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 8 of 20.
“In a time of austerity, when Departments are struggling for cash — and when many are not entirely sure what their agreed budget line is at this stage of the financial year — we are spending significantly more on SpAds than our Scottish and Welsh counterparts, which are easy to use for a direct comparison because they are devolved Governments. <BR /> <BR />This may be a more powerful institution than the Welsh Assembly Government; it may have more powers. It does, of course, have a coalition form of Government, but so had the Scottish and Welsh Governments. The Scottish Government had a Lib Dem/Labour coalition from 1999-2007 and several First Ministers at that time. The Welsh, over that time, have had a mix between the Labour/Lib Dem and the Labour/Plaid Cymru coalitions.”
“The Member proposing the Bill is not exactly restricting SpAds to a life of destitution. I would have thought that, at £78,000, he was setting the bar fairly high, with a decent balance between attracting people that we need into the specialist roles that a special adviser should fulfil and putting in a cap. <BR /> <BR />The very fact that average salaries in Northern Ireland are lower than in other constituent parts of the nation makes you wonder how on earth our settlement costs us, on average, £30,500 more per head than in Scotland and a staggering £45,000 more per head than in Wales. These are the difficulties that the Bill seeks to address.”
“I would like to begin by congratulating Mr Allister on getting to this stage; it certainly looks as if it will get through. There is agreement on the broad principles of various parts of the Bill from various political parties. <BR /> <BR />The key parts of the Bill are around the disciplinary code being applied when people are temporary civil servants. I think that is important. It is important to set a standard and have something to measure that standard. We would expect it of others, so why would it not apply to SpAds? <BR /> <BR />On the issue of pay, if I picked it up correctly at the Committee last week, it is actually a salary of £78,000. Bear in mind that it is £30,000 more than MLAs get paid, and probably close to four times the average salary in Northern Ireland.”
“This Bill is a chance, by the next Assembly term, to change the dynamic of our Northern Ireland Government and Assembly and make them fit for purpose. <BR /> <BR />Use the Bill as the vehicle to make that change happen and get on and give real purpose, direction and meaning to what a Government does, with the robust challenge and scrutiny that an opposition can bring.”
“An election would make not one jot of difference. It would be largely the same faces and same parties. A few seats might change here and there, but we would come back to face the same problems. <BR /> <BR />How do we deal with all these issues? This Bill provides a mechanism to do that. I accept that the Government may have to park some issues that cannot be dealt with, but get on and do the stuff that we can agree on, and do government, not endless peace process negotiation. What we have had for the last 18 years is government by peace process negotiation. <BR /> <BR />By next May, the peace process will have the first people casting their votes — if they can make it out to a polling station — who were born after the Good Friday Agreement and are of that era. So, the first truly post-conflict generation is coming of age to vote.”
“Do we want to be responsible for ourselves and our own future and our children's future? The crux of this Bill is deciding whether we can have a future in which we work together, that demands partnership in government, scrutiny from an opposition and provides an alternative. <BR /> <BR />There is nothing in the Bill that says that opposition parties have to work together. There is nothing that says that the UUP as an opposition has to work with the SDLP, Alliance or any of us. However, the electoral advantage of starting to work together and look like an alternative to the Government changes the dynamics in here and the way that people think. <BR /> <BR />One reason that so many people predicted that we might have an election by now or in November or at any time is because so many people knew that nothing would change.”
“We have the St Andrews Agreement, the agreement at Hillsborough, the Stormont House Agreement, Stormont Castle agreement — we have them all, and where are we at this point? <BR /> <BR />This Bill provides a vehicle and a timely way to vote yes or no at some point. We have to decide whether we want to reform this place or continue in the way we have been going. We have to decide. It is up to every one of us and our parties to decide whether we want to continue with what we have had over past years, with indecision and constant crisis, with one crisis here and another one there or whether the Assembly and Executive will survive until next week. We have to decide whether we have had enough of that brinkmanship. We have to decide whether we want to do government.”
