William Irwin
Newry and Armagh · Democratic Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. We have worked closely together, and I hold you in high esteem. <BR /> <BR />I thank the Minister for agreeing to look into the matter. I was at the funeral on Sunday, and the family are devastated by their loss. The lady was going to get her hair done and was killed on that main road.”
“I thank my party colleagues and Members from all sides of the House who have wished me well on the occasion of my retirement. It has been an absolute privilege to represent Newry and Armagh since 2007. I think that most people will recognise that I represented everyone irrespective of their class or creed.”
“The Minister may be aware that the Bramley apple industry in County Armagh is worth in the region of £20 million to the local economy. For growers, cold stores are vital to the protection and keeping of the apples. Most of those cold stores are now 30, 40 or 50 years old. Growers need help to replace and renew those stores.”
“I thank the deputy First Minister for her response and for her efforts on the matter. The deputy First Minister will be aware that a large number of vaccines are used by the intensive farming sectors. Does she agree that it would be a serious issue if those medicines were not available?”
“I thank the Minister for his responses so far. We are aware of the reports that thousands of tons of raw sewage has been pumped into Belfast lough. Does the Minister agree that that is totally unacceptable and that something needs to be done as soon as possible?”
“That having been said, securing PGI status for the Armagh Bramley in 2012 was hard worked for and very welcome. That has been a valued and unique selling point, not only for the Bramley variety in the Armagh area but for apples generally in all their varieties, as well as apple-based products.”
The complete record
Every one of 984 lines we hold for William Irwin, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 20.
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee expressed serious concerns about the costs associated with the staffing element, which totals £1·032 million for the budget period. When questioned on how the figures were arrived at, the officials gave a vague response and did not in any way explain the basis for having six interpreters. Officials simply stated that the Commission would consider demand for the translation services and review the situation after six months. <BR /> <BR />In an effort to ease the Committee's concerns, the Commission advised in late December that, to determine the initial level of demand, all MLAs were asked to state whether their intention was to make substantive contributions in Irish or Ulster Scots during Assembly business.”
“However, the Committee was told that no information beyond what was in the written update could be provided, whether in open or closed session. The Committee found the refusal to provide that information unacceptable. <BR /> <BR />Committee members questioned officials on the cost of the provision of translation services, which would allow any person to conduct their business before the Assembly or a Committee of the Assembly in Irish or Ulster Scots, and the provision of a simultaneous translation system. The Committee was advised that the cost of six interpreters, three each for Irish and Ulster Scots, would be £344,000 per annum. Approximately £43,000 of capital cost was identified.”
“Those projects will now be completed in 2022-23, with the majority of capital expenditure being incurred during that time. Moving forward, the Committee wishes to see tight controls over timetables to minimise the potential of slippage. <BR /> <BR />During oral evidence sessions with Commission officials on 3 November 2021 and 24 November 2021, the Committee explored a wide range of issues. Given the limited time for this debate, I will concentrate on just a few. <BR /> <BR />The Committee noted that the draft budget did not include the cost of the Parliament Buildings roof project. Given the commercially sensitive and legal issues involved, the Committee agreed to invite officials to attend its meeting on 24 November to provide an oral update in closed session.”
“The Committee, in undertaking its consideration of the Commission's draft budget plans for 2022-25, was mindful of the statutory functions of the Commission and, in particular, the legal requirement to meet all costs associated with Members. The Committee recognised that those costs cannot be withheld or altered by the Commission, and, as such, are not under its control. <BR /> <BR />The Commission's draft three-year budget reflects the costs that are likely to be incurred at the start of the new Assembly mandate. The draft budget is based on an assumption of a near-to-normal operating environment. In relation to the Commission's capital budget, the Committee noted that a number of projects were carried forward from 2021 to 2022 because progress was slower than expected.”
“2) Bill, as a result of the recent vote, are reconsidered and the more reasonable approach of 82% by 2050 is re-established. Our farmers depend on it.”
“It beggars belief that the Assembly, despite the strongest of objections raised by the UK Climate Change Committee's (CCC) economists, farming representative bodies and, indeed, the farming public, actively rejected those concerns and opted for a massively over-ambitious target. <BR /> <BR />If the decision for net zero by 2050 is to be carried through, it will require a massive budget to deliver. Indeed, it will take a significant proportion of the finances available to our Executive to be directed solely at Agriculture. A huge financial mountain has been placed in front of the Assembly, and it is very clear that the resources required are not available. It is, therefore, vital that the issue is revisited and that changes made to the AERA Minister's Climate Change (No.”
