Basil McCrea
Lagan Valley · Ulster Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“I carried on that work on the all-party group on science and technology, and, when I am gone from this place, I hope that those who are still here will take up the challenge of science and technology, because that is where the jobs are and that is where the future is.”
“I rise for the last time to address the Assembly. I thank the people of Lagan Valley for the privilege of representing them over the past nine years. It seems like only yesterday that I first got here, awestruck by the names on the doors of people that I had seen only on television, and, yet, here we are.”
“— what matters is to have the courage to go on. I will go on. I will leave this place with my head high, with my colours flying, with my dignity intact and with all conviction about what is good for Northern Ireland. In conclusion, two roads diverged in the woods, and I took the road less travelled. That has made all the difference.”
“Despite the heckling from the man in front of me, I shall ask a question of the Minister in two parts. First, would the Minister care to tell us what was his personal favourite of the many events at the Northern Ireland Science Festival?”
“I am grateful to the Member for the explanation, and I have no doubt that her efforts to draft the amendment were well-intentioned. Maybe she can help me on this, if it has come up in the discussions.”
“Actually, when I read it, I understood it to be the other way round. However, I am happy that it is a more general stance and is not limited to single acts. <BR /> <BR />As regards amendment No 2, I approached the concept in a sympathetic manner, but I am not convinced that we can properly define an imbalance of power.”
The complete record
Every one of 747 lines we hold for Basil McCrea, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 15.
“The Member has been talking about nations. I draw her attention to the plight of Pakistan, where one of the most densely populated areas in the world is under huge threat. Many countries are saying that a reduction of 2°C is too much and that we should be aiming at 1·5°C. Even if we were to get 2°C, it is by no means certain that that would fix the problem.”
“Thank you for giving way. In exhorting people to invest, does the Member think that the Northern Ireland Executive should invest in the grid infrastructure so that we can bring more wind power online? What is his position on the interconnector with the South of Ireland?”
“The Member issued a challenge to the Ulster Unionist Party, but I invite him to clarify his position. What I have heard so far is a lack of consensus. Does the Democratic Unionist Party accept that climate change is a problem, and will it take any actions necessary to address the problem?”
“I know the point that he is making about those most vulnerable, but climate change is catastrophic. I do not think that people have got their head around the fact that it is not just Pakistan that it is going to affect; it is us as well. We really do have to do something and do something urgently.”
“I understand that this announcement comes from a decision by the Executive on 10 March 2011. That is some time ago, and a lot has changed since, not least our financial position. Has the Minister had cause to bring this issue back to the Executive to ask them whether they are sure that, in light of other priorities, we really ought to be investing £36 million in this venture?”
“I welcome the statement and congratulate the Minister for the way in which she delivered it. I am particularly pleased by her recognition of the arts voice that has come to the fore. I realise that the Minister is busy but did she, by any chance, catch, on BBC 2 last night, 'Ireland with Simon Reeve', which covered, in Derry/Londonderry, the Playhouse and various other issues such as art in the Bogside. Does she think that there is any connection there, in explaining to Members present, how important the arts are to Delivering Social Change, Together: Building a United Community, and how we might encourage everybody to help the arts?”
“Since Mr McNarry has asked, I will. I caught the start of Mr Attwood's speech, but, as some of you will know, I have to go for a daily walk for health reasons. I am proud to say that, having taken an hour's walk around the premises, I came back and, fortunately, he was still on his feet, so I did not miss that much of it. It is great to have such a contribution in a democratic forum.”
“Your electoral mandate is still respected, and you will still have the say, but, if we really want to make the changes in Northern Ireland that we want to see, it is better that we get more rather than fewer people involved. <BR /> <BR />You have all very kindly listened to me. I hope that I have not gone on too long. I am sorry if I bored anybody. Mr Attwood is not here; I had a joke for him but —”
“<BR /> <BR />I will conclude my comments by saying that the aspirations of the people of Northern Ireland are that we find a way of working together, accepting that it is difficult and that there are many, many issues that we disagree on. Those who agree on a way forward should form an Executive and work together, but the bigger parties in that Executive should treat the smaller parties with respect. You should not just treat them as some sort of inconvenience to be dealt with, by the by. Agendas for the Executive come in late. Frankly, even today, when Mr Allister raised his motion asking why we are rushing this so far and so fast, we should have been given the courtesy of being allowed to see the documents. We should have been brought into the conversation.”
