Stephen Farry
North Down · Alliance Party · Northern Ireland
“Speaking for a party that has a longer pedigree in advocating a public inquiry than both the DUP and Sinn Féin, I nonetheless welcome this announcement, despite the torturous path that we have had and, indeed, the missed opportunities.”
“The first was a reform of the petition of concern to take it back to the original intent when it was designed in 1998. It was clear at that stage that Arlene Foster banged the table and said, "No, never. We are not doing that. That is a way whereby we are going to have to fold on equal marriage: it's not happening".”
“<BR /> <BR />The main points that I make concern the substance of the order. There are probably three aspects that the Minister needs to address properly before the Assembly, and they really relate to what other options he has.”
“That raises the question of why they want to go as far as 2022, especially when I am not sure — I would welcome any clarification to the contrary on it — that there has been formal Executive approval of this.”
“<BR /> <BR />There are three major substantive issues that I do not believe have been properly aired on this: VAT; European Commission infraction proceedings; and, most important, the opportunity foregone to revisit the classification of Northern Ireland Water and the ability, through a separate water charge, to allow it to borrow commerc…”
“While my party was supportive of the Good Friday Agreement back in 1998, at that time, we expressed some reservations around the very detailed nature of the proposals and how those could, in due course, destabilise Northern Ireland and prevent us from realising our full potential. We have been very much vindicated in that analysis.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,504 lines we hold for Stephen Farry, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 51.
“It is important that we capture the actions of individuals beyond their strict roles as Ministers and advisers, be it a party political role or a party consultation role, in the actions being taken.”
“Speaking for a party that has a longer pedigree in advocating a public inquiry than both the DUP and Sinn Féin, I nonetheless welcome this announcement, despite the torturous path that we have had and, indeed, the missed opportunities. Does the Minister believe that 1(b) of the terms of reference is sufficiently robust and comprehensive to cover, in essence, the interface between government and political parties, namely the DUP, in particular, given that a lot of the narrative around this controversy over the past number of weeks has involved characterisations that probably go beyond what you would associate with the normal process of government?”
“— and interferes with people's scope to have open, mixed and multiple identities, and it puts people back in their single identities, which goes against the whole spirit of what we are trying to achieve under the Good Friday Agreement.”
“If they are serious about addressing equality issues, albeit belatedly — I draw their attention to the fact that there has been virtually no progress on equality issues under devolution over the past 10 years — they have to be serious about the reform of structures and not just make demands as to what they seek to do. <BR /> <BR />In closing, I want to make a point about Brexit. We heard a comment that Brexit in itself does not challenge the formal structures of the Good Friday Agreement. In a way, that is correct, if you take it in the extreme, literal sense, but it does challenge the underlying assumptions that empower the Good Friday Agreement whereby people can move freely on a North/South and east-west basis. Brexit creates barriers —”
“The first was a reform of the petition of concern to take it back to the original intent when it was designed in 1998. It was clear at that stage that Arlene Foster banged the table and said, "No, never. We are not doing that. That is a way whereby we are going to have to fold on equal marriage: it's not happening". <BR /> <BR />At the same time, Sinn Féin was also very clear that it was not for budging on the petition of concern. There is this notion that Sinn Féin is seeking to force through equality issues through talks process after talks process. The far better way is to ensure that we are able to address equality and human rights issues on an ongoing basis through the provision of a natural process of deliberation and building sufficient consensus, where there is not the risk of a veto being used inappropriately.”
“It is worth referencing three particular aspects in this regard: the fact that we have mutual vetoes in the Executive; the fact that we have the petition of concern; and the fact that we have institutionalised sectarianism most clearly demonstrated through the use of designations in the Assembly but also permeating through some wider aspects of our public policy and an inability to address that. <BR /> <BR />I have to say to Sinn Féin, which is making a great play about its demand for equality now, that it is stressing the term "now" because it has passed up opportunities to address equality issues in the past. We have made much of the fact that, when we were offered the opportunity to take on the Justice portfolio back in May 2016, we had what we viewed as five reasonable demands.”