“That decision, if carried through, will have a profound and long-lasting negative impact on the finances available to each and every Department, given the costs associated with such a move. It will also have a massive impact on wider society and every sector of business, yet such a vote was taken despite the reality of that being fully explained to the other parties in the Chamber. <BR /> <BR />Whilst the impact of climate change deserves detailed attention, the measures and legislation created, if implemented, cannot be allowed to damage our agri-food industry or create a situation where the massive gaps left in our ability to produce food for our consumers our filled with cheap imports from countries with woeful records on emissions.”
“It is a concern that the Treasury has stated that the rebate on red diesel fuel will end in April for most uses, with the exception of agriculture. Many industries have spoken about their concerns about the impact that this will have on their operations. Increasing costs will have to be passed onto the consumer. I reiterate my call to the Treasury to reconsider that change, especially in the current economic climate. I urge our Ministers to redouble their efforts on that issue. <BR /> <BR />It will not be lost on the farming public that in recent weeks, against all scientific and reasoned advice, the Assembly voted to catastrophically impact our agri-food industry most severely and heavily with a decision to allow a path to net zero by 2050.”
“<BR /> <BR />From the farming industry's perspective, various sectors have been under pressure, not least our pig sector. In recent times, there has been a significant squeeze on its margins. I welcome the fact that the Minister has given some attention to various sectors within our agri-food industry due to the pressures of COVID. I urge the Minister to continue to look at ways to support the pig sector at this time. <BR /> <BR />Other pressures have been brought to bear on the wider agri-food industry, not least the spectre of continued rising energy prices and general input costs across the production sectors. These are concerning times, and it is most important that the House recognises the pressures being applied in terms of energy and inputs. The security of food supply is vital for any society, and Northern Ireland is no different.”
“<BR /> <BR />Despite the immense pressures that the virus brought to bear on many areas of life in Northern Ireland, it is very clear that many thousands of people who are employed directly in the agri-food industry have continued to provide the most vital service to ensure that all links in the supply chain continue to function from farm to fork, and that has been the case from the outset of the pandemic. When many areas of life locked down, our agri-food sector stepped up a gear and met an increased need. I pay tribute to the sector. <BR /> <BR />Not surprisingly, the pressure on resources across Departments has risen significantly, and that has been for a multitude of reasons, most notably the various support schemes enacted to offset the impacts of the COVID restrictions.”
“As a member of the AERA Committee, I will comment on the issues that are most pertinent to the agri-food industry and the environment at this time. <BR /> <BR />It has been another challenging year for the Assembly and, indeed, for agriculture in Northern Ireland. The pandemic has continued to have an effect, and, whilst the signs are encouraging and the severity of COVID-19 is lessening, we continue to hope and pray that the virus will continue to weaken to allow some level of normality to return. The removal of restrictions is certainly a good start and a welcome signal that normal life is resuming across all sectors.”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. Will the Minister outline who has been successful in the programme and a flavour of the activities that could be supported in the scheme?”
“Mr McHugh said that he wanted public services to see the best possible outcomes from decisions that are made and that those things must be cost-effective. He also wished the Comptroller and Auditor General well in his retirement. In his contribution, Jim Allister said that it was important to move to an independent board. He also wished Mr Donnelly well in his retirement. He noted that it was important to separate the roles of the complainant and the adjudicator. That point was made very clear by Mr Allister. <BR /> <BR />To conclude, I hope that today's debate has highlighted the importance of robust governance and accountability for organisations that provide such critical support to the public and the Assembly. I ask Members to support the motion.”
“It should be noted that the Audit Committee recommends that its role be extended to align with best practice elsewhere. For example, I mentioned the recommendation that non-executive members of the Audit Office's statutory board be appointed by the Audit Committee. I did not have time to mention that the Committee recommends assuming responsibility for appointing the Comptroller and Auditor General, as accounting officer of the Northern Ireland Audit Office, and for appointing the external auditor of the NIAO. Currently, those responsibilities lie with the Department, and assuming them will bring the Audit Committee's function in line with its peers and provide proper separation from the Department of Finance, which finances the audits by Comptroller and Auditor General. <BR /> <BR />Two Members spoke in the debate.”
“The Committee believes that its recommendations will strengthen that competence.”
