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 16 of 60.
“I appreciate the Member's giving way. Obviously, this is a necessary requirement in relation to what happened in the courts. However, Members need to also take into account what the Audit Office has said in relation to the £700 million overspend. That report, which, some Members seem to forget, has been made public, makes clear reference to the problems in the Planning Service. My concern is that, while the legislation has to be made to respond to what happened in court, we also need to take into account the fact that, if we want progress, it has to be on the basis of a Planning Service that is fit for purpose.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Surely we would be in the most bizarre situation if, as a result of this evening's proceedings in the House, with the motion having been passed, as it most likely will be, teachers deciding that, when the schools are reopened, they will just ignore all the guidance. What message would that send to parents? Yet, today, we have the deputy First Minister and Ministers and Members of the House flagrantly breaching the regulations in a way that has set a disgraceful example.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I will clarify the point. First, I trust that he is referring to Northern Ireland when he talks about "the North" and is not talking about some other jurisdiction. Secondly, is there not a five-party mandatory coalition, or have I missed something in the last number of months? Is this not a classic case of, when it suits the SDLP, they will have a go, but, when there is credit to be had, they will take credit even for things they did not support in the first place?”
“The Minister specifically referred to post-COVID. Will he give an assurance that serious consideration will be given to the help that companies need to allow them to be proactively involved in procurement through Constructionline in a way that is beneficial to them and to start the economy again in Northern Ireland?”
“Sadly, many in the construction business will not share this positive response about the practical help given by Constructionline and the procurement process. The Minister knows that this is an issue. I have written to him a number of times on —.”
“I thank the Minister for reading what the Department gave to him. Undoubtedly, the issue always is, when we come to the House, how the Department views itself on many of these things.”
“On a point of order, Mr Temporary Speaker. I thank the Minister for clarifying the issue in relation to police powers. We will be checking the Hansard report of the Member for West Belfast's inaccurate comments on the issue of stop-and-search. That is not relevant to this debate. I want to place on the record that independent scrutiny of that issue is not consistent with the Member's comments.”
“You are pedalling falsehoods but you will not give way.”
“I thank the Minister for coming to the House. His last comment may be a personal comment on how care homes are valued in society. I wonder whether that goes across the higher echelons of the Department, particularly as we look at any reorganised inspection regime. Can the Minister provide assurance that the resumption of statutory and non-statutory inspections will be carried out in a safe, coordinated and care-centred way and in a timely manner? It is extremely sad that, yet again, in the midst of these circumstances, care homes are at the centre of the story. I know your personal concern about that, but we need clarity about what the Department knew and what it did or did not do.”
“— problems that we will face, but an assurance that things will be done in a way that is prudent and in the best interests of our citizens is vital.”
“I thank the First Minister for her answer. Given the obvious challenges that we face, which she referred to in her answer, I seek assurance that financial prudence and accountability are at the centre of the decisions that will be made. I say that on the back of an increasing number of reports coming from the Comptroller and Auditor General, not least the recent one regarding the LandWeb situation, about which he states:”
“The Member says that the British Government took us out. I know that his party was aligned with the policy of an Armalite in one hand and a ballot box in the other, but I thought that it had made some progress and that the ballot box had primacy. Will he accept that the United Kingdom, of which we are a part, voted to leave? That is the reason. It was not one individual but the people of the United Kingdom. Yes or no?”
“That is the party that tells us that Europe is a wonderful place and we never should have left it.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Will she accept that one of the experts who has given us advice on Europe is a Sinn Féin MEP who, in 2016, said:”
“I will be quick. Let us remember that the former president of Sinn Féin said that the backers of the EU treaty were "Thatcherites". That was the former president of Sinn Féin, Gerry Adams, who cannot remember that he was in an illegal organisation.”
“— there is much more that we could say about this issue. We will be opposing the amendment and the motion. I look forward to the completion of our removal from the European Union.”
