John McCallister
South Down · Ulster Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“She did whatever needed to be done and nothing seemed to be too much trouble or too difficult for her to overcome. <BR /> <BR />It was very much to her credit that she was able to work and find a solution to an issue that, as we go forward, will allow us to look at different things.”
“Sometimes, one of the downsides of being in politics is that social media exposes all our lives to some really quite harsh and unkind things. I certainly am delighted that things have improved in that regard, not only with getting the Bill passed but with your father's health improving.”
“Like colleagues, I welcome the Final Stage of the Licensing Bill. Following on from Mr Ross, it is a shame that Mrs Cochrane is standing down because we could desperately do with her back here to continue the reform of our licensing laws, although that is looking like quite a big job for anybody to take on.”
“It would have been such a shame to have to have him removed on his last day. <BR /> <BR />Mr Speaker, I will begin by paying tribute to you and the respect agenda you have set in your time in the Speaker's office.”
“<BR /> <BR />In this term, I am particularly proud of the private Member's Bill to reform the way that the Assembly does its business, and I hope that the messages from all of the political parties seem to be that there is a will to have a much more collective and cohesive Executive on the other side of an election.”
“While there is partly a disappointment in some regards about what the Assembly and Executive have achieved, the one thing that they have achieved is to have got people talking from very different and difficult backgrounds. As Mr Hamilton said, it is much better having a robust debate in here than division on our streets.”
The complete record
Every one of 975 lines we hold for John McCallister, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 12 of 20.
“Sinn Féin has been in charge of education in Northern Ireland for about 10 years out of the past 15. It cannot all be the Tories' fault. It cannot all be someone else's fault. The only policy initiative that I hear from Sinn Féin and the SDLP is that the Brits should send us more money. That is the only policy, never mind whether we are spending what we get wisely. <BR /> <BR />Mr Attwood went on to talk about the great work that Mark Durkan and Brian Cowen did on roads. I suggest that Mr Attwood was probably foolish to remind us of the link that he was trying to create between the SDLP and Fianna Fáil. When the SDLP looks around and thinks about other parties that it wants to partner with, it might want to think about other people. Fianna Fáil did not exactly have a great track record on managing the Irish economy when it hit the dust.”
“The SDLP was a party that grew up and that was involved in social mobility, in education and, particularly at that time, in lifting and creating a Catholic middle class that was socially mobile and was moving out and getting professional jobs and a university education. Why have you abandoned those people? Why have Sinn Féin and the SDLP abandoned social mobility? Why do you not want to give people the tools in life, through early intervention and proper schooling, to get out of poverty? That is something that we should all want. <BR /> <BR />They talked about west Belfast and how its poverty indices have been the worst and are so bad. West Belfast has had a Sinn Féin or SDLP MP from 1966 — almost 50 years. What have you done about it? Where is the game changer?”
“They are taking a fight and a debate to the national Government, but they are not threatening their institutions. They have passed Budgets and are getting on with the work of being in government. They know the difference between being in government and being in opposition, and they know that you cannot do both. You have to be in one or the other.”
“Mr McNarry rightly mentioned bus passes, water charges and prescription charges. Those are all decisions that the Executive and Assembly have made, but they have budgetary consequences, whether for tuition fees or whatever. If you want to keep tuition fees low, can you fund apprenticeships? You cannot have your cake and eat it, and Sinn Féin and the SDLP need to realise that. <BR /> <BR />Mr Attwood talked about power-sharing being in jeopardy. The Welsh probably have more cause to complain, because, in the recent Barnett review, they hit convergence. They probably have more cause to complain than the Scots or us about funding. However, are First Minister Carwyn Jones or First Minister Nicola Sturgeon threatening their institutions? Is Cardiff bay or Holyrood at risk of collapse? No, Wales and Scotland are getting on with it.”
“He attacked Dr Stephen Farry for talking about the consent principle. He has to realise at some point that we are in a regional Government for one part of the United Kingdom. We get a large and generous fiscal transfer of £9·6 billion a year. There are pretty much no questions asked about what we do with that. It is ours to spend as we like. We hear that the Tories need to be taken on. The Minister will confirm that we spend £2,000 a head more in Fermanagh and South Tyrone and in South Down than is spent in Witney or Chipping Barnet, the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State's constituencies respectively. That is good, because we have a need for more spending. We have the lowest household charges, as Finance Ministers like to remind us. We never want to go to any of the difficult places. We never want to discuss and debate the issues.”
