Mervyn Storey
North Antrim · Democratic Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“I thank the Minister for his statement. It will be noted that there are those who cry much about the environment and purport to be the champions of the environment who did not have the courtesy to come to the House and be present when the statement was being made.”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. Clearly, there are some in the House who want to continue with the same old, same old and get the same outcomes at a huge cost to the public purse and to farms in Northern Ireland. The Minister is absolutely right: it is a scourge.”
“I am sure that the Minister will be aware, having listened to the Member who spoke before me, that the farmers of North Antrim will make an informed choice about who best supported farmers during this mandate of the Assembly.”
“A pilot scheme has been operating with the Education Authority, the PSNI and the South Eastern Health and Social Care Trust across 60 schools in the south Down area since September 2021 and was extended to a further 77 schools in the Newry and south Armagh areas at the start of February 2022.”
“As Chair of the Justice Committee, I am pleased to welcome the motion. It implements the provisions taken forward by the Committee in the Domestic Abuse and Civil Proceedings Act (Northern Ireland) 2021 to establish an Operation Encompass model in Northern Ireland, which is, as the Minister has outlined, a police and early intervention pa…”
“We had our final meeting of that Committee this morning, and I want to place on the public record our appreciation and thanks to our Committee staff of for all the work that they have done.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,983 lines we hold for Mervyn Storey, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 11 of 60.
“— who was from Cloughmills in my constituency. I passed the place where he was murdered on my way here today. Let his memory not be sullied by these proposals. I trust that they will be the given the rejection from the House that they deserve.”
“What of the denial for 40 years of the involvement of the IRA in the abduction and murder of Jean McConville or the murder of postal worker Frank Kerr? Who in the House knows what about the murder of Robert McCartney? On Thursday, it will be forty-fourth anniversary of the murder of prison officer Thomas Fenton —”
“Sadly, the standard used by the party opposite when it comes to the truth was put on display for all to see when the late Martin McGuinness told the Bloody Sunday inquiry:”
“Nobody denies that the passage of time presents prosecutorial difficulties, but the answer is not to arbitrarily close down legal routes for innocent victims. That holds implications for the integrity and the foundations of the criminal justice system not just in Northern Ireland but across the United Kingdom. Surely, yesterday's revelations about the murder of Tom Oliver are a reminder that they are tentatively close to bringing to justice those who carried out that heinous crime. <BR /> <BR />Then we had the recent comments by the deputy First Minister in which she accused the Government of covering up the truth and putting their forces beyond the law while ignoring republicans' blinkered vision of the truth.”
“For the Belfast Agreement's provisions to be now cited as justification for this acceleration in the denial of justice for innocent victims is a sad reflection on those who signed up to the agreement. My party opposed that agreement and, likewise, rejects these plans. <BR /> <BR />The real test of any fresh approach to legacy is ensuring that the focus of investigations is balanced and proportionate, given that the majority of murders were carried out by paramilitary terrorist organisations. The Secretary of State, rather than finding an answer to that difficult and sensitive question, seems to have chosen a path that finds equivalence between the soldier and the police officer and those who planted the bomb or pulled the trigger. That is morally reprehensible.”
“There was legislation to ensure that illegal guns that were decommissioned could not be tested ballistically, meaning that those who used those guns in their murderous campaign against the innocent could not be brought to justice for their crimes. There were letters of comfort and royal pardons. All that was done not to bring justice to the victims of terrorism but to shield and protect the victim makers.”
“However, not for the first time, Westminster Governments, aided by willing accomplices in the Chamber today, have removed some of the basic elements of a society that believes in doing what is right and not just what is politically expedient. The road to the Government's latest announcements is littered with numerous acts of perverting the course of justice, actions that were designed to protect the victim maker rather than deliver justice to those who suffered at the hands of terrorists. There was the release of prisoners in 1998 and a guarantee that anyone convicted in future would serve only two years in jail.”