“In practice, what we have had in many of our attempts at power-sharing is more of a power carve-up, where we have an almost transactional approach towards the Executive rather than a genuine partnership where we are looking to a common vision of Northern Ireland and moving ahead in a coherent manner. <BR /> <BR />The structures matter. If designed correctly, they can further incentivise cooperation, but, when they are drawn incorrectly, they can disincentivise cooperation or, indeed, provide blockages.”
“While my party was supportive of the Good Friday Agreement back in 1998, at that time, we expressed some reservations around the very detailed nature of the proposals and how those could, in due course, destabilise Northern Ireland and prevent us from realising our full potential. We have been very much vindicated in that analysis. However, even if you dispute that particular point, looking back almost 20 years to the Good Friday Agreement, it is clear that our structures have been holding us back in more recent times and that there is a need for some degree of change. <BR /> <BR />I concur with the remarks made by both Mike Nesbitt and Gerry Kelly that, ultimately, power-sharing can only work if there is trust, mutual respect and partnership between those who are attempting to share power.”
“It is clear that we are going to have a talks process after the election. That needs to be both an intensive and very focused process in which we need to address a range of very difficult and challenging issues and, indeed, to look at some of the structures that have been holding us back over the past number of years. I am glad that the motion refers to the values and principles of the Good Friday Agreement, because I think that it is important that we recognise that those are very durable. They are something that we should constantly remind ourselves of and return to on a regular basis, particularly at times of political difficulty. <BR /> <BR />It is important that we make that distinction between the values and principles and the specific structures.”
“However, that is at odds with giving an extension through to 2022, which, essentially, means maintaining the status quo for another five or six years and forgoes the opportunity to have that wider review of governance, which, I stress, if done properly, could bring in tens of millions of pounds every year beyond what we currently have to allow us to invest in our infrastructure.”
“The Member will be aware that all the points I just read out were, essentially, in our Assembly manifesto last year. Indeed, I answered the questions around that in quite considerable detail on 'The Stephen Nolan Show'. I do not want to bring back memories to the Minister of 'The Stephen Nolan Show' on elections. <BR /> <BR />While I have the Floor, I just want to clarify something with the Minister. He is saying two different things. He is saying that he appreciates that there is a need to look at the issue of governance, and, if that is the case, I would accept him perhaps extending the current subsidy to NI Water for a year or two years while he or his successor conducts a review around governance.”
“The Finance Minister was here previously, and he in particular has made great play of his willingness to be creative and to push all the boundaries to make the best use of the resources available to the Northern Ireland Executive. Particularly in these straitened times when we have to squeeze out the maximum efficiency from every pound and every penny, I am slightly confused and bewildered about why, for superficial political reasons, we are not prepared to be a little more creative and innovative about how we manage our money.”
“<BR /> <BR />There are three major substantive issues that I do not believe have been properly aired on this: VAT; European Commission infraction proceedings; and, most important, the opportunity foregone to revisit the classification of Northern Ireland Water and the ability, through a separate water charge, to allow it to borrow commercially and therefore have a much greater resource that can be reinvested in improving our infrastructure. In making those three points, I re-emphasise that all of that can be done without our having to incur any additional revenue in net terms from households. It can be done by shifting the same buck that we raise through the regional rate but instead raising that buck through a water charge. In essence, we get a bigger bang for our buck if we are prepared to be creative.”
“Leaving aside the opportunity that flows from a potential reclassification of how we raise the same amount of money, there are also issues that the Minister needs to address around the approach that we take to VAT treatment, which may leave us open to tens of millions of pounds of additional charges to the block grant from HMRC. I appreciate that we are on schedule to leave the European Union, but, like the Minister, I am determined that we should do our best to remain and seek some form of special status. However, there is a running risk of infraction proceedings to Northern Ireland from our failure to adopt a different approach to how people pay for water.”
“If people want to go out and make a big fuss about what we are doing about renewable heat and cracking down on corruption and the waste of resources, they need to be consistent about that and look at something that stands right before us.”
