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 18 of 60.
“If austerity was such an issue, and if it was being imposed on us in such an impossible and terrible way, why did they not bring down the institutions before 2016? They were quite happy to operate the institutions and implement austerity. <BR /> <BR />Of course, we then had the double standards of those who were in the Executive and not in the Executive. Parties like the SDLP and the Ulster Unionist Party wanted the luxury of the ministerial portfolio but also the ability to say, "Oh no, we did not make that decision. We were able to vote against that. Our hands are clean. We would never do that". What happened to a five-party mandatory coalition? It went out the window when it did not suit them. When will we all get real?”
“What comes out second is education. Those are the beginnings of a priority financial framework. My party, the parties opposite, all the parties here and those who do not have a party all claim to have the most important issue of the day, but if it costs a huge amount, we need to have a serious rethink. <BR /> <BR />Let me move on to another issue. The Members opposite need to be reminded of it. It is British austerity. That austerity was an awful thing. It was introduced, yet again, by those bad Tories — those bad politicians in London. Who implemented it in Northern Ireland for 10 years? What happened between 2007 and the contrived collapse of the institutions in 2016? There were Sinn Féin Ministers — Ministers of the Crown.”
“<BR /> <BR />I will comment on what we need to do regarding what I call a "priority financial framework". Yesterday and today, we have had, "We need, we need, we need" and "We have to have". The list goes on. We all have them in our constituencies, and I could give the same list for mine, but in this Budget process and previous processes, I think that the leader of the Ulster Unionist Party referred earlier to a fiscal council. I call it a priority financial framework. We need a system that reflects the priorities of the people whom we claim to represent. I heard in the House today, yesterday and in previous times, "But the people in my constituency require", but when it comes to listing those priorities in any opinion poll, what comes out top will be health. Of course, health has the largest percentage of the Budget.”
“I am sure that Members will be delighted to know that I am going to make another contribution today and cause all sorts of trouble, but that is not the reason why I come to the Chamber. As the Speaker knows, I try to engage in a way that is meaningful to Members because it is very easy for us to come here and to think that we are not part of the process. We play a vital role not only in the Chamber but in Committees. That needs to be conveyed to our colleagues in the Executive because, on some occasions, what is discussed here fails to be conveyed in a way that we get outcomes when it comes to Executive decisions. Maybe the debates today and yesterday will help to send a message to the Executive that things need to be done differently.”
“I appreciate the fact that the Member and I are having this conversation, because it seems that she is always looking across at me on these issues. Maybe we will involve the rest of the Members. She made reference to reading papers. I am not trying to be clever or facetious, but we discovered today that Casement Park requires an additional £33 million. That is eye-watering. Who was not reading their papers when the original business case came into your Department and your successor's Department? I have been where the Finance Minister is and where Minister Hargey is; it is very difficult and challenging to read every paper that comes across your desk. However, when you have a paper now that says that there is £33 million of a deficit, are we not all collectively responsible for taking our eye off the ball on many of these issues?”
“The Member knows about this, because she and I have had the discussion. When will the party opposite, along with their colleagues in the SDLP, recognise that the Housing Executive's current structure is not fit for purpose? I want good housing in your constituency just as I want it in mine, but report after report has stated that there needs to be a change in the way in which the Housing Executive borrows money. When will we get to a point beyond the rhetoric and make a decision similar to what the Minister has done with the bedroom tax? That was the right thing to do, but, remember, it has had consequences for the block grant, out of which we run this part of the United Kingdom.”
“I thank the Minister for that, but will he give a specific assurance that the Barnett consequentials, particularly those that came as a result of the announcement by the Prime Minister of additional police officers in the United Kingdom, will not be taken and used by the Department of Finance in any way other than what they were designated for specifically? He has responsibility for that, not the Department of Justice.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. For many years we have had the view that the use of free school meals is a blunt instrument that actually creates other inequalities. In fact, it discriminates against those schools whereby now they find themselves in the position that, even though their numbers, as you outlined, are in a strong position, the funding is not reflective of that. So numbers no longer guarantee that you will have the financial resources. I certainly will await the outcome of a review that I understand the Minister of Education is doing. I hope that one of the issues coming out of that review will be addressing the imbalance that there is in the use of free school meals as a blunt instrument to deal with how you fund our schools.”
“Will the Member call St Mary's College a sectarian project?”