“The Committee also recognised the key role that the Public Services Ombudsman plays in promoting good governance and improving accountability in public administration, as well as in providing a remedy in individual complaint cases. In conducting the review, the principle of balancing independence and accountability was therefore foremost in the Committee's thinking. Members were aware of the need to strike the right balance of protecting the vital independence of the Comptroller and Auditor General and the Northern Ireland Public Services Ombudsman's corporate role whilst ensuring robust governance and accountability arrangements that align with best practice. Clearly, there is a link between the competence of organisations to carry out their functions effectively and the governance and accountability mechanisms that are in place.”
“I thank Members for their contributions to the debate this evening. As we have heard, in order to maintain and enhance confidence in the Northern Ireland Audit Office and the Northern Ireland Public Services Ombudsman, it is essential that governance and accountability mechanisms for those organisations be robust and be seen to be robust. <BR /> <BR />In undertaking the review, the Committee recognised the important function of the Audit Office in financial, audit and public reporting, as well as its critical role in governance and counter fraud and the key support that it gives to the Northern Ireland Assembly and the citizens of Northern Ireland.”
“In all other UK jurisdictions, the investigation is undertaken separately from the adjudication and by different bodies. The Committee, therefore, recommends that the adjudication function is removed from the ombudsman and becomes the responsibility of a separate body. In making that recommendation, the Committee wishes that any new arrangements should be as cost-effective as possible. <BR /> <BR />As I mentioned at the beginning, there is not enough time to cover every recommendation. Hopefully, I have set out the rationale for the most significant recommendations. I ask the House to support the motion.”
“In particular, the Committee welcomes the ombudsman's proposal to undertake a review of the recruitment, operation, membership and skills of our current audit and risk committee. While recognising the important role that the audit and risk committee plays, the Committee is of the view that an advisory panel similar to that adopted in Wales should be established to improve governance and accountability and supplement the work of the audit and risk committee. To protect the ombudsman's corporation sole status, the Committee is of the view that the advisory panel should have no executive powers. <BR /> <BR />The Northern Ireland Ombudsman's role is unusual in that she is both the investigator and adjudicator of complaints against a councillor who may have failed to comply with the relevant code of conduct.”
“<BR /> <BR />In evidence to the Committee, the ombudsman proposed a wide range of robust actions in order to further improve the governance and accountability arrangements for her office. The Committee recommends that those be progressed without undue delay.”
“Members also reflected the view that was expressed by the president of the International Ombudsman Institute that the current governance arrangements for the NIPSO are entirely consistent with best international practice. They also expressed that the introduction of a strategy board would be inconsistent with the Venice principles, which are the international set of standards for the ombudsman institute. <BR /> <BR />In summary, there was no support from any witness for corporatisation. The Committee therefore concluded that the creation of a statutory board for the NIPSO would not be appropriate. However, it found that there was scope to strengthen the existing governance and accountability arrangements.”
“In order to address those gaps, the Committee recommends that the C&AG become the single auditor for the public sector and has the ability to report to the Assembly and Committees on issues that cut across multiple local councils and deliver reports that cut across central and local government. That is similar to the position that has been adopted in Wales. <BR /> <BR />I will turn now to the recommendations that are relevant to the Public Services Ombudsman. The Committee considered whether corporatisation was appropriate for the NIPSO. In considering the matter, the Committee noted not only the scale of the organisation but the fact that no other International Ombudsman Institute (IOI) members have a statutory board.”
“<BR /> <BR />In order to ensure the robust governance and oversight of the operations of the Audit Office and, at the same time, to preserve the independence of the C&AG as a corporate role, the Committee recommends that the relationship between the strategy board and the C&AG be governed by a code of practice that is to be reviewed every two years. <BR /> <BR />Moving now to auditing arrangements for local government, in Northern Ireland, there is a separate auditor for local government. However, we know that there is considerable crossover between the functions of the Comptroller and Auditor General and the Local Government Auditor, and it was pointed out by the C&AG that that separation has resulted in some significant accountability gaps in reporting arrangements.”
“The Committee therefore recommends that the Audit Office be formally separated from the Comptroller and Auditor General and be established as a body corporate in the form of a strategy board. <BR /> <BR />The overarching function of a strategy board will be to scrutinise and support the activities of the C&AG while respecting and maintaining the independence of his or her statutory role and ensuring that effective governance systems are of the highest standard and are maintained. In order to be certain of independence, the Committee recommends that non-executive members of the board, including the chairperson, should be appointed by the Audit Committee and that non-executives should hold the majority of positions.”