“We should be telling our Health and Education Ministers to work together and to intervene with families from as early as 20 weeks into pregnancy. We should be helping and supporting them. We should be working on things such as Home-Start and Sure Start, yet we are gutting all of that. We are dismantling all the infrastructure that we have to deliver those services. In the meantime, what are we paying for? You negotiated £564 million at Stormont House to mitigate welfare, and then you petition-of-concerned it. There is no logic to any of that. It is fair to say that this place rarely has any logic to it. <BR /> <BR />I have huge respect for Mr Attwood. However, he accused everybody of being a spokesperson for the Tories and the NIO. I wrote down some of the highlights for the Minister.”
“To Sinn Féin and the SDLP, I say this: that is not what you voted for. You voted to put most of our resources — £564 million initially — into welfare reform to mitigate certain measures and to let us breach a £26,000 welfare cap. You pushed for and voted for that. Meanwhile, you have gutted everything else to pay for it. You have gutted our skills budget, so Minister Farry has an Enabling Success strategy with no money attached to it. Constituency colleagues will know that, in the community and voluntary sector in Kilkeel, we are almost stopping our childcare and nursery provision from early years funding. Such projects deliver real social change. They are lifting the reading ages of children by two years and improving children's numeracy by a significant margin. We should be intervening early.”
“We are borrowing that, when, had we put a recruitment freeze on four years ago, the public sector and the Civil Service would have reduced naturally to where we want them to be. We keep ducking these decisions and putting them off. We keep laying down a wee bit more track to take us another few yards down the road. At some point, we have to realise that you guys are in government. This is the problem. There seems to be no way that you have realised that there are any links to being in government or that there is any semblance of responsibility to govern. <BR /> <BR />I listened intently to the many contributions during Monday's debate. I have to say that some of them were pretty mythical creations. I hear from many contributors that we need to support early intervention, we need to be doing this and we need to be doing that.”
“<BR /> <BR />Ireland has slogged its way out of an economic quagmire in the last seven to eight years and had real austerity, so do not give that up lightly. Let us remind ourselves that the Republic of Ireland had to cut its public spending by 18% of its GDP. That is a fraction and makes George Osborne's cuts so far look fairly minimal and a bit of trimming around the edges. <BR /> <BR />I am not saying that real pain is not being felt, but we have been shielded from some of it, because, as the Minister acknowledged last week in Committee, we have had health and education increases from Barnett consequentials. Our real difficulty here is that we have not made the necessary reforms. We are set to borrow £700 million, and this Budget almost depends on us starting the voluntary exit scheme.”
“It seems to think that it can take on the democratically elected UK Government and that somehow we will all eventually morph into this mythical all-Ireland republic where everything will be great. I have to say to voters in the South, if anybody is watching this debate: be afraid, be very afraid of who you vote for in your next Dáil election. Quite frankly, if you are not fit to govern and run an Administration up here, why on earth would anyone think that you could run a national Administration? Why would anyone set out a grand vision: "Vote for us and put Ireland up there with Greece". It would be heading towards a bailout again or an exit from the eurozone and, possibly, the European Union. That is where it would take Ireland to.”
“From my perspective, I want to see how we bind the four constituent parts of the UK together in a much stronger way. It is a UK-wide event, and, quite frankly, the Dublin Government should be absolutely embarrassed to be asked to be involved in the financial arrangements of the United Kingdom. When Dublin pulled the money out of the A5 project, I do not recall the Prime Minister or anyone getting involved in the internal finances of the Republic of Ireland. Why on earth would the Republic of Ireland want to get into the internal finances and fiscal transfers within the United Kingdom? It is a position and a matter for the sovereign Government of the United Kingdom. It just does not make sense. <BR /> <BR />Why, then, is Sinn Féin intent on fighting this ideological republican ideal?”
“<BR /> <BR />It comes back to the basis of some of our politics. I am someone who voted for the Good Friday Agreement and believes in it. As many know, I believe in power-sharing, although I want to change the model that we use. Do Sinn Féin and the SDLP accept a democratic system in the UK? They continue to question the Government, yet Dr McDonnell has the great record of having the lowest percentage vote — 24% or 25% — to be elected to Parliament. I do not see them objecting to that electoral system. <BR /> <BR />If you believe in democracy, you have to accept the system. I would like a UK constitutional convention. I keep asking Sinn Féin whether it would participate in such a thing. I want a debate about an electoral system and how we change the UK.”