“Of course, there are those who believe that all you have to do is just to ask for more money and you will get it; the bigger the bowl, the bigger the receipt. However, there are consequences of an extension and there would be consequences if we were not to fulfil the obligation. <BR /> <BR />An extension to the transition period would prevent us from taking the radical steps needed to rebuild the post-COVID-19 economy because the United Kingdom would continue to be bound by EU rules and unable to influence them. What is more ludicrous than for Members who talk about scrutiny, getting more information and having more detail, when rules would be made in Brussels that could not be changed in Belfast. Therefore, —”
“That is why Europe was in such a quandary and in such a political tizzy when the democratic wish of the United Kingdom was expressed via the ballot box. The UK Paymaster General has also decided to take away the chequebook that Europe would like us to continue using because they would like us to still contribute to their coffers. <BR /> <BR />It also means that the UK cannot benefit from any free trade deals that it wants to engage in. What we have heard is a panacea of doom, worry and fear, rather than grasping the opportunities of being unshackled from a system that is undemocratic and riddled with inconsistencies and inappropriate financial behaviour. <BR /> <BR />It has to be remembered than an extension to the transition period could cost the United Kingdom Government somewhere in the region of £380 billion.”
“<BR /> <BR />I say to the Member who proposed the motion that, despite his coming from a party that claims they were the advocates of democracy — one man, one vote and recognising the ballot paper and all of that — it seems that now you can set all of that aside when it does not suit and the outcome you wanted is not what you got. Members also need to recognise that they are not alone in that regard, because we have seen EU negotiators and their supporters ruthlessly exploiting the current global crisis, particularly in relation to economies that are in meltdown. They use the same flawed arguments as we have already heard in the Chamber this afternoon. <BR /> <BR />Why would the EU not want further delay? Of course, it would mean one thing: that the United Kingdom would continue to pay. The Paymaster General has decided to leave the club.”
“Sir Francis Bacon once said that reading maketh a broad man, speaking a ready man, and writing an exact man. That forces you to read what people have written, and, in doing so, gives you a sense of where they are really coming from. <BR /> <BR />Despite all of the words in the motion and the amendment, it brings us back to the salient point: that there are those who are still opposed to us leaving the undemocratic and overly bureaucratic European Union. They will stop at nothing to overturn the democratic decision of the people of the United Kingdom over four years ago to leave the European Union. In the motion and the amendment, they have decided to employ the COVID-19 crisis and to use it as a mask to cover their real intention, which is to deny the democratic wish of the UK as exercised through the ballot box.”
“I have listened to the Member. A recurring question has come to me during all that she has said: who is going to pay for all of this? She talks about an "economic stimulus". Those are great words. The party opposite cannot even support the North/South interconnector, which has benefits — and it is strange that I, from a unionist perspective, have support for that. When it comes to a beneficial connection between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland however, the party opposite cannot support it. Words are fine, but who is going to pay for the wish list that the Member is setting before us this afternoon?”
“Why did that happen, given the fact that responsibility for the delivery of that project lay primarily in those two Departments?”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. It goes back to that territory of, "It is not my responsibility: I am waiting on those bids to come in". It is clear from what the Minister of Justice has said that she is not prioritising the additional police officers. She is working on other pressures. There are strategic outline cases. Some of them are, now, moving to business cases, which is some progress. My central point is this: a deal is a deal. If it said that there would be a medical school, and, on the opposite page, said that there would be additional police officers to bring the total to 7,500, that, to me, is a deal. It is not about waiting for a business case. It leads to the question: what was the process to remove the medical school from the Department for the Economy and the Department of Health and move it to the Executive Office?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I do not live in denial: I live in the real world. Going back to this point, if it was your own money, would you spend more than what you had or would you realise that there are some things that you could not do? It seems that the Members opposite have an endless list of things that they want to do until it is something that they agree to and are uncomfortable with, like the additional officers for the PSNI. Then, they are not so keen to find money. It is only when it suits, and maybe the Member needs to realise that we have to cut our cloth accordingly because that is one of the realities that COVID-19 is teaching us all.”