“The next set of recommendations deals with the corporatisation of the Audit Office strategy board membership and code of practice. At present, the Comptroller and Auditor General is supported by an advisory-only board. During oral evidence, the C&AG indicated that any adjustment to the strategy board from an advisory board would not be a big one. The chairperson of the advisory board expressed the view that his preferred model would be for the board to be completely independent of the C&AG. <BR /> <BR />It should be noted at this point that, following reforms, corporatisation reflects the position in other UK jurisdictions. Northern Ireland not following the example of England, Scotland and Wales would be seen as an anomaly.”
“In Westminster, there is a fixed, non-renewable term of 10 years. In Scotland and Wales, the term is eight years. The evidence that was received by the Committee demonstrated that a fixed non-renewable tenure negates the risk of long-term postholders being open to external pressures and avoids the familiarity and complacency that can arise from being in a long-term position. The Committee therefore recommends that the tenure of the next Comptroller and Auditor General is a non-renewable term of 10 years. In order to ensure that public accountability is not compromised, it is recommended that C&AGs are prohibited for a period of two years after leaving office from holding a position with any organisation or person whose accounts fall to be examined by the Comptroller and Auditor General.”
“I do not have time to go through each and every one, so I will highlight the key recommendations or parts thereof. The first two relate to the work of the next Audit Committee, and they focus on implementation. The implementation of many of the recommendations will require legislative change through the Assembly or Westminster. Some do not require legislative change and can be implemented through administrative measures. The Committee, because of where we are in the current mandate, calls on the next Audit Committee to identify and pursue the appropriate legislative avenues and to consult stakeholders on the implementation of the recommendations. <BR /> <BR />I move to the recommendations relevant to the Audit Office, and, starting with the tenure of the Comptroller and Auditor General, there is no fixed term in Northern Ireland.”
“On public audit, the Committee considered evidence from the Comptroller and Auditor General, the chairperson of his advisory board, the Local Government Auditor, the chairpersons of the statutory bodies in England, Scotland and Wales — the National Audit Office, Audit Scotland and Audit Wales — and three experts in the field of public audit. On the Public Services Ombudsman, the evidence received included that from the chairperson of NIPSO's audit and risk committee, the president of the International Ombudsman Institute and three expert witnesses in the field. The Committee also commissioned comparative research on structures and practices in other jurisdictions, and we sought legal advice on particular issues. <BR /> <BR />At the conclusion of the review, the Committee made 23 recommendations.”
“I ask the House to support the motion. <BR /> <BR />There is no denying that the Northern Ireland Audit Office (NIAO) and the Northern Ireland Public Services Ombudsman (NIPSO) perform critical functions. Both bodies exercise their functions effectively and provide key support to the Assembly and our citizens. However, the Committee's review found that there is scope to enhance the governance and accountability of both bodies to ensure that there is alignment with best practice and to provide greater support and confidence to the Assembly and the public. <BR /> <BR />The Committee, as part of its review, requested written evidence from stakeholders and expert witnesses in the field of public audit and the Public Services Ombudsman. Fifteen written submissions were received, and 12 oral evidence sessions were held.”
“I have made my views well known on the considerable problems ahead for our agri-food economy due to the decisions taken in the House last week by Members who shunned sensible and reasonable expert advice.”
“It is one thing to create legislation to address significant challenges in meeting climate obligations based on the 82% reduction by 2050 model. It is a completely different proposition to create legislation on a whim, which is, in reality, what the amendments in group 4 would do. The goalposts were moved considerably — wrongly, in my view — by the vote for net zero by 2050. The entire direction of the amendments has a huge and unknown cost element that has not been fully understood when matched against the Climate Change Committee's view of the massively increased costs in the net zero by 2050 model. <BR /> <BR />The matter is far from resolved.”
“<BR /> <BR />We are now very far away from starting on a firm footing after last week's vote on net zero by 2050. What that means for our economy, Departments and their finances and, of course, every facet of life in Northern Ireland, is that this entire group of amendments should be rejected.”
“I wish to comment on the final group of amendments, which is group 4 and which is headed "Just Transition Principles and Fund". The broad thrust of the new clauses in the group is not derived from the Department for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, and, again, the proposal of the amendments is akin to a competition between all those parties that wish to out-green each other. <BR /> <BR />In order to make any transition a success, we must, as an integral part of the United Kingdom, work collectively with the other UK nations in an overall coordinated strategy that meets our climate obligations. Starting from the wrong footing, as I have stated in earlier contributions, will be catastrophic for our economy and way of life in Northern Ireland.”