“Will the Member accept that, although we can make decisions in this House, we need to answer the question of when we are going to have the public inquiry on the back of the Audit Office report? I referred to that matter yesterday. How many times do we have to repeat it? It makes the RHI look like a small piece. It is a figure of £700 million, not as a result of the mistakes that politicians made but something more fundamental. Kieran Donnelly has made it clear. Are we going to ignore that? Are we going to continue to go over the same old mantra and the same old stuff that we hear in this House day in, day out? It is action we need; it has to be right across the piece; and, maybe, on 13 March, Judge Coghlin will give us the eye-opener that will be about not only the political problems but the institutional problems.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I am happy to talk about sinners and the remedy for sin, but I will maybe leave that to another day in the House.”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. For clarity, I was not ignoring RHI. Maybe you missed the point where I said that, when I was in the post of Finance Minister, I contacted the Comptroller and Auditor General about the irregular spend. My eyes were not closed, so when you are reporting that, the generalisations are unfair and unwarranted.”
“— gives us delivery, because, as the Comptroller and Auditor General clearly indicated in his most up-to-date report, that has failed to date, with £700 million being the amount of underspend.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. My time spent as Minister, in either the Department for Social Development or the Department of Finance and Personnel, should prove that need is something about which I genuinely have a concern. When I visited the Member's constituency with him, he will remember that I saw housing conditions in West Belfast that were abysmal. Let us remember that, in meeting need, we have to have the right structures in place. What I am imploring the Finance Minister to do is to ensure that the way in which the money is not only allocated but spent —”
“<BR /> <BR />The House and the decisions that we make in the House are sometimes taken as though, "Well, sure, you can have a swipe at the politicians", and we are up for it, but, as the Comptroller and Auditor General said, we need change to how we do our business.”
“That was not in 2016. That was not in 2017. That was in 2019. There are two other reports that he gave his financial assessment on. One was on the Education Authority, and the other was on the voluntary exit scheme. There is an interesting one. Let us remember that we, in good faith, embarked on a process to rebalance the economy. It seems as though that phrase has now disappeared. It seems as though there is little interest now in us addressing that. It is still there. What was it that we did? We let almost 4,500 people leave the Civil Service, and what did it cost us? It cost £170 million. I ask the Finance Minister to undertake a piece of work to determine to ensure that no one has been returned to the system as a result of the exit scheme, as I believe there has been.”
“We could depend only on our own opinion on these things, and we all have biases and all come with a particular political view, but I do not think that anybody would argue with the Northern Ireland auditor. Let us remember that there have been three Northern Ireland audits on issues in relation to spend, but not on what we are going to spend. Sometimes we are accused in the House of not making decisions. Decisions were made about certain spend. The last Comptroller and Auditor General's report made it abundantly clear that there is £700 million. Do we get that figure in the House today? It is £700 million not as a result of some botched boiler scheme but because of total and absolute inadequacy in the system to deliver on the decisions made in the House. Let us remember what Mr Donnelly said about how we spend our money:”
“I thank the Member for reminding us. Wherever irregular spend happens, I am quite happy to call it out. In fact, I remind the Member that, when I was the Finance Minister, I was the Minister who contacted the Comptroller and Auditor General about the irregular spend in RHI, so none of us are running away from our responsibilities. We are facing up to our responsibilities in the House.”
“Where is that money coming from? Are we just going to go to the Treasury again and say, "Please give us more", when we are unprepared to change the financial structure that deals with how the Housing Executive can spend money?”
“You cannot manage the money that you have already been allocated". <BR /> <BR />Then we come to the Housing Executive. When will the parties opposite, including the SDLP, grasp the issue? I am no financial expert, but the reality is that the Housing Executive, according to the Savills report on housing that we brought in, needs in the region of £6 billion over the next number of years.”
“Some of us remain more sceptical than others. <BR /> <BR />As we come to what is before us today, there are issues that I would like the Finance Minister to address. I have no doubt that he has many officials in another part of the Building who are seeking to prepare responses for him. When it comes to, for example, the Department for Communities, when will we deal with the underspend on mitigation measures of at least £136 million, going by the last correspondence that I had with the then permanent secretary, in March 2016? There was much talk about how we needed to get the money to the people who were in need. The need did not transpire, and we have an underspend of over £136 million. No wonder the Treasury looks at this place and asks, "Why would we give you any more money?”
“Let us look at the mitigation of welfare reform, an issue that, we were told, was "really important to the people whom we represent, an issue of real concern". When the deal was done to bring in mitigation measures, whom did Sinn Féin leave it up to to deliver? The Westminster Government: "Let us send it to London to the big bad Tories", whom we heard a Member talk about, the people who were responsible for austerity. Why? Sinn Féin was not prepared to come to the House, put its hand up and vote for something. We welcome the fact that now, maybe, for a time, they have returned to the Chamber. They will go through the Lobbies, and they will vote for a Budget and for measures that were made in Northern Ireland. Maybe we can give a degree of comfort to the people of Northern Ireland that, for a period, we may have some progress.”