“I have no great issues with the suggestion for a civic forum. This place has to be the supreme seat of representative democracy in Northern Ireland. Could a civic forum add value to it or some ideas? Absolutely, of course it could. <BR /> <BR />As for the point about renegotiating all, we have effectively been negotiating all my life, and not just my adult life. I was born in February 1972, and we have been negotiating for all of that period. We have been negotiating since Sunningdale, when I was a small boy, to constitutional conventions and rolling devolution in the 1980s, to the Hume/Adams talks here in the early 1990s, to the ceasefires and the Good Friday Agreement. We have an agreement named after almost every country estate in the United Kingdom.”
“I expect that d'Hondt will be used for a considerable time to come as people's right to a place in the Government. I am not about trying to gang up on any one party to put them out of the Government. The challenge is to respond, be responsible and act like you are in the Government. Therefore, I will defend sticking with d'Hondt.”
“That costs the Assembly £767,000 a year by the time you add in National Insurance contributions and pensions. <BR /> <BR />He also mentioned giving up ministerial office and power. That is why there is a threshold built in; d'Hondt is your way in. I am surprised at him talking about d'Hondt being such a travesty. I expected that from Mr Allister, but not from Mr McCrea. He will well know that we are not in a position to move away from d'Hondt. He will well know that I respect all the parties here and their mandate.”
“I do not know what changed his mind. I think that he well knows the issues that NI21 floundered on. <BR /> <BR />I am surprised that he is not as supportive of technical groups. It is not compulsory to be in a technical group. If he did not want to be part of that, he would not have to be. Indeed, if anyone did not want him to be part of it, he would not have to be either. He asked about financial support and a SpAd for the leader of the opposition. I think that financial support on these matters is best left to a review panel. I did say, when opening the debate, that if you were to move and wanted to keep it as cost-neutral to the Assembly as possible, you could quite easily move to the Departments paying all or a percentage of the ministerial salaries that they are responsible for, rather than the Assembly paying it all.”
“I am grateful, Deputy Speaker. On the issue of community designation in the Bill, I will quote from the Member's party website, which was up until the end of March or the start of April this year. It said:”
“You will get your chance. <BR /> <BR />Mr McCrea also made some comment about designation being important to me. I think that, if the record is checked, we will find that Mr McCrea is still designated as a unionist. It was obviously such a pressing thing to change in May 2014 that he could not even get that done.”
“I am happy to confirm that, and I look forward to an update on how he got on with his public procurement Bill.”
“That is fine, but those two points certainly nail the myth that Mr McCrea invented opposition.”
“I am not sure that that is entirely consistent with what he said. He went on:”
“If somebody wants to hold a referendum and thinks that that is a good idea, I would not be opposed to it, but I am just not convinced, in a representative democracy, that this is the place to do that. <BR /> <BR />Turning to Mr McCrea's contribution, I gathered that he was wanting very much to say that he had invented opposition. <BR /> <BR />I will quote two things to him initially. This is from his launch speech for the leadership of the Ulster Unionist Party in 2010:”
“He knows that I have often said to him, "You do know that when you sign a petition of concern, Mr Agnew, your vote does not count?". Neither does Mr Lunn's vote count; and I think that this is inherently wrong. The votes of nine Members in the Chamber do not count at that point. We, therefore, need to move and change that. <BR /> <BR />I am not overly convinced about Mr Agnew's point on holding a referendum. I thought that 71·25% of the population voting yes in 1998 had settled the issue, with everybody turning round and saying, "The people have spoken. Isn't it great?". But, we have spent the 17 and a half years since the referendum fighting about it. So, I am never entirely convinced that it is entirely appropriate to have a referendum on, at times, quite technical changes. Ms Sugden brought that up as well.”
“That is why I think that a collective Cabinet and a change in culture are needed. <BR /> <BR />Too often in the House, when Members and Ministers get up to speak about the Government, they do so as though they are thinking about London or Dublin; they do not think that they are the Government of Northern Ireland. So, there needs to be a sea change. I agree with Mr Agnew, in that I am quite keen to hear it being referred to as the Government of Northern Ireland in future. <BR /> <BR />On the ministerial code and the issue of accountability, I think that Mr Agnew is well placed on the Standards and Privileges Committee to look at that. I certainly welcome anything like that. I think that Ms Sugden mentioned it as well. Anything like that is to the good. <BR /> <BR />Mr Agnew is right about petitions of concern.”