“I think that it is long past time that CPD was brought under some financial scrutiny. Are we getting value for money? We are talking about a Budget here. Of course, when it is not your own money, some people seem to think that you can spend it whatever way you like and then give accountability to others to make it very onerous and very challenging. Now that we have, thankfully, set aside some of the procurement rules from Europe, which were nonsensical and, I hope, will never come back, I hope that the Minister will be able to tell us how he will deal with the issue of procurement and that it will not be as he dealt with it in regard to the procurement of PPE from China, which never actually transpired.”
“In conclusion, I want to raise another area of responsibility that the Minister has. I have raised this with him previously, and I want him to take it away today and look seriously at the operations of CPD. I am not convinced that the Central Procurement Directorate is giving the public sector in Northern Ireland value for money. I declare an interest as a member of the board of governors of two schools in my constituency, Ballymoney High School and William Pinkerton Memorial Primary School in Dervock. Those two schools are subject to rules and regulations that cost them money four times more than if they had the ability to go out and procure in another means. Yet, seemingly, in the world of CPD, you are better spending £10 to be able to justify how you have spent £1.”
“Let us remember that for some of those pressures, the shortfall is somewhere in the region of £53 million for issues such as holiday pay, injury awards, estates, body armour, human resources, technology, district policing, custody healthcare and cybercrime. The list goes on. Members will come through the doors of the Chamber and say that these things are very necessary, but then their Finance Minister is not prepared to put up the money to ensure that those are delivered.”
“And the forests. When it comes to dealing with public finances, the Member and his party have to take into consideration that the faults are not always on somebody else's side. <BR /> <BR />I come back to this point: I want the Minister to give a clear indication today — not, as the Alliance Member mentioned, jam tomorrow — that money will be allocated to fulfil the promises made and the commitments entered into on additional police officers. There are those who would like the Police Service of Northern Ireland to be run into the ground and be so constrained that would be incapable of dealing with public order and the many challenges that it faces.”
“I thank the Member for the question. I am delighted that he asked it, because his party wanted to sell an asset in relation to planes — the city of Londonderry's airport — and they did not even own it.”
“It is not a case of just going out and getting additional police officers and paying them for the first year but not every other year. There are recurring costs that have to be met, and somebody has to pay the bill. <BR /> <BR />Of course, we notice that money was allocated to the new medical facility in Londonderry: only £15 million. When anyone looks at the current estimates for the running — the capital and the resource — of that project, the cost will be in excess of £30 million. Some people are hanging their hats on the Belfast city deal providing the additional money, but there is no doubt that it will have recurring costs that have to come back to the Executive.”
“Thankfully, I had written to the Justice Minister before I asked the question in the House. I got a reply that was very enlightening for a number of reasons. One, it seems that the Minister of Justice is not really giving priority to the New Decade, New Approach agreement because, in the letter, she said that she had made it clear to the Finance Minister in a meeting that her priority would be the inescapable pressures in the first instance as they related to just standing still and that only once those pressures were met could she consider allocating funding to New Decade, New Approach-related costs. The letter also informs us that the Finance Minister is in receipt of the money that is needed to fulfil the promise made in 'New Decade, New Approach': £40 million per annum.”
“Sometimes it is like going back to primary school: we need to be reminded of the law of first principles. <BR /> <BR />I declare an interest as a member of the Northern Ireland Policing Board, because I want to revisit the way in which the finances have been distributed, via the Finance Minister, to the Justice Minister. We find ourselves in a situation where, yet again, we are playing ping-pong. I thought that we had a collective, five-party mandatory coalition and that we were all towing together to work to whatever agreements we came to in order to see them fulfilled. The Minister will recall that I raised with him on the last occasion the funding of additional police officers in 'New Decade, New Approach'. The Minister, on that occasion, said that there were processes and that he had had a discussion with the Justice Minister.”