“Some people do not like that, and you hear the talk about the Conservatives not having a mandate in Northern Ireland, barely having one in Scotland and not having one in Wales. That is the electoral system. I am sure that Mr McNarry is not delighted that UKIP got four million votes and won one seat in Parliament. I am sure that that is a difficulty. Barack Obama won 26 of the 50 states, but he is still the president: he won the election under their electoral system. So, you need to get over it. We held an election to elect the Parliament of the United Kingdom, after which an Executive were picked from the majority party that won. That is the system. The Conservative Party won the election. It has a mandate for welfare reform, as did the Coalition Government between 2010 and 2015.”
“As does NI21. <BR /> <BR />That should not be done. Because of the very principles of this place and the ability to criticise, we should not be using the petition of concern in such a way. It never was designed for that, yet every party is at it and must accept that level of responsibility. <BR /> <BR />On the issue of money, we keep hearing from Sinn Féin and the SDLP, "Oh, Minister, get you over to London and take on the evil Tories. Get over to London and tell the Prime Minister, the Chancellor and the Chief Secretary what's what." I have no difficulty with sending the Minister over to London, and I have no difficulty with her or with this Administration working with the Scots and the Welsh and going to London to get as good a deal as they can. However, the Conservative Party won the general election.”
“Mr Girvan wants me to name others. The Alliance Party as well, if that is any use to him.”
“We had petitions of concern against something like 50 amendments to the Welfare Reform Bill, most of which were not needed, as you will see if you check the voting record. We had something like 10 to amendments to the Education Bill, and they were not needed. That damages the system. Everybody is doing it — the DUP, the SDLP, the Green Party and Sinn Féin — and that abuses the system. The House should be finding its own system.”
“This place needs serious reform. One of the things that we abuse most often is the petition-of-concern mechanism. There are petitions of concern to the right of me and to the left of me; it is a case of into the valley of the petition of concern. Everywhere I look, people are signing petitions of concern. We have heard of petitions of concern to legislation that we have not even seen, namely Paul Givan's conscience clause. I think that it is a ridiculous piece of legislation, but why do we have a petition of concern to legislation that we have not yet seen? <BR /> <BR />We had a petition of concern signed last week against mandatory minimum sentencing. I voted against mandatory minimum sentencing, and the vote was 46 to 41, so it was not needed.”
“Does anyone think that families should be better off when they are in work than when not in work? I find it very hard to go to my constituents who are working and paying for fairly expensive childcare because we do not have our act together in some of the childcare strategy. They are paying dear for that, yet they see families who are on benefits and are better off financially. That is a hard thing to sell. The Department's figures showed that a third would be better off, a third would receive the same amount and a third would be worse off. It is sheer recklessness to leave welfare reform hanging.”
“That is where the policy driver should come from, but there have been no suggestions from Sinn Féin and the SDLP about the changes you would make if you had total control of welfare. <BR /> <BR />The Minister also mentioned at the Committee last week that we need to have a "mature debate" on revenue raising. There is no comprehension from the SDLP or Sinn Féin about how you would have a mature debate. Even when Mr Wells was Health Minister and talked about some modest charge of or options for prescriptions, everybody ran for the hills. There was no effort to engage in a debate on how you would move an issue like that forward. <BR /> <BR />We have got so far away from the broad principles of welfare reform. Does anybody object to the idea that work should pay?”
“Then we get the threats from Sinn Féin that say, "If that happens, Mr McGuinness will resign as deputy First Minister." <BR /> <BR />We could do a fourth option. We could have all welfare devolved to Northern Ireland. We could have negotiated how much our share was and had it added in to the block grant. We could entirely design our own welfare system. That would require policy ideas and parties like Sinn Féin and the SDLP to say, "What do you want from welfare?". <BR /> <BR />Mr McNarry was critical of the Civil Service. It is not always up to the Civil Service to provide policies and manifestos; it is the job of political parties. It is what we fight and stand for elections on.”