“With Northern Ireland set to have a higher levy than the rest of the UK, it positively signals our intent to lead by example and to deliver meaningful and lasting environmental change on a matter that each and every one of us can play a real part in. The throwaway culture must end. Indeed, when we look across the countryside, we see that littering is a significant concern generally. In my constituency, the Armagh City, Banbridge and Craigavon (ABC) Borough Council spends a considerable sum cleaning the borough. Much of that work is as a result of people discarding rubbish, including carrier bags. <BR /> <BR />I support the motion as a signal of our continued intent to address environmental concerns across the Province.”
“The increase in the levy is the type of bold step that must be taken to encourage consumers to consider the impact of their shopping habits and to adjust them towards more sustainable methods. <BR /> <BR />The fact that larger-volume reusable bags are being sold in greater numbers is a further call to action. Given the fact that those bags are made of heavier-duty plastic, they have an even greater impact on the environment when they end up in landfill and blow around hedgerows. As they are made to last longer, that problem is intensified. <BR /> <BR />In the era of renewed focus and determination to act on environmental issues and how we use and reuse a wide variety of resources, the levy offers a clear pathway for improvement, and I welcome this further legislative drive.”
“That sizeable and welcome reduction shows that the legislation has had an important impact. However, there is still a significant way to go, and the increase of the charge from 5p to 25p will have a further impact on driving down the use of plastic bags and will help to again reshape the habits of consumers away from using single-use bags to more sustainable solutions that have much less of an impact on the environment. <BR /> <BR />The Minister has taken decisive action by proposing an increase in the levy from 5p to 25p, which will make the levy here the highest in the UK. However, as I said, that is necessary because, as with the original levy, it will change consumer habits. Plastic that ends up in landfill is a huge and mounting problem that must be tackled robustly.”
“I welcome the motion from my colleague Edwin Poots. In an era when our environment and its protection have never been more to the fore, this is a timely piece of legislation that will further reduce the use of plastic bags generally across the Province. <BR /> <BR />The history of the issue is important. When the levy on carrier bags was brought in back in 2013, approximately 300 million single-use plastic bags were distributed per year. That is certainly a shocking statistic. To back up the necessity for the scheme, from its inception, the impact of the levy has been significant and has meant a reduction of some 80% in the number of single-use plastic bags over that period. I understand that, in contrast, 56 million bags were issued in the past year.”
“Will the Minister outline the process that he used in coming to issuing the instruction last Wednesday to officials to stop the checks at the ports?”
“<BR /> <BR />I support the Minister's new clause 28A in amendment No 67. I trust that other Members will get behind that and work constructively on any consultation that arises from it in order to arrive at the best possible and most cost-effective solution for the climate advisory role and what such a role would entail and constitute. There are important questions that can be scoped out only through a suitable consultation. It is, therefore, wrong to make proposals that have not been fully scoped out. <BR /> <BR />I urge Members to get behind the Minister's new clause 28A and the other amendments in his name in group 3.”
“I will make some comments on the amendments in group 3, which come under the description of "Oversight, governance and accountability". <BR /> <BR />At the outset, I state that Minister Poots's new clause 28A in amendment No 67 very adequately and reasonably covers the provisions in most of the new clauses on oversight that have been proposed by other Members. It is absolutely right that such a proposal is put out for consultation, as the Minister and his Department have rightly proposed. That is prudent given the significant job of work that the Bill entails. I say it again that it is deeply unhelpful for others to seek to compete on this important issue, with evermore elaborate oversight mechanisms that come with significant costs, sizeable budget strains and administrative burdens.”
“I am conscious of time, so I draw my remarks to a close.”
“<BR /> <BR />Amendment Nos 46, 47, 48, 49 and 51, which propose new clauses, are unwelcome inputs that serve only to further complicate the Bill unnecessarily, given Minister Poots's amendment No 38, which more than adequately expands on clause 16. <BR /> <BR />It will come as no surprise that I find amendment No 76 not in keeping with the Bill's overall aims and direction, and I reiterate the fact that Northern Ireland's ability to meet the targets set in the Bill will crucially be achieved only as part of the United Kingdom's overall climate change strategy, which has the expert input of the UK Climate Change Committee. <BR /> <BR />Minister Poots's amendment Nos 77 and 79 are technical in nature and take account of new clause 16A, which I support. <BR /> <BR />I have covered most of the amendments in group 2.”