“<BR /> <BR />On the legislation not being required for all, I think that when basing it on Standing Orders and in primary legislation, then that means that it is about much more than just the grace and favour of the Executive arm of government. It makes sure that the Government are listening. <BR /> <BR />Mr Agnew is in favour of collective responsibility. I think that you have only to look at many Government policies to quickly see that they read like a set of football results. That is why we have to move away from that. We have parties in the Government voting against the Budget. That would bring down Governments in other places, but parties can do that without taking any great responsibility because they know that the big two have enough to carry the Budget. That is not being a responsible party in a Government.”
“We remove community designations, put in a threshold and change the dynamics of how this place works. I think that that is vital. <BR /> <BR />Mr Agnew was quite right when he opened and said that many people probably told me that I could not do this. You are right: I heard that quite a few times. They said, "You can't do it. How do you get round the competencies? We need Westminster". As I said when opening the debate, I think three different debates in the House of Lords nailed that firmly down. Baroness Randerson, speaking on behalf of the then coalition Government, and Lord McAvoy, speaking on behalf of the Labour Opposition, made it quite clear that they would not act without the Northern Ireland Assembly and Executive being the initiator of that action. This Bill is the way to initiate that; it is the vehicle with which to do it.”
“<BR /> <BR />I am pleased that Mr Allister agrees with the renaming of OFMDFM. He made a point about giving real effect to this in getting a lot of the schedule passed. The things that we can do here are great for the opposition. The prize of getting so much of the schedule through is that we change how our Executive works; we challenge that and we build in collective Cabinet government.”
“It is simply a mechanism to make sure that your opposition in a technical group is of a certain size so that it can access enhanced speaking rights and membership of the Business Committee. That is why it is welcome. It could certainly change the dynamic and it answers the points made by Ms Sugden and Mr McCrea in that it would guarantee Members in this corner a speaking slot in every debate. That changes things quite dramatically. On many occasions, Mr Deputy Speaker, you and your colleagues do your level best to include as many people and as wide a cross-section of views as possible but, on very many occasions, it is not possible to include anyone from this corner. Indeed, during a certain Budget debate, which was time-limited, because I tabled an amendment to it I was possibly the only one from these Benches who got to speak.”
“He rightly pointed out that he was a member of a technical group in the European Parliament and that the Dáil has one. Newry, Mourne and Down District Council has a technical group which is the third-largest grouping in the council. There are no political affiliations among the members involved, but it includes an independent republican, the Alliance Party and a couple of other independents. They qualify for extra speaking time in the council, which is something to be welcomed. <BR /> <BR />If the six of us or any collection of six people wanted to do that and trigger extra rights and a seat on the Business Committee, it does not mean that we are signing up to agree with each other on anything.”
“I sometimes wish that we were in a position to move away from it, but d'Hondt guarantees parties of a certain size their entry into government. It is then up to those parties to accept that responsibility. There is a responsibility in being in government. In certain ways, it is easier to be in opposition and always saying, "This is terrible", or, "That is no good", or whatever. Being in government carries a huge responsibility; being a Government Back-Bencher must be a terrible burden, with not many perks in the job and all the criticisms. That is why, if you use the d'Hondt system, parties must face up to the challenge, negotiate a Programme for Government and move on. <BR /> <BR />I very much welcome Mr Allister's support for moving away from the tribal nature of designation.”
“We have never matured into the politics of grown-up government and actually dealing with the issues or, indeed, coming up with policy innovations that would tackle that. Our one policy agreement seems to be that London should send us more money; what we would do with it would be anybody's guess. It is time — the Bill presents the opportunity — for Northern Ireland to come of age, grow up, govern ourselves and meet the challenges of government. <BR /> <BR />Mr Allister, obviously, was somewhat surprised that we would need a debate on having an opposition. He said that of course there should be an opposition and at least the Bill is moving in the right direction. I could have comfortably predicted that the one area he would denounce me for would be staying wedded to d'Hondt.”