“We in the House must be sensitive and mindful today of the many thousands of people in Northern Ireland and further afield who feel betrayed and let down by the actions of Her Majesty's Government. While we have concerns about some of the wording in the motion and would have supported the Ulster Unionist Party's amendment, which was not accepted, we do not want any message to come from the House today other than that victims cannot and should not be ignored in this way. <BR /> <BR />A phrase that has often been used in our troubled past is "perverting the course of justice". Sadly, the recent announcement by the Government is the ultimate manifestation of just that.”
“I thank the Member for reminding us of that point. One of the challenges is that, in many places, parents are encouraged not to put down their religious affiliation on the assessment form but to put down "Other". There is a serious issue with schools that claim to be integrated but are not integrated because they do not meet the threshold. The figures bear that out.”
“It is because parents want good-quality education for their children. Sadly, this Bill will create more division and more concern and place more financial impositions not only on education but on other public bodies at a time when we all know the pressures on our public finances. <BR /> <BR />Those are just some comments. I have no doubt, Mr Deputy Speaker, that we will return to the Bill in the weeks ahead, when there will be much more to say.”
“We have gone beyond the confines of the school and are now in the confines of the community. I have to say that the more that you read the Bill, the more that you become concerned that it is about putting into legislation a sector that tells us, "In all the public surveys that are carried out, 70% or 80% of people are for integrated education but less than 10% send their children to an integrated school". When you fill in a form that asks, "Would you do that?", it is all very well saying, "Oh yes, I would do that". However, when you have to make the choice, that choice is governed by one thing: the quality of the education. We see it more and more in our education system, where parents from different communities are now prepared to send their children to other schools, irrespective of the sign on the door. Do you know why?”
“Then, we come to clause 11. In clause 11, we have the issue of guidance for the other bodies, which, as the Member highlighted, are set out in clause 13. Clause 11(2) states:”
“What happens if there is a failure on the part of a public body to comply with that regulation and the regulations supplementing that provision of the Act? Will there be a penalty? Will there be a sanction? Will a public body, for example, not be able to tender for a contract? How do you demonstrate compliance? How do you prove it? How do you show it? Those are some of the many questions that remain unanswered.”
“It is not just education bodies but public bodies. I assume that that includes the Department of Health and other public bodies, but, as the Member indicated, those are not specified in clause 13, which comes under the heading of "Interpretation: general". <BR /> <BR />Clause 10(2)(j) goes on to say:”
“— again, note that it says "must" not "may" —”
“That has been borne out — I will not name the schools — in some areas where there have been proposals for the amalgamation of schools. When the integrated sector — that is what it is: it is a sector; the same as the maintained, controlled and Irish-medium sectors — comes to the table, it demands that any new provision has to have integrated in its title. There is no working together. There is no recognition of the benefit of a number of schools coming together. No, it makes demands. <BR /> <BR />I contend that the Bill goes even further than what the Member said. Look at the regulations set down in clause 10, which states:”
“What, then, are the special circumstances? Is it the case that what is really wanted here is more new schools to facilitate those that are currently integrated and are oversubscribed and, therefore, that will be the means whereby people will get their new schools? It is time for openness and transparency on that issue.”
“So, you would assume that those special circumstances would be listed. Well, they are, but it is the exclusion. Clause 7(2) says:”
“— not "may", but "must". One of the few benefits of being around this place has been that we have all come to realise that these pieces of paper are more important than Members' private motions, which we used to spend our time debating but were not worth the paper they were written on. This clause makes changes, and it has implications. Clause 7 says:”
“I thank the Member for that intervention. That brings me to an allied issue specifically mentioned in clause 7, where the Bill proposes that”
“I ask the Education Minister to do a timeline of legislative provision and practice in the Department that has led us to a position where now, if you have only half a dozen parents who decide to raise an issue, you can change the long-term future of a school. <BR /> <BR />I do not want to step on any other Member's toes when it comes to their constituencies. However, look at post-primary provision in Blackwater Integrated College. There was a great surge to have that school opened, but now they want it to close so that they can move closer to Saintfield or Ballynahinch. It was not enough. There is an issue with how we come to the figures and what are "reasonable numbers".”