“You should be happy to send £2 million, because that is going out into the community. Isn't it great?". It is a pretty irresponsible way to deal with the public finances if we are saying, "Just because we cannot get our act together to do the legislation, let us give the people £2 million a week extra." <BR /> <BR />We could do the Stormont House Agreement. I have been critical of the £564 million that was set aside. I have been critical that we have been gutting our skills budget and gutting early years spending to help to pay for this. That, I think, is a real crime that we are almost committing, because we are trapping people in poverty by not investing in those. <BR /> <BR />The third option, of course, is that the UK Government could do it without any of the mitigation measures.”
“He said that the three points that Scotland would like to be different about welfare reform are the bedroom tax, or the spare room subsidy — take your choice — the fortnightly payments and housing benefit paid directly to landlords. I will say this again to the House and to Members opposing welfare reform: does any of that sound familiar? I think that it is almost identical to the deal that the then Minister for Social Development, Nelson McCausland, maybe had a year, 18 months or two years ago, yet we are about to run out of track because we literally will not do welfare. <BR /> <BR />As I see it, we probably have up to four options on welfare. We could do nothing and keep spending £2 million a week and sending it back to Treasury. I know that the Green Party says, "It is all right Minister.”
“By 24 December, major cracks in the unity of purpose around it were appearing, even though parties had negotiated for 11 weeks or something in the lead-up to that. Then, suddenly, what was agreed was not agreed, everything was agreed, and nothing was agreed. I have said this before: was the Secretary of State serving too much eggnog? Did people sign up to something that they did not quite understand? How did we get into such a mess? <BR /> <BR />I have to say to the parties involved that we can look at the primary cause of the failure on welfare reform. I will go back to quoting Alex Neil, the Scottish Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, who is the equivalent of our Minister for Social Development.”
“We face having to do a Budget based entirely on the Stormont House Agreement, but we have no real knowledge of who still supports that agreement. The Budget is entirely based on it. We do not know who supports it because it was signed or agreed on 23 December 2014.”
“I am sorry, Mr Speaker, I could barely hear that. <BR /> <BR />Before coming to the House, as is probably well known, I used to be heavily involved in the young farmers' clubs. At that time, one of my interests was three-act dramas. We used to do a few Sam Cree comedy farces. This has all the farce but not much of the comedy. It would probably, unfortunately, mean that, if we were doing the casting, the Minister would have to be the stern mother-in-law and the Chair of the Finance Committee would be the feckless son-in-law who was never good enough to marry her daughter.”
“Can I ask the Member whether, if the UK did set up a constitutional convention — and I realise that he will not answer this as Chair of the Committee but as a Sinn Féin MLA — would his party take part in it?”
“What linkages can we build up to that and what changes can we make? However, all that depends on the funding that we get, and we must always be mindful of that funding coming from the centre.”
“Would they participate in and debate issues such as the powers that the Parliaments and Assemblies around the nations of the UK should have, and how we can tap into things like the English northern powerhouse?”
“We have focused exclusively on corporation tax. We have not looked at other areas, while the Scots and Welsh are much further ahead. <BR /> <BR />I am sure that the Minister shares my concerns. Yes, I would like us to be at that debate, and yes, I would like the Executive to be in a position to have more tax-varying powers devolved to them. But given the state of paralysis that the Assembly and Executive face at the minute, we just do not have the political maturity to devolve anything to them. I think that that is hugely regrettable, given the state of flux that the UK is in. <BR /> <BR />I think that a constitutional convention being set up would be a very positive step. The big question is whether parties like Sinn Féin would participate in a UK constitutional convention. That is the big challenge.”
“I suspect that, even as we move through this Parliament, if the current Government meet their obligation to increase health spending by £8 billion, there will be Barnett consequentials on that that will have a dramatic impact on the spending situation of the Department of Finance here. So, on those positives, I think it has been good. <BR /> <BR />On other aspects, I think that we should, of course, look to and speak to other Administrations about this. For probably 18 months, even before the Scottish referendum, I have been warning that, whatever its outcome, it would change the United Kingdom in a very different way. The debates are on English votes for English MPs and on devolving tax-varying powers. I have very often warned that we do not seem to be at the forefront of that debate or engagement.”
“On some of the wider issues that the debate has opened up, we hear people, predominantly Sinn Féin and the SDLP, talking about austerity. We have been largely protected from that austerity because of Barnett. In answering a question from me at last week's Committee, the Minister explored the idea that, when the coalition Government protected health spending, we got our share of it through Barnett. It came at 100%, because it has a 100% comparator effect on the consequential. That made a huge difference to our spending. When there were increases in spending in education in England on things like free school meals, we had a Barnett consequential on that as well. Those eased spending dramatically.”
