Raymond McCartney
Foyle · Sinn Féin · Northern Ireland
“Comhghairdeas leis an Aire. I congratulate the Minister on what is, obviously, a very challenging portfolio. I welcome the statement. I welcome the speed with which you have met the unions and, hopefully, share your optimism that you have put on the table an offer that will see an end to the industrial action.”
“This is a classic case of, sometimes, a decision being made that, people think, is the right thing to do at one time that only pushes another challenge down the road. We need a commitment from the Minister to ensure that we have a mechanism in place to safeguard us against that.”
“The Minister has alluded to the fact that the Assembly is about to dissolve, and we will all go to the doors in the coming weeks. I commend the Minister. Certainly, when we go to the doors, many issues will be raised, and it will be good for us, as Assembly Members, to be able to say to people, "No water tax".”
“Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as na freagraí sin. I thank the Minister for his answers. We talked about the cost of division, but I ask him to talk about the reputational damage to the Assembly that has come about as a result of some disgraceful decisions that were blatantly discriminatory, sectarian in the truest sense of the word and pa…”
“That aside, it is fair to say that, over a long number of years, the expansion of the campus at Magee has been very much part of the politics of the north-west; indeed, Stephen Farry, in fairness, talked about it.”
“The university, in presenting that, gave all the pluses around that and said clearly that one of the things, particularly at postgraduate entry in medical schools and in other courses, from experiences elsewhere, is the idea of what they call the 20:20 rule — people stay within 20 miles of where they were educated for 20 years.”
The complete record
Every one of 553 lines we hold for Raymond McCartney, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 12.
“This is a classic case of, sometimes, a decision being made that, people think, is the right thing to do at one time that only pushes another challenge down the road. We need a commitment from the Minister to ensure that we have a mechanism in place to safeguard us against that.”
“Comhghairdeas leis an Aire. I congratulate the Minister on what is, obviously, a very challenging portfolio. I welcome the statement. I welcome the speed with which you have met the unions and, hopefully, share your optimism that you have put on the table an offer that will see an end to the industrial action. <BR /> <BR />A big part of your statement was the historical context of the dispute, but, as we go forward and, particularly, given your own portfolio and the fact that you have got the pledge from all parties to be supportive of you, critical to that is ensuring that we have some mechanism whereby we look at the long-term implications of decisions that are made in the here and now.”
“Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a ráiteas. I have heard the Minister's pledge this afternoon, but how can he ensure that there will be no political interference?”
“The Minister has alluded to the fact that the Assembly is about to dissolve, and we will all go to the doors in the coming weeks. I commend the Minister. Certainly, when we go to the doors, many issues will be raised, and it will be good for us, as Assembly Members, to be able to say to people, "No water tax". That was a guarantee given over many years and one that is being delivered yet again.”
“Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as na freagraí sin. I thank the Minister for his answers. We talked about the cost of division, but I ask him to talk about the reputational damage to the Assembly that has come about as a result of some disgraceful decisions that were blatantly discriminatory, sectarian in the truest sense of the word and partisan. What reputational damage have those decisions done to the Assembly?”
“Agus mo bhuíochas leis an Aire. I thank the Minister for her answers, in particular in response to Gary Middleton, when you said you were impressed about what is called the Derry model. Will you pledge your support for the Women's Aid One Safe Place project if you are contacted by the Minister for Communities or the Department of Finance?”
“I welcome the tone of the motion and the widespread support, give or take who was the first to say it. I will say it: Sinn Féin was the first.”
“<BR /> <BR />Another emphasis that has to put on this is that it sends a signal with the right case well presented by the university. We have seen recently a change in the direction and the leadership of the university. The university, for the first time, is starting to realise, that, if it sends out the right signal when it, along with the rest of us, talks about the expansion of the university and the need and desire for a medical school, it must present it in such a way that the case will be made. Stephen Farry alluded to some of the problems in the past around this. There will be no gaps and no holes, and that is why it is important.”