“We still seem to look somewhat of the teens and early twenties; not long left for university, still have the apron strings fairly tied to them, and do not want to do much without somebody giving support or sending money. I am sure that some of you who have young people at university get the call every once in a while to send more money across. That, essentially, seems to be where we are stuck.”
“My hope, and why you would separate out the Budget process and have a Budget Committee and a Finance Committee, is that the Finance Committee could handle all the other stuff, such as rating policies, personnel and voluntary exit schemes, but the Budget Committee would focus on the Budget process. The Budget process changes that have been long talked about and championed by people like Mr Cree would come to some sort of fruition at this stage. Most people in the Chamber seem to agree that the Budget process is wholly inadequate now. <BR /> <BR />Mr Lunn also talked about getting maturity and growing up. Northern Ireland is coming close to 100 years old. I am not quite sure that we have really grown up.”
“I think that the point was well made by Mr Agnew that, sometimes, we do have a Government and an opposition; they just happen to be all the same people. That is the really disappointing thing and what gets us into such difficulty with making decisions: everyone is in government and in opposition. Those should be two very clear, distinct roles. <BR /> <BR />The Deputy Chair of the Committee for Finance and Personnel, Mr Bradley, in an intervention, talked about the Budget process. I have to say that I agree with Mr Lunn and with Mr Bradley's intervention. Mr Cree is in the Chamber. During my opening speech, I mentioned that the financial process has been a longstanding bugbear of his. We have to do everything and end up doing it by accelerated passage. We get information at the last minute.”
“That is why the Bill is here: it bases those rights in legislation and makes it very difficult for a future Executive or Government to take them away, as indeed was Mr McCartney's worry. That is why it is good and useful to have that legislation. He mentioned technical groups in the opposition and looking at resources. He also mentioned the sectarian nature of the OFMDFM headcount but was supportive overall of reform of the Assembly and Executive. Indeed, as a Minister of almost five years' service, he is probably well placed to comment on it. <BR /> <BR />I turn now to Mr Lunn, who welcomed the Bill. I agree with him that it will test the Assembly. There are challenges in there around the petition of concern and community designation. He welcomed the opposition and questioned the need for a Government.”
“In welcoming the Bill, Mr Kennedy talked about the power to vote a party out of government. I agree with his point that the Assembly has not evolved at the speed or pace that society has in 17 years; we may even think that the Assembly is probably significantly behind society on many issues. Rather than bringing people in, the structures put people off. I agree with Mr Kennedy because not only do we put people off and voter engagement is low, but even those of us who are in our second term here and those who have served longer will know that engagement by lobby groups and charities is not nearly as significant as it was during my first term. <BR /> <BR />Mr Kennedy rightly made the point about revitalising the Assembly. He referred to Lord Empey's attempts in the House of Lords and about rights that are based in legislation.”
“Without repeating what I have said, I think that it is as important to be included in the political community as it is to be included in government. He talked about being nervous about changes to community designation, but I think that he was open to that debate. I very much welcome his comments around that. Again, there was some nervousness around the size of technical groups. He used a quote from Seamus Mallon, a former deputy First Minister, about being at peace with ourselves and setting out integrity and vision. That is what the Bill is about. It is setting out a vision for how we address not just the bugbears that always come back to bite us, but all of the problems, be they around educational underachievement or economic reform — all of the things that we have to do, and do significantly better.”
“During the recent debate about water, Sinn Féin ended up with an average of something like four seconds in which to address each amendment that its Members had tabled. That is when an Executive has too much power over the legislative branch. That should not happen, and it should not happen in this Chamber. Therefore, I think that the way in which Sinn Féin has been using opposition in the Dáil is a good example of holding a Government to account. <BR /> <BR />Mr Rogers very much welcomed the Bill. He welcomes the proposals on topical questions, the Chair of the Public Accounts Committee and funding, and very much welcomes the policy on d'Hondt. Again, he mentioned the Good Friday Agreement and inclusivity.”