“We listened to expert witnesses who told us that we are very well served by this. One of the dangers of opening up a debate like this is that any future arrangements may not meet our requirements quite as well as Barnett has served us, particularly in the past.”
“Principal Deputy Speaker, I apologise to you for missing Employment and Learning question 7. <BR /> <BR />I also want to thank the Committee staff. I found that looking into how we are financed was a very interesting subject. In light of yesterday's debate, which will continue tomorrow, I say to those who are critical that it is ironic that the opening part of the report says that we have been very generously dealt with through the Barnett formula, and we should all be mindful of that. You listen to Budget debates and you hear how bad the national Government are and all of that, and when you look at the evidence and do a Committee inquiry into this, you see that it uncovers the fact that we have been very well served through Barnett.”
“Nearly all Ministers seem to have breached the code at some point, regardless of whether they were taken to court. We must have a code that actually means something. That was Mr Allister's driving point, and I concur with it.”
“It is important that it is not made unnecessarily difficult to have exactly the right language and to meet the standard, because we want this to be of value in upholding this institution and in ensuring that Members are rightly held up by the public as maintaining a high standard in public life. We also question how well equipped any individual commissioner is — not just the current commissioner — to deal with a very sensitive complaint. <BR /> <BR />Mr Allister made a point about breaching the ministerial code. I accept Mr Ross's point that it is up to a court, but the ministerial code can sometimes be viewed in the same way as ASBOs used to be viewed. It is almost a badge of honour to be accused of breaching the ministerial code when it should be seen as being slightly more serious.”
“Mr Speaker, I wrote to your predecessor about this to see whether we could extend the scope, make sure that the Carecall process is looked at as an option and whether there could be some point of redress for members of staff of small parties or independent Members. Working for a Member is like working for a small business: you are effectively on your own. As a corporate body, we should have an overall responsibility. That needs to be looked at and grappled with. <BR /> <BR />It is worth supporting Mr Agnew's point about making a complaint and how difficult it is for a Member, a member of the public or a member of staff to make a complaint.”
“I am grateful to the current Chair, the previous Chair and the Committee for bringing the report forward. I have concerns about the issue of respect, mentioned in paragraphs 214 to 225. I feel that there is a gap in that that section does not include Members' staff or, indeed, party staff. That is one of the difficulties that we have here. It applies particularly to staff members of independent Members like me or of smaller parties that maybe do not have the capacity, structure or HR experience to deal with complaints and in which, effectively, there is nowhere for a staff member to go. I would like that to be looked at.”
“I will be very brief. At the outset, I associate myself with the remarks about the late Councillor John Hanna. I knew John very well. I fought my first election campaign in the Knockiveagh ward alongside John so I have many fond memories of him. He will be greatly missed by his party colleagues and his wife, Joan, and I extend to Joan my sincere sympathies at this very difficult time.”
“I am grateful to the Member for giving way. Does he accept that, in acting in such a capacity, you are unlikely, if you are not an MLA, to be asked to speak? Therefore, the code should, of course, cover your actions at such an event.”
“I also look forward to any improvements and changes that the Committee can make in its call for evidence and in scrutinising the Bill. I am happy to support the Bill today.”
“<BR /> <BR />The broad principles of the Bill before us are about separating out regulation, which I think is an important step forward. It is an improvement and something that is long overdue. I recognise the work of the Minister and others in getting to this stage, and of Alasdair MacLaughlin and people before him, for moving it on and progressing it and giving a sense of independence. That is something that we should embrace and look forward to.”
“I will be fairly brief since, as a member of the Finance and Personnel Committee, I will have the opportunity to scrutinise the Bill, provided it gets through this stage. We have rushed so fast at the process — I think Mr Cree said that it has only been 10 years. So, in the best traditions of the Assembly, we are rushing this through. <BR /> <BR />There is much to welcome. Despite all the difficulties we are having with welfare reform and possible Budget difficulties, today is a great reason as to why the Assembly should be here. We are debating mental health and capacity, and now the Bill on legal complaints, and that is what the Assembly should be about. It is at its best when it is scrutinising legislation.”