“The university, in presenting that, gave all the pluses around that and said clearly that one of the things, particularly at postgraduate entry in medical schools and in other courses, from experiences elsewhere, is the idea of what they call the 20:20 rule — people stay within 20 miles of where they were educated for 20 years. That is a big plus. If you add to that — people have already alluded to it — the fact that the Western Trust has a large bill for locums that is predicted to grow and with the focus and the emphasis being put on GPs, we can see how the business case will be improved by the fact that we will have postgraduate entry with a focus on general practice and filling that gap. That is how we should go forward with this.”
“It is, perhaps, easy to say that we need a medical school, but the university will ensure that it has a rigorous case that is well presented. As a party, we met and had the presentation from the university. Last Friday, at the Unity of Purpose meeting, Gary Middleton and Mark H Durkan also got a version of that presentation from Hugh McKenna. The intentions and the desire but also the solidity of the case are being well made. <BR /> <BR />The innovation around this is the idea that it will be a postgraduate-entry school.”
“It has to be acknowledged that the Minister for the Economy and the Minister of Health, who is obviously a party colleague, have also expressed their support for the medical school. You can place the medical school in that wider context, but, as an idea in its own right, it has its strengths. Therefore, on that alone, Ulster University has approached this in the right manner. It sees this as a project that will have to go through the rigour of business cases etc. The approach that it has taken, in particular the appointment of a full-time senior person in the university — Professor Hugh McKenna — to take it forward, is a good signal of its intent. It will not leave any gaps. This is not just some sort of concept.”
“That aside, it is fair to say that, over a long number of years, the expansion of the campus at Magee has been very much part of the politics of the north-west; indeed, Stephen Farry, in fairness, talked about it. We all know the need for the expansion not just in the numbers of courses and students but in ways that will add to the strength of the university and wider. Obviously, that is in conjunction with the development of the A5 and the A6 and all other aspects. For us, it is about trying to address decades of uneven development. I acknowledge the fact that even Steve Aiken acknowledged the need for the development of the A6. <BR /> <BR />For representatives for Foyle and the north-west it is good to see that people are starting to see this and support it, and, hopefully, we will see some movement forward.”
“I support the motion. I think that, right across the Assembly this morning, everybody is in support of the motion, notwithstanding that there are some issues about who was the first to propose this. They say that success has many mothers and fathers; we might need an expansion of the maternity ward in Altnagelvin hospital to cater for everybody who is going to claim success.”
“Perhaps when they are considering that, the Opposition will allow us more than an hour to discuss such a topic.”
“On a point of order, Principal Deputy Speaker. Perhaps when the Speaker is reviewing the ruling, he will note that two former Ministers spoke here today. Perhaps we can have some record of when they were accused of not answering questions at Question Time.”
“I represent a constituency where there are a number of these projects doing valuable work on the ground. Can the Minister confirm that many of these projects have now moved into delivery phase? Will he take the opportunity today to reassure them, despite some of the claims and suggestions being made, particularly by people who call themselves the Opposition, that none of these projects will be halted? Indeed, they will create more photo opportunities for members of the Opposition in the future.”
“The complexity of what we are dealing with cannot be overstated. In the last Question Time, I mentioned the assessment of prisoners as they came in, particularly to Maghaberry, and whether it was effective enough. Also, on resources and the use of resources, the Anne Owers prison review team was very specific that better deployment of resources could be brought into place with the three mini-prisons in Maghaberry. I have stated that I think that that proposal has been, at best, ignored and that there is a degree of resistance to it. Will the Minister revisit it? Perhaps it will allow her some resource as she goes forward.”
“Mo bhuíochas leis an Aire as an fhreagra sin. I thank the Minister for his answer. While he waits to have that discussion with the Minister of Health, are there any actions that he could take to help reduce the waiting times, even in the short term?”
“Has the Minister anything in mind subsequent to this investigation — perhaps a review of the processes of committal?”
“I urge people not to divide on this issue. Support the motion, support our amendment and do not divide.”
“We will certainly come at it from different perspectives, but the victims and people seeking truth and justice are entitled to mechanisms that deliver it. None of us should put any obstacles in the way of allowing that to happen. In our opinion, the British Government have tried to do that, and Eamonn McCann outlined some of the issues with regard to the sort of cover-all of British national security interests.”