“I will revisit issues that are pertinent to us all. As the Member reminded us, we are taxpayers as members of the United Kingdom. However, we also need to remember — there are many in the House who would like to forget — that what we bring in is not sufficient to run all the services that we have in Northern Ireland. If you read the document, you see that 85% of the total spend is as a result of the block grant.”
“Here again we are seeing played out in this House a classic example of, "If we do not get what we are looking for, you will not get". However, the problem is that it is not in the Budget. That is the problem. It is on a piece of paper that says, "We will increase the numbers of police to 7,500". There is no financial commitment, yet we have a financial commitment in this document of £15 million to a medical centre in Londonderry that the business case today does not stack up for. We are then told by Members from the SDLP and Sinn Féin that we have to make sure that everything has to be done properly and that we have to have scrutiny. We are told that we cannot have anything done that is improper. If you do not have a business case that stacks up, why have you allocated £15 million to something that is not financially viable?”
“He cannot wash his hands and say that it was somebody else. I have the letter with me. It was the late Martin McGuinness and his party that decided to do the job, so do not try to blame the DUP.”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. We might as well get a bit of a discussion going because we will not be going too far this evening. Although, right enough, I have a board of governors' meeting at 7.00 pm. <BR /> <BR />It does not serve the Minister well to try to shift the blame. The reality for him and his party is that they decided to pull the institutions down. The late Martin McGuinness decided, collectively — maybe not, but, whoever it was, it was decided to pull the institutions down. Will the Minister at least accept that, in doing so, Martin McGuinness created further problems for children with special educational needs, further crises in the health service and further challenges for the unemployed? As a result, the Minister cannot try to do a Pontius Pilate in the House tonight.”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. Obviously, he has had some conversation with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, but can he confirm to the House that, while many Members come to the House and talk aspirationally about what we should do and so on, he has the power to write to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury and to set out in detail that issue around flexibility? If ever there was an opportunity for us to make the argument in these circumstances and justify the flexibility, now is it. Will he commit to ensuring that that is done, if he has not already done so?”
“In the New Decade, New Approach deal there was a commitment to increase the number of police officers to 7,500. Minister, will you tell me, and the House, where that money is and what has happened to the Barnett consequential with regard to the additional 20,000 officers that was announced by the Prime Minister? Where are we on giving the PSNI those additional officers? It cannot be that one side gets what was agreed and the other side — and the other part of the agreement — is left for six months or six years. We will not wait. If it is a deal, then we do them both together or we do not do them at all. <BR /> <BR />I will wait for an answer from the Finance Minister this afternoon.”
“<BR /> <BR />During the COVID-19 crisis, we have seen a particular demand, sadly, that relates to the rise in domestic abuse. Shame on those who would engage in such a vile thing in society. Last week, the House debated the Domestic Abuse and Family Proceedings Bill. Where will the additional resources be found to ensure that the police are adequately resourced to be able to deliver on that? Let us remember that, last week, an Audit Office report stated that, over 10 years, £200 million has been taken from the police budget. If they had delivered a reduction in headcount, that would equate to 4,000 officers. <BR /> <BR />I want to conclude with a comment on what is in this Budget. My colleague has already spoken on the need for £15 million for health provision in the maiden city of Londonderry and the medical school.”
“It is a flat budget with regard to what is provided for the Police Service. Let us remember that the Police Service is the most scrutinised, looked at, observed and changed, and there are all the other things that it has to do as well as provide for us all a peaceful and safe community. <BR /> <BR />The pressures that the Police Service is under include such issues as legacy litigation, compensation, holiday pay, injury awards, estates, body armour, human resources, and technology. The list goes on and on. There was a funding gap of £58 million. I cannot criticise the party opposite for being ungrateful and, then, not be grateful myself: the Department of Justice provided in-house an additional £23 million for the Police Service of Northern Ireland. That is welcome. However, the reality is that a challenge remains.”