“The Ad Hoc Joint Committee, the Justice Committee, the Health Committee and the Departments of Health and Justice might want to look at that to see whether there are any other solutions or whether we will be dependent on legislation that is now almost 30 years old. Is that as relevant today as it was in 1986, for example, or are there alternatives and perhaps better options more relevant to the age that we live in today? <BR /> <BR />I am more than happy to support the very broad principles of the Bill, but we must be ever mindful of the huge responsibilities that the state will take on should it progress and become law. Where are the checks and balances on that power when it comes to monitoring the police and making decisions about capacity? It is incumbent on us all to make sure that we get that balance right.”
“That is not overly onerous or debilitating for individuals or their advocates, but the principles of ability, expertise and accountability must run through the Bill, from the police to court judges. <BR /> <BR />I remind the House that the role of overseeing and reviewing the implementation of the Bill at a later stage may well fall to us or to a successor Assembly, so we all have to be very mindful of that. It would probably have been preferable for this huge legislation to be introduced earlier. However, I think that the single-Bill approach, with an Ad Hoc Joint Committee, which has members of the Health and Justice Committees, looking at this very closely and being mindful of the huge responsibility that the state has the potential to take on, is the right way to progress. <BR /> <BR />Mr McGlone aired the under-16s issue.”
“However, we have to be aware that, in many instances in the past, in this jurisdiction, in other parts of the UK and in the Republic of Ireland, the old adage, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions", applied. The state took on more responsibilities but did not have the ability or accountability to manage them. So, in my mind, the training, ethics and scrutiny to which the state subjects itself are crucial to delivering what is genuinely in the best interests of vulnerable people. <BR /> <BR />I encourage members of the Ad Hoc Joint Committee to ensure that the clauses relating to the ability to have a case referred to a tribunal result in a process.”
“The Bill talks of safeguarding. I suggest that Members be cognisant of recent incidents, primarily in health services, in which vulnerable people who perhaps do not have mental capacity issues have been abused by those who work for and on behalf of the state. To some, this may seem slightly outside the scope and tone of the debate, but, in my mind, it is crucial to it. We are exploring the role that the state will have in helping people to come to decisions that are in their best interests and, in some cases, making decisions for them. <BR /> <BR />We should be very mindful that the state is taking on a huge responsibility — at times, maybe rightly so.”
“<BR /> <BR />One core aspect of the Bill is to promote the ability and to support people with mental health and mental capacity issues to make decisions for themselves, and that is extremely welcome. Another core aspect explores the role of the state when it considers that individuals do not have the mental capacity to advocate for themselves and the role of the state in acting in the best interests of those people. <BR /> <BR />While I do not want to go into the detail of the Bill today, the core focus of our scrutiny should be to ensure that the right legal framework is in place to ensure that decision-makers acting on behalf of the state and, subsequently, in the best interests of individuals have the ability and training and are accountable for making decisions on behalf of other people and in their interests.”
“<BR /> <BR />I recognise Members' comments today about the need to reform the legislation, but we should not lose sight of the fact that this is the power of devolution and the benefits of the Assembly. If the Assembly were to collapse or were not here, we would not be doing this. This much-needed legislation would go, and that is worth looking at. When we see the development of legislation like this, we see the very best of the Assembly in scrutinising and progressing it through its stages. We look at the impasses and the politics that make this place work. We need to be sure that we can deliver this legislation, because huge numbers of people are affected and are depending on it. I welcome the fact that the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety is working so closely with the Department of Justice.”
“I have only a few brief comments about the Bill. I welcome the Bill, despite the time that it has taken to develop it. It has been a long time in getting to this stage: during the 2007-2011 Assembly mandate, I served on the Health Committee, and we took evidence back then. At one stage, it looked like there would be two Bills, and we have narrowed that down to one Bill. However, it is a huge piece of legislation with a lot of ramifications. Compared with other areas of the UK, this is slightly different with regard to mental capacity legislation, and we are in a stronger position than the rest of the UK with the creation of a single comprehensive framework for reforming mental health legislation and capacity legislation.”
“I should declare an interest as a recipient of single farm payment. Surely the Minister must know the very difficult financial situation that farmers face. Our dairy sector is in real crisis at the moment; there are problems with beef; sheep are in difficulties; grain is in difficulties. Many farmers will be in financial desperation and in need of the single farm payment. Surely it is incumbent on her to have a contingency plan to make sure that single farm payments are paid on time to every farmer this year.”