“That is not to say that many victims' groups do not have criticisms, but I think that, in the main, they believe that the framework sent a clear signal that we are going in the right direction. That is the approach that we should take. <BR /> <BR />Of course, there are principles on which all this will be founded. It has to be independent. There should be no room for partisanship or for it to serve narrow self-interests, including those of the state, armed groups and political parties, and even, as someone said, economic interests. That is how it should be taken forward. It should be victim-centred. People might have different definitions of what that means, but equality should be at its core. Sometimes people hear about the idea of rewriting the past. There can be no rewriting of the past. History is there for us all to examine.”
“However, we have all seen over recent times, particularly with the Stormont House Agreement and the Fresh Start Agreement, that people have different ideas. We all have to come together to provide a framework in which we can face up to the challenges that, undoubtedly, there will be while having the victims foremost in our minds. Paul Frew is right: there is no single voice from or approach taken by all victims or victims' groups. However, I think that all of them would urge us to ensure that we come up with a process from which as many of them as possible get truth and justice. The Fresh Start Agreement and the Stormont House Agreement laid the framework in which that could happen.”
“Unfortunately, near the end, we heard the politics of division, which is not in the best interests of victims, no matter how people want to define them. Interestingly, in one part of today's proceedings, Members talked about no one being beyond the law, but other Members started to believe that the people whom they represent, whether they are the good guys, the bad guys or however you refer to them, can step outside the law. That is not how we should approach this. The motion is well grounded and well centred in its approach. <BR /> <BR />Gerry Kelly outlined our position. We have argued, as far back as Eames/Bradley, that perhaps the best way to approach this would have been an independent international truth commission.”
“I regret that Mike Nesbitt and Doug Beattie do not get the reasons why we put in the amendment. It was not in any way to try to postpone anything; we are trying to ensure that, after the British Government fulfil their responsibilities, there should be consultation, not the other way round. <BR /> <BR />Paul Frew proposed the DUP amendment. I think that he accepted that there was nothing in the SDLP motion that he disagreed with, although he certainly had issues and reservations. My appeal is that we should not allow the House to divide on minor issues that have been outlined today. We should all be focused on trying to address the issues on behalf of what people call victims and survivors.”
“In the main, it was a fairly even-tempered debate; there was even a moderate approach to the issue. I think that most Members who spoke addressed the core issue. However, it was unfortunate that, near the end, after Jim Allister spooked the horses, we had a return to the rhetoric of the past, which served no purpose in trying to address something that is very difficult. It is an issue that has focused the minds of most of us on trying to come up with a resolution to deal with what people broadly call the legacy of the past. <BR /> <BR />We welcome the fact that Alex Attwood accepted our amendment in the spirit in which it was made, which was to try to strengthen the motion. It is a fairly reflective motion; I think that most Members accept that it is well grounded and well intended.”
“Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire. I thank the Minister for his answer and add my gratitude, particularly from the people in Derry, for the good work carried out by many individuals and organisations in welcoming refugees. Can the Minister give an update on how the complex needs of many refugees are being addressed on an ongoing basis?”
“Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire. I thank the Minister for her decision. I have to say that I was a bit surprised that a wider impact assessment was not carried out on the previous decision. That aside, one of the features of the review was the underuse of courthouses, so a strategy has to be put in place so that they are used more in the future. What are the Minister's views of what that might entail? As part of the previous process, the decision to close Strabane would have meant more business in Omagh. It was obvious that there were disability access issues in Omagh that the previous Minister said would be addressed. I hope that addressing disability access will still be on your agenda.”
“That was supported at the time by the Minister and, indeed, in broad terms across the Assembly. I heard no objections at the Justice Committee or at the debate in the Assembly saying that that was the wrong thing to do. It was not called a "flawed decision" then. I think what we are seeing here is that, as opportunities now arise with this new world of the Opposition, they have to find things that, in my opinion, divide people when it is not necessary. The review will examine all the issues, as it should, but I will say this, and I will say it with confidence: if you talk privately to prison managers, you will find they will tell you that forced integration in Maghaberry will ensure the next report from the CJI will be worse than the reports we have had to date.”