“<BR /> <BR />In dealing with welfare reform, the key issue is that a life on benefits should not be a long-term ambition. That is not what we want to see; we want people to have aspirations and the ability to do better and to get a job or skills. When I look at this negotiation in its totality, what I would like to see — I am not sure that I see it yet — is vision. I would like to see that, OK, we are going to deal with welfare because it is essential in the short term; nobody wants to see anybody disadvantaged, and I think that many people in Northern Ireland will benefit from this deal. However, it is not the long-term solution. We have to find a way of growing an economy, and the only way to do that is by having some form of political stability.”
“Will you please do something?" <BR /> <BR />There are certain issues that we may not yet have grasped. A few days ago, the 'Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings, 2015' was published. Would you believe that Northern Ireland topped the league in earnings growth? That, of course, comes from a pretty poor past, considering the impact that the crisis has had on us. However, the issue facing those who attack the Conservatives — I am not arguing for the Conservatives; I am only saying that you must understand the environment that we are working in — is that they think that their policies are working. They think that they have taken action on debt and the deficit, the economy is growing, wages are growing, and the economy will be on a sounder footing.”
“She said that you cannot look at the motion in isolation because it is not just about welfare reform; it is part of a political settlement. I say to her that isolation does not stop there. The harsh reality for this place is that we represent 2·4% of the United Kingdom, so the other 98% of people will take a view about what they do. We do not dictate to people. Hopefully, we go together to explain our difficulties and hope that our arguments will see favour with the people who have the resources. <BR /> <BR />We spend approximately £20 billion in Northern Ireland and raise £10 billion in taxes. If it were the other way round, we could do whatever we liked and wanted with welfare reform, but that is not the case. We have to go and ask people, "Will you please invest in us?”
“<BR /> <BR />A few issues probably need to be changed. People say, "I would like you to show leadership", but they mean by that, "You are absolutely wrong. I do not agree with you". The truth of the matter is that very few people get thanked for showing leadership in this place. Absolutely the last thing that you want to be doing is showing leadership. It is the ministerial equivalent of, "Yes, Minister, a very courageous decision". Who wants to make a very courageous decision with an election looming? That is why politics in this place do not work. <BR /> <BR />The issue of tax credits is associated with welfare. Michelle O'Neill made what I thought was a particularly telling comment in her contribution, but maybe not in the context that she meant it. Nevertheless, it was valid.”
“Yet we passed a Budget that we did not have the resources to meet. Part of the problem was that we could not get agreement on welfare reform. For what it is worth, I understand the difficulties that the DUP and Sinn Féin have tried to address. <BR /> <BR />Other parties now take some issue with the deal that has been put forward. I am someone who has long advocated opposition. I think that there should be an opposition in any democratic forum, but it should not be opposition simply for opposition's sake, taking an opportunistic stance and saying that we might get a few electoral votes out of it. It has to say that there is an alternative. What this place really needs, in my opinion, is not just an opposition but an effective alternative, and those of us who disagree with the current system need to come forward with one.”
“I say that because, nearly every time that I talk to Mr Maskey, he, at best, tells me off and, at worst, tells me that I am talking rubbish. I am a bigger man than that, and I can say that his was a good contribution. I expect people to come out strongly, fight and say that this is the best deal that we can get, so I will not be one of those chiding Sinn Féin for the deal that it got. Sinn Féin negotiated and negotiated hard. I do not know what is in the deal because I have not read the 126 pages, but Sinn Féin believes in what it got and is fighting for it. <BR /> <BR />In a similar vein, I was aware of the challenges that the DUP had. At the time, the Minister of Finance went to great lengths to explain to the Assembly that we had to pass the so-called phantom Budget — otherwise, we would not have the authority to spend.”
“I have said in previous speeches that I wish, such are the difficulties of dealing with the important subject of welfare reform, that it was a five-party coalition. In fact, I wish that other parties had been involved in the debate that led to an agreed way forward. These issues are so difficult that they cannot be resolved against a background of political opportunism, because that destroys the public's belief in the body politic. Mr McNarry, who is not yet back from his comfort break — I hope that it is going well for him — said that this was how people look at us. They look here, and they do not see this great debate. <BR /> <BR />There were some good contributions that I was impressed by. I did not catch everybody's contribution, but I caught Mr Maskey's. I thought that he spoke very strongly and very eloquently.”
