that are likely to happen due to the fact that we do not have GPs?”
“I thank the Minister for a very comprehensive and useful answer and speak well of her for the success that she has had in her own particular office and the contribution that she has made to tourism. <BR /> <BR />I had hoped that she might mention ferry services. In the light of that, would she consider undertaking a review of ferry services between England and Northern Ireland in tandem with a review of how we are attracting that potentially lucrative market in England, as that may give her the figures that I have been looking for?”