“Thank you very much. They are not forced to live there; they do it by choice. Anybody who has looked at rehabilitation knows that you cannot force people into a rehabilitation process; it has to be a process where the prisoner volunteers and works with the prison staff to get the outcome of rehabilitation so that when they go back out they will be better people. If people choose to opt out of that, you cannot force them into rehabilitation either. Your point reinforces the point I am making, which is that the independent review is the place to bring all these issues. <BR /> <BR />Where the Alliance Party is concerned, in 2011 Anne Owers explicitly said that Maghaberry should be separated into three mini-prisons, with one to house that particular group of prisoners.”
“If Maghaberry is difficult to manage in the current circumstances, how much more difficult would it be to manage if we took the decision to support a motion on forcing prisoners to integrate? Show me a prison system in a similar circumstance anywhere in the world where the governance of a prison is designed so that people are forced to integrate. I can tell you that it has not worked and will not work. That is why we tabled an amendment. When there is an independent review, we will bring that to it.”
“That is what is at the core of the separated regime in Maghaberry. In my opinion, that was recognised by the John Steele report in 2003. Forced integration does not work. Indeed, it makes prisons very difficult to manage. <BR /> <BR />Look at it in the context of Maghaberry: the Anne Owers report in 2011 said very clearly that it was a difficult prison to manage, and each and every single CJI report reinforces that position. We should consider that when trying to steer a way out the last report of the CJI. People have their own interpretations of that. There was a quote from one of the inspectors and that was if it carried, but I think that all of us would agree that where Maghaberry found itself in the last report is not where it should be. Imagine implanting into that a decision that would force prisoners to integrate.”
“<BR /> <BR />I echo the remarks made by Declan Kearney and Eamonn McCann about Tony Taylor. In the middle of this, there are prisoners who have not received due process. We have to come at the arguments or discussions on whether prisoners are the same and should be treated the same with that in mind. There is no doubt that, at the heart of this, there are political perspectives, and people have views of how prisoners should be treated. What people should bring to the independent review is the issue of good governance. Whatever your view of the prisoners and the impact of particular individuals inside and outside a prison, bring good governance to the discussion. My opinion, based on years of experience and talking to prison managers in recent times, is that forced integration as a policy does not work.”
“I will speak in support of the amendment and in opposition to the motion tabled in the names of the Ulster Unionists. Central to our amendment is that there is already an independent review in place. The place to take the points outlined today is the independent review, where all of us can inform whatever decisions will be made. We will bring to that review, when it is in place, the same logic that we brought in 2003, when there was a resolution in August 2010 and to the Anne Owers prison reform report in 2011. Everyone should do that when having this discussion. The Ulster Unionists, in my opinion, have tried to predetermine the outcome of the review. Let us have the review, and let everybody have their input. The points can be made to that review, and then let the review determine what is the best way forward.”
“We will be tested on what we say. It is very important for the SDLP and the Ulster Unionists to learn this about opposition. They remind me of the story of the person who grafted a hump onto a horse, called it a camel and expected everybody else to believe it was a camel. When you bring a motion to the House, it will be tested and scrutinised, and you will be reminded of what you have said in the past. We will certainly call your camel a horse because it is a horse.”
“However, he went on to say that there was also a great need in North Belfast, West Belfast and in his and my constituency of Derry. There once was ring-fencing for social housing in those three areas because of the need, which was well-identified. Fra McCann pointed out that many people thought that it was the sensible approach; where there was great need, to go after it. That scheme was brought to an end by the SDLP, initiated by Margaret Ritchie and then processed through by Alex Attwood. In case Colum feels left out, he was the undersecretary at the time. <BR /> <BR />For us, it is a very clear statement. We are part of the Programme for Government. In our manifesto, we set a minimum of 10,000 social homes, and that is what we will be tested on. That is what setting outcomes in the Programme for Government will do.”
“The SDLP held the housing portfolio so, with the benefit of the inside track, so to speak, you would think that its figure would be worth noting. But when you look at its Assembly manifesto, you see that there was no real figure, no approximation. There was a vague, indeed, clever reference to the regional development strategy. It talked about the need to increase provision but there was no reference and no baseline. Now, in October 2016, there is a very precise figure. This world of opposition is a very wonderful place. <BR /> <BR />Nichola Mallon talked about the great need in North Belfast, and Colum Eastwood is to be congratulated for perhaps the most impromptu speech he ever had to make. To have your name down for a motion and then say that you did not know you were going to be called to speak is some admission in itself.”