“Other Members are against it because we were not given enough information, but they think that it should be done nevertheless. Even Members who argued strongly that it is a good idea took up most of their time saying why they think that there are bad bits about it. All of that gives a terribly confusing image to the public.”
“Mr McNarry needs some comfort, and he is away to get that. <BR /> <BR />I have but one page of notes. I tried to take some wisdom from the contributions here today. Paula Bradley started off. I got to hear her say that she had looked over the contributions that people had made in the previous debates and found that nobody really had clean hands on this, or something like that. I checked to see what position I had taken in previous debates on the issue, and I was relieved to discover that I have been remarkably consistent and that I have indicated that I will support the motion. <BR /> <BR />That leads me to something that is worth saying, though: it is all terribly confusing. Some of the people who were against it in principle are now voting for it because they think it needs to be done.”
“I actually have but one page of notes that I have taken, having listened diligently.”
“I have been asked three times on the way to the Benches how long I will be. Obviously there is no concern about what I will actually say, just how long I will be. <BR /> <BR />As I have sat listening to previous Members, I have been in the Minister's direct line of sight. I wonder — no doubt he will tell us in his memoirs — what he thought about during this long period. You get quite an interesting read of the body language. I can tell you, Mr Speaker — I mean no disrespect to my colleague Mr McNarry — that also in my line of sight is the page upon page upon page that he has so eloquently delivered to us just now. That is a bit of a challenge.”
“At this time of the evening, one wonders whether there is anything worth saying.”
“Like Mr Farry, I will, in all probability, support the LCM, but I think that we should not rush into it. As a matter of principle, when you are asked to consent to something but you do not know what it is, and, as far as I am aware, it has not been laid, that seems to be a very dangerous precedent to set. If you are going to agree to something on a legislative basis, it ought to be in front of you so that you can see what you are agreeing to. On that basis, I will be supporting Mr Allister's motion.”
“I think that Mr Allister was quite prescient in bringing this to our attention. In his response, the Minister made a good argument for why Standing Order 42A needed to be suspended. I take on board that there would otherwise be a four-week delay that may cause some problems in the legislative programme at Westminster. However, I am not sure that he addressed why we should not wait until next Tuesday. <BR /> <BR />There is some talk that this appears to be a deal between the DUP and Sinn Féin. I am sure that they do not want it to be that and that they would like it to be more inclusive and to bring more people into the debate. Therefore, there is an argument for delaying it for a week to give people a chance to study it and come forward with proposals.”
“The Minister has mentioned, a number of times, the technical monitoring round that may come up in January 2016. For those of us who follow these issues, it is quite a strange departure that such revaluations, if you like, are not brought back to the Executive. I just wonder why such a dramatic initiative is required because, certainly, there will be members of the Culture, Arts and Leisure Committee who are worried about internal reallocations going to places that were not thought of at the start of the year.”
“There is a danger that there will be a knee-jerk reaction against Islam and against Muslims. The ISIS strategy is to divide humanity. Not all those people are bad people. We must find a way to show our humanity and our support. We must win hearts and minds. That is the way forward, and it requires cool, calm and calculated thought and not necessarily a knee-jerk reaction.”
“I know that President Hollande will have been disappointed in the support that he had from some people when he wanted to take air strike initiatives. There was a vote in the House of Commons, and there was a reference to the United States Congress, but Hollande and France were left standing alone. That is why they are the ones who are identified as being at the point of this war. We, therefore, all have decisions to make about whether we are going to stand four-square with them and whether we are going to do more than just issue words and platitudes. We will have to consider what the right way forward is. <BR /> <BR />Mr Allister said that there are no good terrorists. I suppose that the rejoinder to that is that there are no good wars. What is the appropriate response that we all must make to this challenge to our democracy?”
“Of course, we must send our condolences to those who have suffered and show our solidarity in standing with France at this tragic time. One of the key questions that we might all consider, however, which has not yet been discussed in this Chamber, is why it is that France has become the focal point of the ISIS campaign. Why is it that France is identified as the crusader whilst others are not?”
“I will stand over my argument here, in a Committee or on the airwaves, because it is correct.”