“I thank the Member for that. I was going to commend him for the way in which he presented his comments earlier and set a balanced approach — perhaps more balanced than mine — to the Budget. He makes a valid point: yes, we do pay our taxes. Remember, however, that if we depended only on paying our taxes, there would be an almost £10 billion deficit. That deficit is made up by the Exchequer. Let us not cut off the hand that feeds us. Let us have a little bit of gratitude. I am sure that that will be lost on the Members opposite, who will find some other political imagination to have a go at the British Government. <BR /> <BR />While, on the face of it, the settlement for the Department of Justice has a 6·3 increase, which would equate to around 3%, for the Police Service of Northern Ireland, in real terms, it is a standstill budget.”
“<BR /> <BR />I have listened to those Members talk about Tory austerity and the big, bad Tories, but look at page 6 of the Budget document. Perhaps, figures do not mean much to the Members opposite. It states that 85% of the Budget comes from the block grant. Where does that come from? Does it come from the Irish Republic? Does it come from Europe? Does it come from fiscal policies that we have here? No: it comes from the very place that the Members opposite criticise. They never miss an opportunity. They have no thankfulness or gratitude. They just say, "Give us more".”
“It is disappointing that we have come to the House four years since the last Budget was presented to us — I presented that Budget in 2016-17. The reason for that is that the party opposite, which now holds the ministry of Finance, decided for political reasons, and nothing else, to walk away. Without worrying about the medical school, the poor, the unemployed, children or education, but for purely political reasons, it ran away. Members, do not be under any illusion: if that party thought that it was politically expedient, it would do it again, because what drives that party is not care for the poor and the oppressed but its political ideology. Shame on the party opposite that it took four years for it then to come back to the House after it got more concessions from the Treasury.”
“There is a rest and a peace to be found in him, even in the midst of crisis and turmoil. <BR /> <BR />I declare an interest as a member of the Northern Ireland Policing Board because my comments will be focused on the settlement for the Department of Justice and the Police Service of Northern Ireland.”
“I join the Members of the House who have expressed their condolences to the Dallat family on the sad passing of a Member of the House, Mr John Dallat. I offer my personal condolences to the family and also to his party at the loss. It is but a reminder to us all that there is but a step between us and death. We would all do well to remember the words of the saviour when he said:”
“Our farmers deserve all the freedom that they have to do what they have always done, and that is to produce the best possible product in the best possible circumstances for the people of Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I listened to the Member's concerns about farmers in Northern Ireland. Could she explain to me how farmers were shackled by the bureaucracy of the European Union? It cost farmers in Northern Ireland millions of pounds in added regulations that they had to abide by, when the rest of Europe paid no regard. Our farmers have always been good, responsible caretakers of the land and the environment, and yet they were penalised by the bureaucracy of Brussels, when others in the rest of the European Union paid absolutely no regard. We are glad that we are unshackled from Brussels.”
“It is that healing that we need along with the work that we, collectively, all must do.”
“The deputy First Minister said that we would look back and say that we did the right thing. She may be aware that a Matter of the Day that I tabled in the House last week calling for a day of prayer was rejected by the Speaker. She will also be aware that I wrote to the First and deputy First Ministers at the weekend encouraging them to call on our people to recognise that there is a God in heaven and that, at a time when we face a crisis, people should resort to the greatest place of safety, which is calling on the God of heaven to intervene, and to earnestly pray that we will see the other side of this and that, out of that prayer, there will come to all our families the peace, confidence and comfort that we need, ever mindful of what the scripture says:”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the First Minister and the deputy First Minister for the update to the House today. I also place on record our appreciation to our Executive colleagues for the way in which they are endeavouring to deal with what, everyone will concur, are unprecedented times.”