“As I contribute to this afternoon's debate, I feel much more relieved and under less pressure than I did in 2016, when I sat in the House as Finance Minister. My colleague from North Antrim has reminded us that, not many months after we brought a Budget through the House, the party that now has responsibility for the Department of Finance abdicated its responsibility and ran away from its duty. We have heard much over the last weeks and months about "Our commitment to public services" and how "We will work for the people whom we represent". That party has been found wanting in that delivery. Let me give you an example. The current Finance Minister was the person responsible, so, if this is not the case, he can deny it, although he has had reason to deny a lot of things recently.”
“I welcome the Minister to her post and wish her well. Unfortunately, for many years in my constituency in the village of Rasharkin, illegal signs have been put up on top of directional signs. That is intimidating. They have been put up in support of republican prisoners, and, repeatedly, the police and your Department have failed to address the issue. When will you allow the Protestant minority in the village of Rasharkin to live free from the intimidation caused by that type of activity?”
“I welcome the Minister's comments on social sector size criteria. It will be novel to see the party opposite vote for regulations this time, because they left that responsibility to the House of Commons the last time. <BR /> <BR />Will the Minister give an assurance that the underspend, for at least the past two years, of £136 million for mitigation measures is still in place and is money that will be available? What will she do in the Department to ensure that there is no further drain on public finances and that the money that was allocated is used?”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. As a former Minister for housing, I concur with his comments on the issue. Comments have been made today about lost opportunities. As the Assembly comes to an end, let us face reality: it is most likely that we will not be back in this institution in the way that it was formed and the way that it is. Let us all bear the responsibility for what has happened over the last number of weeks. There was one lost opportunity — the Members on the opposite Benches know about it — when I endeavoured to ensure that we found a solution to housing. If there is one thing that we need to sort in Northern Ireland it is to give our people good homes. I concur with the Minister's comments, and I look forward to a day when the people of Northern Ireland, across the piece, will share the benefit of good homes.”
“Is it now time for the consultation to be suspended until we are satisfied that a proper assessment has been carried out that gives us the facts, based on reality, as opposed to what may be the assumption of the Education Authority?”
“The figures for 2015-16 show a reduction of part-time staff from 14 to three, so how would you expect an organisation, when it is audited, looked at and put under the microscope, to come up with figures that say that this is the reason why the provision should be retained? We then have to look at where these children and young people would go. If the Education Authority were to get its way and close the facility, where would they go? Would they go to Woodhall residential centre in Kilrea? It cannot take them because it is full. They would have to travel many miles to get comparable — not just another type of — provision. The Minister needs to grasp that point. It is vital. <BR /> <BR />I ask the Minister to have a serious look at the Education Authority. Does it have the capacity to deal appropriately with the issue?”
“I do not believe that we can say that this happened because of budgetary constraints alone. A decision was made by whomever in the Department or the Education Authority that certain places had to go. Why these facilities? Why a facility like Bushmills in our North Antrim constituency? These are not places that are just open, with cobwebs gathering in corners and a few small groups coming now and again. It can be clearly demonstrated that, in 2014-15, these places were used: 240 school and youth groups involving over 8,500 individuals, 73% from schools and youth services, and 27% adults. <BR /> <BR />The Member mentioned the following, but I want to expand on it a wee bit: was there a deliberate attempt by the Education Authority and the former North Eastern Education and Library Board to run down this service?”
“We need to keep the focus on that. It is the reason why I attended the debate in the House last week. The issue has implications for colleagues in other constituencies. We need to ask how we got to this place. What we have before us did not happen as a result of a decision taken primarily because of budget constraints, even though it is interesting that the Education Authority's document states that there have been savings of £1·3 million. Where are the savings in the following years? It does not add up. <BR /> <BR />We need to go back to 2013 and the policy document, 'Priorities for Youth: Improving Young People's Lives through Youth Work', because that is when the problem arose. That led to the regional youth development plan in 2015-16, which has brought us to the point that we are at today.”
“The 'Review of Residential and Outdoor Education' gives us all the reasons why there should be a focus on the retention of these services. It states:”
“I thank the Member for securing the Adjournment debate. A number of points need to be made at the start that underline the importance of what we are debating tonight. Some years ago, Edward Lappin wrote a book about outdoor education, in which he said:”
“The Member will be aware that there are political representatives on that board, including those from the Ulster Unionist Party.”
“I thank the Minister for her response. She will be aware, given the rural nature of my constituency of North Antrim, which includes the glens, Ballycastle, Rathlin and other locations, that people want to have confidence that, in the co-design, there is a play with all the elements of our health professionals, particularly our GPs and our health centres. Does the Minister see a pivotal role for those health centres, particularly given that some of them have a very rural nature?”
“Let us remember the discussions that we had in the House in the past about qualification regulations and how we need to ensure that what we do in the House is done in a way that does not either increase or inhibit reputational damage. The Minister has therefore gone some way to dealing with that issue today. It is also to be welcomed that the Minister has given clarity and assurance on the concern about linking the process to the possibility of an increase in tuition fees. I welcome the fact that the Minister said that there are no plans to have a link between the framework and tuition fees. We will therefore be supporting the LCM.”