“Therefore, we get a sense that, on the one hand, this is a big deal for housing associations in that it is important that people who are trying to a do a public good by building houses should have the maximum ability to borrow money but that, on the other hand, for Northern Ireland Water, for the political reason that water charges are a massive taboo that no one is prepared to take on, we are forgoing the ability to look at the governance issue around Northern Ireland Water and allow it the ability to borrow commercially. <BR /> <BR />Potentially, we have an opportunity cost in resource per annum that is on a much greater scale than the current liability from the overcommitment from the renewable heat incentive scheme. That is to put that point into context.”
“<BR /> <BR />The approach that the Minister has taken — it builds on what has happened previously — of treating Northern Ireland Water as essentially a non-departmental public body stands in contrast to the concern that has rightly been voiced about the potential reclassification of housing associations by the Office for National Statistics and the consequence that will flow from that in terms of their restricted ability to borrow.”
“In turn, that would open up the potential for further investment in our infrastructure at no further revenue cost to the Northern Ireland block grant. I fear therefore that we are forgoing a major opportunity to bring in additional resource to invest in our crumbling water and sewerage infrastructure across Northern Ireland. We are conscious that, in Belfast, there is a major issue with the sustainability of the infrastructure — something that may inhibit our ability to attract inward investment in coming years.”
“<BR /> <BR />The main points that I make concern the substance of the order. There are probably three aspects that the Minister needs to address properly before the Assembly, and they really relate to what other options he has. Great play has been made that we do not want to pass on additional domestic charges to people and we do not want them to pay water charges per se. It may well be that we do not want to raise any additional revenue from people, but, if we were simply to shift resource that we currently raise through the regional rate and instead raise that through a water charge entirely on a revenue-neutral basis and if that were linked to a change in the governance nature of NI Water, it would have the capacity, based on the collection of a water charge, to move onto a stronger footing to borrow commercially.”
“That raises the question of why they want to go as far as 2022, especially when I am not sure — I would welcome any clarification to the contrary on it — that there has been formal Executive approval of this. Certainly, this commitment has been made ahead of the formal agreement of never mind a one-year Budget but what should be a three- or four-year Budget on the part of the Executive. The Minister is potentially making a long-term financial commitment on how resources are to be used by the Executive. It may well be that most parties are perfectly comfortable with that, but there are consequences that flow from it. There is also the issue of the extent to which the Minister has the capacity to bind future Assemblies — I stress that I mean multiple Assemblies — given the potential risk of elections into the future.”
“It is a shame that this debate is coming quite late in the evening after the renewable heat initiative, because the consequences of the decisions that the Assembly takes this evening may be as deep and far-reaching as the need to have mitigation measures for RHI; indeed, they may go further. <BR /> <BR />This is being presented as a good news story by Sinn Féin, which is keen to get the order rushed through ahead of an election campaign. I fear, however, that they are not fully thinking this through and are making a commitment that may not stand up to wider scrutiny or be a wise one to make. I will make a number of points in that regard. First, Sinn Féin claims that it is trying to give certainty over water charges.”
“Therefore, he is in danger of overstating the prospects of this becoming zero on the basis of the factors that he is suggesting, and that is at odds with the caution that his officials gave to the Committee last week.”
“I am grateful to the Minister for giving way. I will park making a flippant comment about the difference between "zero" and "effectively zero", but will the Minister recognise that the comment that he is making is highly speculative and is, in fact, at odds with the evidence that his officials gave to the Committee last week, when they were very clear in saying that the figures presented did not take it down to zero and there would be a residual £2 million to £3 million and, indeed, that they were presenting a model and, in practice, there is a margin of error in that model that could go either way by quite a considerable margin? That is what they stated at the time.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I invite the Member to concur with me to the House that, under scrutiny by the Committee, the permanent secretary has suggested that potentially the more favourable approach in the long term, subject to public consultation, may be the run-on of the current approach. Again, that raises the question of why it did not come forward sooner, but I invite the Member to recognise that there is a view amongst departmental officials at this stage that this may be the preferred approach, subject to consultation ratifying that over the next 12 months.”