“Those are some of the changes that, I think, would be welcomed. I think that it is very important that they are based in primary legislation. <BR /> <BR />Mr McCartney and, I think, Mr Rogers talked about Good Friday Agreement-proofing the legislation. As a supporter of the Good Friday Agreement, I do not have a problem with that. I firmly believe that what I propose in this is based around the principles of inclusivity, but not only in government through the d'Hondt process. I accept that I want to set a threshold on that and give people enhanced rights in opposition, but that is inclusivity in the political process. That is vital. Therefore, I am confident that the Bill will meet the test he is setting. <BR /> <BR />One of his colleagues made a point to me about Sinn Féin's role as an opposition party in Dáil Éireann.”
“I am grateful to colleagues for participating in the debate. In opening the debate, I said that this, to my mind, was a carefully thought-out package. When you put it in as a whole, it works, because you have the collectiveness of a Government working together. You have an opposition, and you have a place that you can hang the rights for Members in opposition. <BR /> <BR />Mr McCartney talked about linking into d'Hondt, and he said that you could do some of this, or maybe most of it, by Standing Orders. That goes back to what he said in response to my point about the 1929 changes to the electoral system. It becomes much harder to change Standing Orders if they are based in primary legislation. Therefore we guarantee those rights of the Assembly and of any opposition that we create flowing from this. Mr Kennedy also mentioned those.”
“Therefore, it would remove section 18(2) and those lines about being able to nominate Ministers and just make sure that the qualifying party had over 5% or six Members of the Assembly. Hopefully, that clarifies the point.”
“I am grateful to the Member for giving way. I know that he was otherwise detained with important stuff around air ambulance work that he is involved in. <BR /> <BR />Literally, the amendment that is to be finalised will read something along the lines of:”
“I am not sure whether he is about to announce that the Minister of the Environment is resigning.”
“The Bill gives the Executive a way of getting that purpose and direction. It is incumbent on the parties in that Executive to get purpose and direction to set the policies, develop their agenda and move on and get elected and set that agenda. Let us all move on and change Northern Ireland very much for the better, and let us make it work.”
“However, for us to get that, we need to be fit for purpose. The Bill, I truly believe, delivers some of that. <BR /> <BR />If, Mr Speaker, like many colleagues in the House, your outlook is to be part of an all-Ireland republic, that is entirely fine and legitimate. I respect that right, and I respect your ability to make those arguments. I might fundamentally disagree, but if you are serious about ever making that argument, you have to make this place work, you have to look like you are a party of government, you have to look like you accept the responsibilities of being in government, and you have to rise to those challenges. <BR /> <BR />In moving the Second Stage of Assembly and Executive Reform (Assembly Opposition) Bill, I end with the quote from John Fitzgerald Kennedy that I have used before:”
“For too long, we have looked like such a dysfunctional place — almost the basket-case corner of the UK. I want to see us working. The prize for us all is that, when we look round and see that the UK constitution is in a state of flux, we see more powers that we could devolve here to a functioning Assembly. There are many more tax-varying powers, not just corporation tax; there are changes to income tax and bands of income tax, possible changes that Scotland and the Welsh are looking at, and the Chancellor announced during his conference speech that he wants to give powers to local government — the whole idea of empowering English cities and the northern powerhouse. You can see throughout the agenda that the real driving force is to devolve power closer to the people, and that is something that we should encourage.”
“Regardless of your constitutional outlook, goodness knows that we vote at every election as if it were a referendum on the border, and we vote at every election as if the border were up for grabs, even though it is not; 1998 secured the consent principle. I was speaking to a friend who moved to Scotland 14 or 15 years ago and who is very much a unionist, believes in Scotland, voted no in the referendum but was happy to vote for the SNP because he thought that it was doing a decent job on agriculture. That is where we need to get to: where policy matters, where manifestos matter and making Northern Ireland work. <BR /> <BR />With regard to the constitutional agenda, if you believe, as I do passionately, that we are best served by being part of the United Kingdom, this is about making Northern Ireland work.”
“It will create a dynamic Government that can make decisions, can function and can deliver on Transforming Your Care without other Ministers out protesting. We can get an Executive that can bring forward their shared education agenda and move ahead with that, can get an economic strategy, and can, when they write that the economy is at the heart of this Government, look as if they mean it. That is an important change. Above all, I want a Northern Ireland Assembly that works, a Government that works and a Northern Ireland that works.”