“I am grateful to the Minister for giving way. My point, Minister, which you do not appear either to accept or understand, is that you are entitled to bring forward legislation seeking the end of academic selection, if you wish to do so. What you are not entitled to do, and what I worry about in the Bill, is to do that in an underhand way. This is a Trojan Horse. Had you brought forward the Bill and not mentioned those who are experiencing socio-economic deprivation, I would have followed your argument. This legislation is supposed to be about shared education. However, it gives you an open door to fund whatever you want, and I am just putting it to you here that, if you think that the Bill is going through without scrutiny and challenge, you are wrong. This is not the right way in which to go about it.”
“Will the Minister give way? Will he give way?”
“Is the Minister aware that some community groups feel that when you fund something, it attracts the attention of outside agencies and that this applies in particular — I will say it here — to paramilitaries? Is he aware that those community groups are looking for such funding, if there is to be a licensing scheme, to be properly recognised? Will he take the opportunity to meet some community leaders so that they can explain the problems that they are having?”
“Are you going to get agreements on those amendments? Or, are you going to push through something that lets the Minister of the day do whatever he likes? Members on the Benches opposite have a responsibility to stand up and fight for the education system in this part of the world because it is a good system. Of course there are areas that we need to address, but the issue is that doing it on one page of A4 is not the right way forward. <BR /> <BR />I intend to return to that after Committee Stage. This should not go through on the nod. Those Members sitting opposite really need to have a look at the Bill and see if they truly agree with it.”
“I was not on that Committee, though I have been in the past. I resile from that point of view. I do not think that it is the right way forward. I do not think that we should abandon integrated education nor try to supplant it with something different. The Bill, in its points, pays lip service to integration and, in the process, attempts to introduce a legislative framework that will allow the Minister of the day to produce finance for his own particular interests. <BR /> <BR />This is not the right way forward, and that is why the Bill is extremely dangerous. For those who say that they will give it a fair wind and have a look at it in the Committee, it is a Bill that is on two sides of A4 paper with no real clauses or information. What are you going to do at Committee Stage? Are you going to introduce 100 amendments?”
“We should not speak with weasel words. We should not pretend to be one thing and do another. We have to tackle the integration of our children if we want to have a future in this place. <BR /> <BR />I am coming to the end of my contribution. In its recent report on shared and integrated education, which it presented in September, the Committee for Education was spectacularly dismissive of integrated education. It stated:”
“She said that Mrs Foster's comment was "insulting" and:”
“as an essential element in the process of reconciliation and the creation of a culture of tolerance at every level of society. The Bill attempts to change that balance. It attempts to put shared education on a similar level as integrated education and, in the fullness of time, it will subsume that obligation. This is a change of political priorities, and it should not go unremarked. <BR /> <BR />There are people here who talk about shared education, who believe that it is in some way the same or analogous to integrated education. There are people who say the words, but they do not really mean them. It is a tick-box exercise. The principal of Enniskillen Integrated Primary School, Adele Kerr, was dismayed when Arlene Foster made comments about her school when Obama and Cameron came to see it. She said that it was:”
“I am sure that other Members will deal with it, but, as far back as 2010, the First Minister, Peter Robinson, described Northern Ireland's education system as being a "benign form of apartheid". <BR /> <BR />The Good Friday Agreement — the Belfast Agreement — contains a specific pledge to:”
“There was a poll by LucidTalk in 2013. I know that there are others, but these are the figures that I happen to have. In that poll, 66% said that they believed that integrated schools should be the main model for our education system; 68% said that they believed that integrated schools are the best settings to prepare children for living and working in an increasingly diverse society; and 79% said that they would support a request to transform the school that their children attend to an integrated school. <BR /> <BR />You go back to how our friends try to help us. Speaking in the Waterfront Hall in July 2013, no less a figure than President Obama said:”
“<BR /> <BR />Almost half of our children are taught in schools in which 95% or more of pupils are of the same religion. Only 7% attend integrated schools. It was suggested in the Committee that this shows the failure of integrated education, yet what I pick up from successive opinion polls — maybe others will have different information — is that the public at large want greater integration and an end to segregation.”