“I hope that it is the case that they reflect on what is said. Perhaps they could have a more flexible approach or forgo enforcement, pending some wider discussions about better use, which should take place in conjunction with local representatives, including not just MLAs but the local council.”
“At the same time, throughout the residential parts of the town — I am sure that this is reflected in other parts of Northern Ireland — there is huge frustration at the state of the pavements, some of which are overgrown with weeds, where paving stones are still broken, and where there are health and safety hazards. There is frustration because we have had a lot of investment in the town in the look of the street infrastructure, but that has not been matched elsewhere. That has an impact on people's quality of life. <BR /> <BR />In closing, I encourage, at the very least, Departmental officials, who, hopefully, will read the transcript of today's debate, to reflect on Members' comments. If the decisions are, essentially, operational, perhaps they could action them without the direct input of a Minister.”
“Otherwise, you have empty space that is not being properly utilised to allow a free-flowing exchange of vehicles, which, in turn, would provide much needed custom for town-centre businesses. We have, in essence, a lack of flexibility and a lack of understanding of local circumstances. <BR /> <BR />The public realm process, of which that was part, was welcomed by local businesses and other stakeholders. However, I hear comments about it not having brought further regeneration benefits to the town because, for other reasons and factors, that regeneration has not moved to the next step.”
“In that regard, I urge Mr Dunne and Mr Easton to encourage their colleague, the outgoing Minister for Communities, to rethink his position on regeneration powers, because the withholding of those from councils is an example of taking things in a direction that was not planned and it makes things more difficult down the line for that direction of travel. <BR /> <BR />Parking as a whole is at a premium in Bangor town centre, as is undoubtedly the case in many other locations. We have, in effect, a disproportionate impact of the creation of the loading bays, which are not being used for the purpose intended, not least when lorries continue to double-park. Even if they were to be used by lorries for loading, that would be for only a fraction of the day.”
“<BR /> <BR />This issue shows the difficulties that we have sometimes with large Departments understanding the very subtle circumstances that pertain on the ground in how decisions are implemented and operationalised and their lack of flexibility in acknowledging or responding when things are not perhaps working clearly. That is probably an argument for seeking to consolidate a lot of the very basic powers that exist at local government level, especially when we have the opportunity for joined-up thinking on the knock-on implications of a particular intervention — say, car parking — or other aspects of what is happening in the commercial life of a town.”
“While, technically, we can point to the Highway Code and legislation, I am not sure that average motorists, especially those who passed their test a long time ago, fully understand the subtle differences between one type of parking bay and another or between what is a loading bay and what is not. There is very little indication in the signage, for example, to warn people of the changed circumstances. <BR /> <BR />That said, I do not think that this is a massive Sinn Féin plot against Bangor or north Down. However, I certainly put on record my disappointment that the Minister is not here to listen to the debate. I am somewhat confused as to what Sinn Féin's position is vis-à-vis the Assembly at this stage. Its Ministers say that they are carrying on with their duties, but, at times, the evidence of that is patchy, to say the least.”
“I thank Mr Easton for securing the Adjournment debate. I declare at the outset that a close family member unfortunately received a penalty notice for parking in one of the bays. <BR /> <BR />Just to pick up on Mr Chambers's points, I do not think that this would have entered into public consciousness, even during the formal consultation process. At the best of times, it is difficult to get people to engage. People who are assumed to be most overtly affected tend to respond, but most of the motorists who fall into this category would not have been aware of this. They would have seen a location where they parked previously and assumed that they could continue to park there, without understanding the changes in the rules and regulations.”
“<BR /> <BR />There are consequences of us seeing government being driven over a cliff edge by Sinn Féin and the DUP. Let us not argue about who exactly is to blame; the fact is that government is going over a cliff edge because of the collective failure of those in positions of authority. We are going to see real pain for the people of Northern Ireland over the coming months.”