“A resilience payment for farmers is one element that the public are asked to give their views on, and I urge farmers to respond to that consultation. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 41 is a considerable departure from amendment No 38 and is a huge overreach into other Departments' remits. Again, that should be the focus of respective Departments and not the focus of the Climate Change (No. 2) Bill. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 45, which proposes new clause 16D, focuses on soil and biodiversity, which is already the remit and reserve of DAERA. Farmers already spend considerable time on the issue, as it goes without saying that soil quality is directly related to the productivity of the land. The amendment is unnecessary in light of that ongoing work.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is no surprise that amendment No 38 tabled by Minister Poots does not meet the approval of those in the House who would push Northern Ireland's economy over the cliff edge with an unrealistic, unachievable and economically damaging policy, and, yet again, we see four amendments — Nos 39, 40, 41 and 42 — that would significantly alter and complicate amendment No 38. Amendment No 39 uses the words "climate resilient". It is so open-ended that it lacks any real meaning in the Northern Ireland context. Farmers have been at the forefront of climate resilience for centuries and face all the challenges that climate can throw at them, and food still ends up on consumers' tables across the Province. <BR /> <BR />Minister Poots is consulting on future agriculture policy proposals for Northern Ireland.”
“It is clear that Minister Poots and his officials wish to move forward in a responsive and responsible way. That is reflected in the new clause, which I fully support. Consultation is a clear element of the clause, and it is a welcome addition to the Bill. Without adequate consultation and planning by Departments, it will be difficult to move forward. The inclusion of aims that seek to give due regard and protection to agriculture and small business is welcome and signals an intent on the part of DAERA and the Minister not to impose regimes that would be to the detriment of or, worse still, the destruction of those sectors.”
“Of course, it is no surprise that farmers, in particular, as custodians of the countryside, do most to protect and enhance the vast majority of the rural mass in Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />It is clear that the impact of the proposal in amendment No 28 focuses on the Department for Infrastructure. It should be for that Department to carry out its own work in that regard, as the amendment refers to expansion of the road walking and cycling network. The Department for Infrastructure must bring forward its own costed aims and objectives. <BR /> <BR />Amendment No 38 presents an utterly sensible new clause; one that further expands and responds to some of the issues that have already been raised about the onus on other Departments.”
“<BR /> <BR />There will be a need for clear and concise planning around sectors and industry efforts. In my opinion, there will also be a requirement for financial assistance to enable them to access and avail themselves of new technologies in order to realise those targets. Whilst I agree that sectoral plans represent a worthwhile pursuit, they can be pursued only in line with the more realistic and achievable pathways that were laid out in the Climate Change (No. 2) Bill. <BR /> <BR />I am opposed to a land use strategy as laid out in amendment No 27, as it will not have an improving effect, but rather it will be the designation of land that could be undesirable.”
“It is now even more pertinent that Departments respond, given the amendments that have been tabled by other parties and the vote on net zero that will impact catastrophically on Northern Ireland as a whole. That, of course, is in light of the updated costs of net zero by 2050, and net zero by 2045, that have been provided by the Climate Change Committee. <BR /> <BR />Those who have tabled the amendments to parts 1, 2 and 3 that I have referred to have proposed amendments that are not economically sustainable. Individual Departments deserve the right to respond to those circumstances in line with the Department's Climate Change (No. 2) Bill, which I support as being the most realistic pathway for Northern Ireland to meet its objectives and obligations in the UK context.”
“I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate on the group 2 amendments. At the outset, I must state that I am deeply concerned about the direction of travel that has been set in action by yesterday's vote on net zero by 2050. That has not been a reasonable outcome by any stretch, and, in my opinion, it totally affects the Bill's financial implications across multiple Departments and has significant implications for business and society generally. <BR /> <BR />Amendment Nos 18 to 28 refer to the capacities of other Departments. I believe firmly that the Departments that are referred to in those amendments should be required to fully respond to the realities of the legislation.”
“2) Bill effectively covers the areas under carbon budgets, with the Minister's amendment No 38 adequately covering the main points. On departmental coordination and multisectoral impacts, the Bill clearly affords the necessary latitude to be reflective and responsive to the circumstances prevailing at that time. Amendment No 35 is unnecessary, as it goes without saying that individual Departments' efforts would be complementary to the regional direction of travel. <BR /> <BR />It has been a lengthy debate so far, so I will draw to a close my remarks on the first group of amendments.”