“I thank the Minister for bringing the LCM to the House today. He said that the Bill has a particular narrow focus, and that is not in any way to dilute the concerns that have been raised, which have been highlighted by the Chair of the Committee. The Committee considered this issue, and its concerns are included in the report that it has presented for the consideration of the House. <BR /> <BR />Most of the Bill's provisions are required to allow Northern Ireland institutions to participate in the teaching framework in the future. That also needs to be given its place, particularly where the Minister referred to reputational damage.”
“Following on from that point, it also needs to be remembered that the wholesale price is 70% of the bill. There are issues that we cannot always control, because electricity is a tradable commodity. That fact has to be placed on the record, given that some people would like to make mischief with the issue.”
“— That is why they were rejected by the electorate and that is why they are in opposition.”
“— to help, whereas what they do is only cheap political point-scoring —”
“— the great infrastructure and the integrated single electricity market. It is disappointing that we do not have more time, because, no doubt, we will hear in the debate today the weasel words of those who claim —”
“Moreover, between 2015-16, almost 26% of our electricity consumption was from renewable sources. I think that that recognises the investment in the interconnection between these islands —”
“As leader of the Ulster Unionist Party, the Member is the expert in spinning negatives into positives, so I will leave him to be the person who does that rather than him, yet again, trying to undermine what is being said and done. <BR /> <BR />Let us go to the consumer, because it is vital that we remind ourselves that what we do here is not about building empires — although some tried to do that and failed — it is about delivering for our constituents and consumers. Let us remind ourselves of electricity prices for domestic customers. They are estimated to be 13% lower than in the Republic of Ireland, and Northern Ireland is on course to meet its renewable target of 40% by 2020. We should also welcome the fact that over 900MW of potential renewable electricity generation has now been connected to the grid.”
“Before I leave this point, let me quote from one of the companies that the Member referred to as one of the excellent companies that we have in Northern Ireland that provide some of our energy for us. They said that they are:”
“Before I comment on the lack of detail in the motion, I would appreciate it if the Minister could give the House an update. In moving the motion, the Member made reference to the electricity and manufacturing advisory group report and how its recommendations were being progressed. I have no doubt that the Minister will take the opportunity to update the House and give us his opinion on electricity prices for large energy users, the integrated single electricity market, and security of supply. <BR /> <BR />I also notice that the motion makes reference to the Programme for Government and it is important that the Member set that out to the House.”
“However, I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate for a couple of reasons. The first is the importance of the issue. Let none of us have any doubt that we are talking about an issue that impinges on all our constituents and all our homes. Secondly, since coming on to the Economy Committee, I have found it to be a steep learning curve. I am trying to understand what some try to present as the complexities of the energy market but what others tell you are easily understood. Maybe the complexity is there because it suits some who believe that they can confound us with all the information. It has been a learning curve for me, and I want to understand for my constituents how we ensure that we deliver for them. That is vital.”
“We will not be accepting the motion, and I will quickly set out a reason. In fact, the Member confirmed for us why we should not. In his opening remarks, he was heading in the right direction when he talked about having an opportunity to ensure that we debate and discuss the issues. He welcomed the comments from the Minister yesterday, and it took him all of two minutes to get to the point at which he then said, "However". It was downhill from thereon. It was a blame game. It was a case of, "Our hands are clean. We've never done anything like that. We are completely faultless when it comes to these things. It is all the fault of the Minister and the Executive". Given the negativity of the motion, there is no way that we can come to the House and be able to support what is being said, and that is disappointing.”
“I thank the Minister for his reply. Will he give an assurance that small businesses, in particular those in the retail sector in my town of Ballymoney and in places like Ballycastle and Ballymena in my North Antrim constituency, that are deemed as retail will not be outside his definition of what retail is so that other sectors may benefit at their expense, hence their rates might increase? That would obviously be of grave concern.”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. Returning to his statement on rating policy earlier today, the Minister may be aware that the Northern Ireland centre for economic policy's conclusion in relation to the review of business rates was not supported by the evidence that was gathered from some 500 businesses, and they argued that the scheme should be retained and were against any attempt to restrict it.”
“Will the Member clarify for the House what he deems to be a sustainable number in a rural school, given that the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools (CCMS) has stated that a figure of 84 could be used, which is a four-teacher school? Does the Member agree with that, and is that how he would define a rural school?”
“I thank the Member for giving way and for mentioning Rathlin, which is in my constituency. So that the Member is well versed, I welcome the fact that Rathlin has increased its pupil intake to 10. It is making progress because the community sees it as its local school and because social housing has been delivered on the island. It is a good news story, and I thank the Member for giving support for Rathlin.”