“<BR /> <BR />This is not about excluding a party with a large mandate; it is about good, effective governance. I want, more than anything else, for my young children to see a future in Northern Ireland. I want a vibrant economy with a growing private sector and a much reduced dependence on the state. I do not want to become a parent whose best advice to my 18-year-old is to get out of here. I do not want to bring up my three kids with a view to them having to leave. I want them to be part of it. <BR /> <BR />To everyone in this Chamber, I say that this is at the heart of it: it is about putting a package together that works and that gives the balance of powers to government and to opposition.”
“Their functions will instead become to scrutinise Ministers. <BR /> <BR />Paragraph 15 of the schedule refers to a simple majority vote for the Budget. Once we move to having that simple majority vote, we can start to say that we are normalising our politics here. That is us starting to say that we are normalising; we are ready and fit to take on the future and we are setting out a collective approach to government. I made the point earlier that this Bill and all the processes and thought behind it are a result of conversations with parties around this Chamber, in Westminster and in the Dáil about making effective government. If the Bill is approved today, I hope to present to the Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement in Dáil Éireann in a few weeks.”
“This is what happens; parties fight elections, they bring their manifestos and they negotiate. <BR /> <BR />In the lead-up to the 2015 UK election, the entire Civil Service machinery was looking at manifesto commitments from different parties. When it looked as though there may have been a coalition Government, it looked at what the negotiations might be. Who might be in government? Who might provide confidence and supply? Those are a normal part of the democratic functions. <BR />The functions of a Statutory Committee will change from:”
“<BR /> <BR />Paragraph 13 of the schedule is about lengthening the time taken to agree the Programme for Government. I think that the Stormont House Agreement stated that it should be two weeks; I have suggested four weeks to negotiate it. If you recall, in 2010 in the United Kingdom, it took the Lib Dems and the Tories four or five days to negotiate that. In the Republic of Ireland, Fine Gael and Labour took maybe two and a half to three weeks. It is vital to get a Programme for Government nailed down, meaningful and including what you want, and for the Government collectively to put their shoulder to the wheel to deliver on that agenda. We expect that when councils get together and consider their agendas for council mandates and we expect it in every other Government.”
“It also means that if we run d'Hondt as one piece, there is an incentive for the smaller parties, which instead of being entitled to pick a Minister get an extra chairmanship. They get a pick at a Chair or Deputy Chair. That will give a higher percentage of Chairs to smaller parties. It very much meets the inclusivity criterion by giving them a prominent role in the opposition, and in the political community, of the Northern Ireland Assembly. Paragraph 11 gives an extra incentive to do that. I have to say that, when you have the choice of one Minister and the impact that you can have, there are endless complaints that you are treated very badly. You would be much better in opposition, chairing Committees, preparing, scrutinising, and looking like an alternative Administration at some point in the future.”
“As the earlier quotation from Eoin Daly puts it, it is passed down from Westminster. The 300-year old convention at Westminster is that if you disagree with Government policy, you leave the Government. It is also in the Irish constitution: if Sinn Féin was ever elected into the Government of the Irish Republic, it would be bound to act as a single unit by article 28 of the constitution. That is an important change. We have to get to the point where we look and act and sound like a Government of Northern Ireland by making those changes. <BR /> <BR />I will take paragraphs 10 and 11 together. Paragraph 10 sets out the threshold for the nomination of Ministers. It puts in a minimum of 16·6%. That is to future-proof it, Mr Speaker, for a smaller Assembly of 90 Members — or for a possible reduction to 90 Members.”
“I think that it is hugely important to remove that sectarian element. <BR /> <BR />Paragraph 4 calls for changes to the 1998 Act by replacing cross-community with weighted-majority voting. A weighted-majority vote may be triggered by 30 signatures from different political parties. The threshold in a weighted-majority vote is 60%. The safeguards are there. <BR /> <BR />Paragraph 7 provides for the Speaker to be elected by weighted majority in a secret ballot, following the example of the House of Commons. The Speaker would then be elected as, effectively, MLA for Stormont. <BR /> <BR />Paragraph 8 allows for the renaming of the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister. Not only is there a single unitary Government, but collective ministerial responsibility is written into the ministerial code.”