“What is "reasonable numbers"? Is it 10? Is it 100? The Member has a duty to explain to the House what she means by "reasonable numbers". <BR /> <BR />I am glad that the Education Minister is here. I ask her to take this away and, at some stage, inform the House about it. When the 1989 Order was enacted, it referred to the "reasonable numbers" of pupils in a school. Then, it seems, there was a shift, not legislatively but in practical terms, because we ended up in a situation where, to all intents and purposes, it was probably deemed to be 50:50, but we could not get 50:50, then we started to talk about 70:30, and then it moved to 40:40:20, and now it is whatever is reasonable.”
“It had gone down to something like 70 pupils. Today, it has almost — in fact, it may now be over — 200 pupils. It is bursting at the seams. Is that because it has "integrated" in its title, or is it because it is a good primary school that provides a high standard of education for those pupils? I urge the Member to engage with the controlled sector, given that it has 50% of schools. <BR /> <BR />Clause 1 refers to:”
“Let us look at the figures for controlled schools: 146,138 pupils attend controlled schools, which represents 42·5% of all pupils, and 49% of schools are controlled. However, the proposer of the Bill has not even yet spoken to the body that represents controlled schools. Of the pupils in controlled schools, 61% are Protestant, 10% are Roman Catholic and 29% are other. Almost 40% of newcomer pupils in Northern Ireland attend controlled schools, but that is not enough for the Bill or its proposer. You have to do more because you have to get "integrated" in the title. <BR /> <BR />Lest anybody thinks that I have something against integrated schools, let me take you to Ballycastle Integrated Primary School in my constituency. Not that many years ago, that school was facing a difficult and precarious future.”
“Maybe I am not the best example of a product of the controlled sector, but Armoy Primary School and, I trust, Ballymoney High School or the intermediate school, as it was then, gave me some of the skills that enable me to do the job that I do in the best way I could. However, the Bill is being presented as though every other sector has not been involved in being integrated and has failed. Dalriada School in Ballymoney in my constituency has, probably for many years, been one of the best examples of an integrated school even though it does not have "integrated" in its title, but the Bill says, "That's not enough. You have to do more". The controlled sector is open to all; it does not say, "You're allowed, but you're not allowed. You can come through the door, but you can't come through the door".”
“The "but" is always important in getting to the nub of where you are. <BR /> <BR />Let me deal with consultation. I want the Member to explain what she said. She talked about a "partisan board". What does the Member really mean? What is she implying? Is she impugning members of boards of governors who voluntarily give of their time and expertise to serve on boards of governors of schools? How are they partisan? Are they partisan because they have particular religious or political views? Are they partisan because their view is that they are there to serve the best interests of the school, which is more likely to be the case? The Member needs to give us an explanation in that regard. <BR /> <BR />I move on to the controlled sector.”
“I thank the Member for that, and I concur with his comments. <BR /> <BR />What sometimes drives Members is that their position is more important than anybody else's position. It is not that many years ago that the Alliance Party had a poster that said, "Let's pull together. Let's not pull apart". Clearly, it wants to pull the educational system apart and drive a coach and horses through our current system. That is the implication of the Bill. <BR /> <BR />A warning needs to go out to our school system today about the import of the Bill. The support for the maintained sector in the House today has been deafening. At least Mr McCrossan got off the fence eventually, but his silence has been deafening. They say, "Oh, but we like to hear what all the other schools want to do, but".”
“I will come back to the Bill and the issue of consultation. The proposer —”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. <BR /> <BR />The Member for East Belfast would like to take representatives of the transferors off boards of governors. Let us remember that the proposer of the Bill, in her opening comments —”
“No. I thought that the proposer said, "On a point of order".”