“However, we will have a situation where district councils are uncertain of exactly what is going to be coming their way. We will see a situation where there will be additional administrative costs in terms of Land and Property Services trying to implement this. We will also see a situation where we have greater levels of default in people's rates payments. That default could amount to many tens of millions, if not more. We are not talking about something on the margins or something that we can gently finesse; these are all things that have major financial consequences for Northern Ireland. They are not numbers on a piece of paper; they are a reference to resources that make a difference to people's lives. They allow us to improve the social and economic well-being of this society and to improve the stock of all our people.”
“<BR /> <BR />We have proposed the amendment around the regional rate because it is important that we focus on a particular aspect of how the legislation is framed. We have a situation where the ability of the permanent secretary of DOF to set a Budget relates to only the consolidated fund — the block grant. It does not relate to what are termed in legislation as accruing resources, which is other income that comes in to government coffers. There may be some ambiguity around some aspects of that, but aspects such as the regional rate do not count as part of what is in the purview of the permanent secretary of DOF. People are saying, "Well, we can defer the raising of the rates until as far as June or July. Let's not worry about that; sure we can catch up on ourselves and everything will be fine".”
“Cuts will have to be made because accounting officers will be very loath to make any new discretionary spending commitments without certainty as to what their budget will be in the context of the position in July, whether it is a 100% or 95% budget. Even if we strike a 100% Budget some time in July, the next financial year will still be a train wreck because we have not taken a strategic approach to the Budget. Things will go missing in that regard. Important decision-making that should be happening at this point in time, around, for example, the health service, is not going to be taken forward. My colleague Paula Bradshaw will focus on that in particular detail. There are many other examples across government as well.”
“Most Departments have information about their budget for the incoming financial year months in advance. They then make their own internal allocations. They think carefully about how to make the best use of their resources before indicating to arm's-length bodies and, in particular, the community and voluntary sector what budgets they will have. In this way, things can be done as efficiently and effectively as possible. In the context of a declining Budget, it is incumbent on all of us to make sure that every penny is used to best advantage. <BR /> <BR />Instead, we will have a situation where people will be placed on protective notice, particularly when organisations do not have certainty over their budgets and there is no existing contractual relationship with government.”
“Departments will have a wee bit of cash, and things can roll on until we get our act together. Let us work on the assumption that Departments will function essentially from a standing start. That is not how things work in the real world. In reality, there has to be a lead-in process. Normally, we would be setting our Budget and the Executive would agree a Budget statement setting out the full amounts during the course of the full financial year. Indeed, some people would argue that there should be a three-year Budget rather than a one-year Budget so that we can have some proper strategic planning. Instead, we have nothing. <BR /> <BR />Flowing from that are the first Budget Bill and then the second Budget Bill, which give Departments legislative authority to spend money in that regard.”
“We had to make sure, for example, that the Budget was passed and that Budget legislation was moved through the Assembly accordingly. In the political crisis that is now before us, we are essentially pushing governance over a cliff edge. That would be bad in any context, but it is particularly bad in the context of where we are in the Budget cycle. <BR /> <BR />I have to say that there is a lot of complacency coming across from those who were formally in charge and, indeed, from the UK Government about how we can make do over the next number of weeks. Reference has been made to the fact that there is the potential under section 59 of the Northern Ireland Act for the permanent secretary to strike a Budget three days before the end of the financial year. So, we will all be saved magically.”
“<BR /> <BR />There is an even more immediate issue that we have to look to, beyond what we could be doing to realise the opportunities, and it is the issue of keeping the lights on. Elections are normally planned. We move into them in a reasonably organised way; there is an orderly winding-down of business. Let us throw our minds back some months, when we were conscious that there would be a break in the Assembly. We were rushing through a whole host of legislation, because we did not want to lose a lot of the work that had been built up in Departments. It may be that it could have been done in a more organised way than it was; nevertheless, people recognised that there was a need to get these things over the line.”
“Indeed. I will come to that in a moment. The implications across public services of not having a Budget will be most acute in the area of health where we were expecting the most significant amount of change if things had been done correctly. <BR /> <BR />Mr Nesbitt made the point in relation to Brexit, and I will not labour it. There is an irony that we are meeting today, in the dog days of the Assembly, in the context where we have had a major speech from the UK Prime Minister and where, as stated, we have no meaningful plan from our Executive. It is worth noting that our counterparts in Scotland and Wales are meeting today to discuss the Prime Minister's statement and advance their plans to mitigate the impact on their respective jurisdictions.”