“They should be in a structure in which they can be educated on the basis of and where they are provided with services that they want to receive. I agree with Mr Allister that what really influences most parents is that they want quality education for their children. When I look at the Bill — Trojan Horse/Don Quixote — I see a really strange Bill. I just do not understand why such a modest proposal has been put forward. <BR /> <BR />There is a strategic issue. The fundamental fault line in our society, the Assembly and our political processes is the idea of maintaining Catholic, Protestant and separate. That is the issue that we have to resolve, and, simply put, this form of delivery will take too long. It will be hijacked for alternative strategies that have nothing to do with what is in the Bill.”
“I am happy to have other forms of education. It is time for another uncomfortable truth: I noted when Nelson McCausland was talking that he and I went to Belfast Royal Academy, as did Mr Lunn — we may have to have some form of reunion. That school has a very mixed intake. It is a grammar school that brings in people from all backgrounds and tries to reach, on the basis of merit, those who want an academic education. I do not want that school to have to change its position because it does not provide strictly integrated education, but, believe me, it is integrated education nonetheless. <BR /> <BR />If you want to know where I think that we should be strategically in 20 to 25 years' time — those of you who are interested in a lot of stepping stones — I think that our children should be freely educated together.”
“Others have made contributions about integrated education and the fact that only 7% of the population are involved in integrated education. The reason for that is that the numbers in integrated schools are capped, so those who wish to change to some form of integrated education are prevented from doing so. If you look through successive polls, you will see that there is willingness to change. <BR /> <BR />Some say that the Bill is a stepping stone. My problem with stepping stones is that they are all very well when you are dealing with shallow water and can get from one side to the other, but a stepping stone that leads you into a deep-water channel brings you nowhere but to destruction. We need not to put in place stepping stones but to build bridges. <BR /> <BR />I do not necessarily need to have an integrated structure per se.”
“<BR /> <BR />In a speech made by Mr Kennedy — I am sure that the words that I am about to say will cause him a little concern — I agreed with what he had to say, almost in its entirety. I realise that that may be something of a shock and we may have to revisit the issue, but he said that this short Bill does not take us very far. He said, in relation to the argument about Stranmillis and St Mary's, that, if people were genuine in their approach to shared education, they might have adopted a different position on that.”
“This is a Trojan Horse. It is an attempt to put finance where finance was not before. Given that we are dealing in a fixed sum of money, taking money from one source to give preference to the other will mean the demise of the financial contribution. <BR /> <BR />There may well be people here who tut-tut. When the great mantra of Don Quixote is brought up, I always know that a nerve has been touched, as it alludes to the fact that someone is mad to be suggesting the point that he or she is making. Well, in looking through the Bill, I see relatively few things to discuss other than these issues. It is not being a Don Quixote to point out the fallacy in the argument that is being put forward.”
“The Bill is an assault on the existing education structures. It is certainly an assault on integrated education. There are some who started their contribution by saying that it is "mercifully short". We must therefore take the opportunity to look at why the Bill has been introduced at all. What is the purpose of introducing a "mercifully short" Bill? <BR /> <BR />Mr Allister indicated that he may have to go. Before he does, I will deal with his issues. He was challenged by the Chief Whip of the DUP across the Chamber, and whether the Chief Whip of the DUP wants to take on Mr Allister or me, the argument will be the same. Clause 1(2)(b) states:”
“It seems to me that this is the central point of the Bill. This is indeed a Trojan Horse; an attack on existing structures and an attempt to bring in comprehensive education by an alternative route. The Member carried on and dealt with the matter, but I find it strange, and I ask him whether he also finds it strange, that the point has not been raised by any of the major parties heretofore?”
“You are very kind, Mr Allister. Actually, you have gone on to develop the theme; I was not sure that you were going to. As Mr Allister was aware, I highlighted clause 1(2)(b):”
“I want to ask the Member's opinion about the merit of the Bill being mercifully short. For a topic of this importance, maybe there ought to be a bit more substance to it. I find it strange that the Bill is only one A4 page in length. I wonder whether that is an omission rather than a positive.”
“Minister, given that Ulster University receives 40% of its funding from your Department and a significant amount of the balance from student loans, which also have a government bias, is it appropriate that you should be more directive in telling the universities what studies they should deliver and on which campus?”
“Minister, you will be aware that there are hundreds of people outside who want to talk to you about the arts. I listened carefully to your answer. Would it be possible for you to meet those representatives of the arts after Question Time? They promise that it will not be in any way contentious. They do not want it to be a political football, but they would like to present you with their open letter to explain their situation. Of course, you could then explain the situation to them directly.”