“<BR /> <BR />Of course, it is not the first time that the Alliance Party has wanted to do things without consultation. It is clear that the Member for East Belfast wants to take from —”
“Let us look at the consultation. My colleague Mr Newton referred to that. I have a private Member's Bill on carers. The process has been arduous and long, but we have endeavoured to consult as widely as we can, in a number of formats, those who will be first and foremost affected by the legislation. Today, the proposer of the Bill tells us, "Well, we spoke to them in 2017". I am sure that the world has not changed much since 2017. As my colleague, friend and former Education Minister Mr Weir pointed out, the Bill has implications for those organisations, but it is "Let us not speak to them. Let us not consult them. Let us wait until they write to us". I say to the proposer of the Bill and to her colleague in the Alliance Party: at least have the courtesy to consult the organisations that are legally implicated in the Bill.”
“<BR /> <BR />As a member of a board of governors of a school, of two schools, of three schools — well, two that receive public funding and one that does not get a penny — I pay tribute to all our teachers, all our boards of governors and all staff in all our schools, whatever the title is above the door. I am sure that, when they listen in to the debate, they will say, "There they go again". We have a system that, yes, is under strain, but, in all our schools, whatever their title and whatever their description, there are those who give unstinting service to our young people. It would be remiss of us not to pay tribute to that today, given all that they have had to endure in the weeks and months that have gone before. That is the context of how we got here.”
“Many things embarrass me but not failed policies that have emanated from a lot of those. For most of those, it was a Sinn Féin Education Minister, which we had for 10 years. <BR /> <BR />A lot of people come to the House and talk about equality, whatever that means. It all depends on what the issue is and what suits you, but let us remember the 1989 Order that was changed. It placed a duty on the Department to encourage and facilitate. I think that Mr Butler made reference to that. It placed a duty on the Department for only two sectors in Northern Ireland: Irish-medium and integrated.”
“Does the Member say something from a sedentary position?”
“Those have all dealt with the issue of integrated education but not enough. It is never enough.”
“I will list the documents that have had a bearing to a lesser or greater degree on the debate on integrated education: the Belfast Agreement, 1998; 'A Shared Future' by the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister, 2005; the programme for cohesion, sharing and integration, 2011; the draft Programme for Government, 2011; the review of public administration, 2002; the 'Independent Strategic Review of Education', known as the Bain report, 2006; the Education (Northern Ireland) Order 2006; 'Towards a culture of tolerance: Integrating Education', 2007; 'Every School a Good School - a policy for school improvement', 2009; 'Schools for the Future: A Policy for Sustainable Schools'; 'Community Relations, Equality and Diversity in Education' 2011; 'Putting Pupils First: Shaping Our Future'; area planning guidance; and the Education Bill.”
“The Bill wants the maintained sector to come under the control of the Bill, but I have no doubt that there will be serious questions asked by CCMS, the trustees, the Catholic bishops, the controlled sector support body and many others about what really is going on here. <BR /> <BR />It is interesting how we have come to this point about integrated integration.”
“In the year that it is, this centenary year of Northern Ireland, while others might want to be disrespectful to it or deny that it is here, we are glad that we are celebrating 100 years of Northern Ireland. Tony Gallagher said:”
“Nobody can question the ability and knowledge that Tony Gallagher brings to debates on education. He wrote a report in 2013, and Mr Sheehan made a point about context and about history.”
“It is all very good to come to the House, read the script and give the party line only to make, when you go outside, a choice that it is the right one for you. Sometimes, pragmatism takes over from principle. Some Members need to be reminded of that. <BR /> <BR />It is said that all good sermons should have three points. Mine must be not be that good, because I have four. I will look today at the context and at consultation, both of which are important. I will speak a bit about the Bill's implications for the controlled sector and, at the end, about concerns. <BR /> <BR />Not for the first time, one of the Members opposite, Mr Sheehan, and I have locked horns. We have done so in the Chamber on many days, and I have no doubt that we will do the same again. I was interested to read an article by Tony Gallagher.”