“We are not sure whether the motion is an SDLP motion or an Opposition motion, given the earlier point of order, but we are now told that in a lesser timescale they want to build more houses than was stated in their target in May and we are provided with no explanation. The only thing that has changed is that they are now in opposition and think they can say whatever they want and it sounds good.”
“So, even today, the motion states that by 2021 there should be 11,700 new homes — 8,800 social homes and 2,900 affordable homes. We received no explanation or rationale as to why the proposers came to those particular figures. I suppose the secret lies in what they have recently said. <BR /> <BR />In their May 2016 election manifesto, just a few short months ago, the Ulster Unionists talked about the need to build 10,000 new social homes by 2021. There is no reference as to how they got that figure, but it is premised on a waiting list of 44,000. Today's motion states that the number on the waiting list is lower than that.”
“I do not get an extra minute, so the answer is no. <BR /> <BR />However, the reality is that, no matter how hard they try or no matter how many times they say it, other people will remind them of the positions they have taken on particular issues.”
“We will not be supporting the motion. Having listened to the Minister's contribution this morning, which we welcome, and to the contributions from the DUP, we will be supporting its amendment and not calling a division on our amendment. <BR /> <BR />One of the striking aspects of the motion is that you get a sense from the SDLP and the Ulster Unionists that they somehow believed that, once they opted for Opposition, all that went before did not exist. It is as if there was no time before a certain date. For them, day 1, year zero was sometime in June 2016.”
“Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as an fhreagra sin. Will the Minister provide an update on his plans to tax derelict land?”
“Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a freagra. I thank the Minister for her answer. I welcome this initiative and the positivity that surrounds it. Can the Minister outline what other investment there will be in general practice alongside this initiative?”
“You did it on a number of occasions on prisons, particularly Maghaberry. That was published before —”
“That is wrong. On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I was on the Business Committee when that went through. Sinn Féin voted that the smaller parties would have speaking rights, so Mr Attwood should be asked to withdraw. He is being economical with the truth.”
“We have to see the current legislation brought to the fore. We must see an awareness campaign. Belfast City Council and Derry City and Strabane District Council have given great publicity to quads and off-road vehicles. In my opinion, the review will assist the process. Alex Attwood said that, in his opinion, there may be a need for some legislation. He talked about the experience of Kent. Those instances need to be brought to the attention of the Department and the Minister so that, when we act, we do so to assist the process. However, we also have to concede that there is enough legislation in place, so long as there is good cooperation and enforcement of it to protect us.”
“It can be around Christmas time, when parents may think that it is not a bad thing to buy a child a small quad or scrambler, but if it is not taxed and registered and if the child is not given the proper equipment in the proper circumstances, parents are leading them into danger or into a situation in which they could get a criminal conviction or worse.”
“I do not want to say that it is all younger people because I have seen people in my area and they are certainly not children.”
“The PSNI did a presentation and talked about how it had seized a number of scramblers and quad bikes, and people at the meeting asked on what basis it was able to do that because people were working from the perception that, first, it had to be reported and then the PSNI would have to catch the person on the scrambler for it to be seized. The officers involved in the meeting said that they went to the house and the person could not prove that they owned it, they could not produce insurance or tax, and the vehicle was seized. That is the type of thing that we need to see happening. That is a relationship between the community and the PSNI. It can be seasonal. Sometimes, it can be in the summer when younger people are off school.”
“Responsibilities are put on owners of vehicles to ensure that when they sell a vehicle on they have a responsibility to inform the DVA as to who the next owner is. We need to look at those issues, and, when we look at the legislation and seek from the PSNI how it enforces it, the review of the legislation will be better informed. Sometimes, there is enough legislation in place; it is about enforcement, awareness and a relationship between the PSNI and the community. <BR /> <BR />In recent times, there was a spate of car crime, and a combination of stolen vehicles or runarounds caused great nuisance in some estates in Derry. I was involved in a meeting with the local PSNI and the community safety partnership, and many of these issues came out.”