“That may well be the case, but there are rules, under the purdah arrangements, as to what can and cannot be done during an election campaign. I am not sure that the penny has dropped.”
“<BR /> <BR />Today, however, we meet in the context of what will now be missed opportunities to put Northern Ireland forward. An opportunity delayed may well be an opportunity missed. At a strategic level, we will not now have for quite some time a Programme for Government, an economic strategy, a social strategy, an investment strategy or a Budget — five key strategic documents that you would expect any meaningful Government to have. That is before you think through each of the individual Departments and all the various strategies and initiatives that will now go on hold. While Ministers will remain in office until the election, there seems to be a slight misunderstanding about their position, particularly the Health Minister, who said that she will make announcements and will be at her desk right through to the election.”
“Instead, we have had dysfunction, which has been characterised by bickering and political instability, and it has led to the situation today in which the institutions are seriously imperilled. There have been missed opportunities and things that we could have been doing to improve people's lives; there has been deadlock on a whole host of key issues, as manifested in mutual vetoes and the use of the petition of concern; and, particularly over the past number of months, increased problems around accountability, lack of transparency and, indeed, corruption and cronyism. You almost have the impression at times that devolution, under the current model, is about carve-up and spoils for particular communities rather than about working in a coherent, cohesive way on behalf of the community as a whole.”
“More generally, if we look across at what is happening in Scotland and Wales, we see that devolution is the norm within these islands, and Northern Ireland should be no different in that regard. <BR /> <BR />Power-sharing and devolution can work, but we have to recognise that, so far, it has not been working, particularly under the stewardship of the DUP and Sinn Féin. Ultimately, for power-sharing to work, it is about more than simply the right institutional design. We can, for sure, make improvements in that regard, but, ultimately, it has to be based upon trust, partnership and mutual respect. Very clearly, we do not have that in any sense whatsoever.”
“I support the motion. I will come to the specifics of the amendment shortly. Hopefully, it adds a specific and very pertinent example to the broad thrust of the motion. <BR /> <BR />The motion is about the failure of the Executive. In exploring that, first, we have to look back. However, in doing so, we must recognise that power-sharing and devolution are important concepts for Northern Ireland and that we should value and cherish them. They are, first, about providing a forum in which we can have reconciliation and bring the different traditions in Northern Ireland together in government. That is a very particular aspect of our situation in Northern Ireland.”
“Just briefly on that point, does the Member recognise that there is no such concept as a rogue SpAd? Even if a SpAd is acting unilaterally, by definition they owe their appointment solely to the Minister and the Minister is fully accountable for everything the SpAd does.”
“I am grateful to the Member for giving way. Does he recognise, as a former Minister, that special advisers have no authority within the government system? They act solely on the direction of their Ministers, and, if they are acting independently without that authority, the Minister is still nevertheless accountable for those actions.”
“The Member just said that is something that people must not underestimate. Does he accept that his party has underestimated the public anger about it over the past month? The frustration today is that the parties here are calling for and endorsing a public inquiry. If his party had acted much sooner, at the beginning of December, acknowledged and recognised the problems and, at that stage, put a public inquiry in place, we would not be in this mess.”
“— and, indeed, special advisers being named. Everything a special adviser does is in the name of a Minister. It is important that that is fully understood and that we have proper collaboration, as we practised in government, between a Minister's advisers and civil servants.”
“I say that with a degree of reservation, but I am slightly concerned whenever we see civil servants' names being quoted as part of political debates and documents being selectively briefed to the media, including references to civil servants, to back up political points. It is something that may come back to haunt us, and it is important across these islands that we preserve the impartiality of the Civil Service irrespective of who is in charge. <BR /> <BR />Also, the nature of how government is operated is not something that I or my colleague David Ford would recognise as how we did things, with special advisers playing games behind the scenes —”