“I declare an interest as a member of the board of governors of Ballymoney High School, William Pinkerton Memorial Primary School in Dervock and Ballymoney Independent Christian School, albeit the last school does not receive one penny from the Department of Education. When my wife and I, as parents, made a choice to send our children to that school, we were happy to make that choice and to pay for making it. A lot of Members talk about having choice, but that is as long as somebody else pays for it. I have listened to Members pontificate about academic selection, yet some of their party colleagues and perhaps even they themselves are happy to have been the beneficiaries of academic selection, including our Finance Minister.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I am glad that he has, at last, come off the fence, because, for some time, I wondered where he was going. Is he in favour of the Bill or not? As someone who values the controlled sector and the maintained sector, does he genuinely believe that there are no concerns and that there are no issues in the Bill that will have massive financial, practical and legal implications for those sectors, including the Irish-medium sector?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. The Member again conveniently forgets about the Northern Ireland Audit Office report. He talks about inequalities and blames everybody for the ills in society, including the British Government and probably the famine, but more than £100,000 — millions of pounds, in fact — was spent on interventions, and the Audit Office has said that those have not changed anything. Something is fundamentally wrong that you cannot blame on academic selection or unionist politicians.”
“Not for the first time, the Member opposite has a narrow and particularly republican view of history. In 1830, there was a multi-denominational common school system. In 1921, when Northern Ireland came into existence, the Roman Catholic Church decided not to take its place in a multi-denominational education system. Maybe the Member, not for the first time, needs to get his historical context correct.”
“I thank the Minister for giving us that opportunity, and we will respond. Will she also keep in mind that it is not just about the impact that it has on local commuters in Ballymoney? The town of Ballycastle is very dependent on its bus connection to Ballymoney for the train service, which has been a phenomenal success. Will she ensure that regional towns like Ballycastle have interconnectivity so that, whether you are a visitor or a resident, there is an integrated approach to transport? It is not a case of either/or; it is a combination of both rail and bus services.”
“Does the Minister stand over pursuing cases in the absence of admissible evidence and that, clearly, would not stand up in a court? Does the Minister believe that the criminal justice system can be considered a neutral arbiter when it comes to dealing with legacy issues? Will the Minister comment on why it took so long for our PPS to come to its conclusion on the basis that there was no admissible evidence?”
“The statutory rule was subsequently considered at the Committee meeting on 17 June, when the Committee noted that the Examiner of Statutory Rules had drawn the Department's attention to the required clarification to the drafting of the rule, which had been made by way of a correction slip laid in the Assembly on 8 June, clarifying that the rule will come into operation 21 days after the order is made. The Committee therefore agreed to recommend that the statutory rule be approved by the Assembly. I support the motion on behalf of the Committee for Justice.”
“The Department laid the statutory rule on 12 May 2021 and, at the Committee meeting of 20 May 2021, members noted an update from the Department regarding the delay in bringing forward the rule. According to the Department, the process was paused pending the outcome of two judicial review applications brought against the Department for Work and Pensions. The legal challenges were resolved, and the grounds on which the court found against Department for Work and Pensions will not arise in Northern Ireland as our regulations do not provide for similar discretion. <BR /> <BR />The Committee also noted that the key aim of the deduction policy was to reduce the number of prison committals for fine default, and that that had been working well in relation to the current list of benefits.”
“The Committee was reassured that, when making a deduction order, the Department for Communities will consider the hardship, and the relevant debt team will review any deductions that are in place. Social security regulations provide safeguards to ensure that claimants are protected. Fine deductions are relatively low on the debt recovery priority order, and deductions for a fine will be considered only if all other conditions to apply a deduction are met. <BR /> <BR />The Committee noted that the scheme protects claimants from imprisonment for non-payment of fines. It also limits the number and amount of deductions taken from the benefit. The Committee agreed that it was content with the proposal for the statutory rule to be made.”