Paul Frew
North Antrim · Democratic Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“I thank the Minister for that intervention. Nevertheless, there are concerns that I want to address. The Minister and the departmental officials will know that, even from the range of questions that I have asked. We need to make sure that we get the balance correct.”
“In the written and oral evidence received then, the Committee was advised of potential amendments that the Minister may table at Consideration Stage, including an amendment to remove the commissioner that is being considered in liaison with OLC.”
“That in itself causes some victims and witnesses bother, because they are in a system that they are not part of, which means that they do not get the support that they require. That can sometimes leave them feeling retraumatised, as though they have been put through the wringer again.”
“The Bill makes provision to offer those protections and provide clarity to victims that they do not have to face their perpetrator in court. <BR /> <BR />Members asked questions about a range of matters, including the independence of the office, the ability to review the performance of any future commissioner, the costs of establishing th…”
“I thank the Minister for her intervention. She was absolutely right to take that action, as it means that victims' voices are right at the heart of the matters under discussion. It is now obvious to us that that should have been done years ago, but it is good that it is being done now.”
“Officials explained that the Bill would legislate on the disclosure regime not to prevent an application for disclosure but to set out a process whereby the defence would have to show the relevance of the information that it was requesting. That is an important protection.”
The complete record
Every one of 3,736 lines we hold for Paul Frew, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 31 of 75.
“Mindful of that, in a context in which we are not even properly funded to 124 from 2026-27, there can be no question of increased revenue raising until that matter is resolved. <BR /> <BR />In looking at revenue raising from the point of departure of suggesting that Northern Ireland rates are below those of GB, Treasury should get its facts right and recognise that the Northern Ireland business rate multipliers are higher than those in GB. The business rate multiplier for England in the coming year is 54·6; for Wales, it is 56·2; and, for Scotland, it is 54·5. For Northern Ireland, where the business rate is set partly by the district business rate, the average rate is 58·9681. In the Mid and East Antrim Borough Council area — in my constituency — it sits at 67·2415. In the Derry City and Strabane District Council area, it is 66·7608.”
“<BR /> <BR />The current Hillsborough proposals, updated in the letter of 13 February from the Chief Secretary to the Treasury to the Finance Minister, which we in the Committee have seen, deny Northern Ireland, first, the dignity of an uplift, which has been worth £1·17 billion to Wales between 2018 and 2024; and, secondly, the fiscal floor at need. The proposals instead offer a fiscal ceiling, and thus no uplift, and condemn us to being funded below the ceiling from 2026-27. When Treasury affords us the dignity of those two protections, only then should the Assembly consider going anywhere near increasing revenue. In doing so, it should be aware that Northern Ireland has the lowest taxable capacity in the UK, and that impacts on the definition of need. As the Fiscal Council noted about Northern Ireland:”
“In order for Northern Ireland to be afforded the same protections as Wales in relation to need, Treasury must now increase our baseline funding to the same amount just above need, as it did in Wales when it intervened to prevent Welsh funding falling below need through the provision of, first, the uplift to slow down the impact of the Barnett squeeze and, secondly, the fiscal floor at the Holtham definition of need. There are two aspects to Holtham. If the people of Wales are worthy of being protected against their funding falling below need through the provision of an uplift and a fiscal floor, so are the people of Northern Ireland.”
“We are resolute and uncompromising in insisting that, given the extraordinary, dislocating and disruptive implications of being funded below need, it is imperative that, as the Barnett squeeze presses parts of the UK to need and thus the prospect and reality of funding slipping below need, we be afforded exactly the same protections as Wales has been granted in relation to that challenge. <BR /> <BR />We welcome the fact that the deal proposed by the Treasury at Hillsborough takes an important step forward in acknowledging that, in order to be funded to need in line with the Holtham formula, Northern Ireland must be funded to £124 per head, rather than the £120 per head of the last two years.”
“We do so not just because it is hard for our constituents to deal with an increase in the regional rate to that level in the context of a cost-of-lockdown crisis but because it would be wholly inappropriate for us to countenance an increase in revenue raising until such time as Northern Ireland, which is the first part of the UK to have been funded below need since the UK Government adopted the UK needs-based Holtham formula in 2012, is afforded the same protection as Wales to prevent funding below need.”
“Certainly, I have been critical of the Opposition leader and the Opposition party's impact since we came back. However, today, it seems that the leader of the Opposition's words have shaken this place's very foundations, given the noise we heard. <BR /> <BR />I take the opportunity to wish the Finance Minister all the best and a speedy recovery from her illness. Well done to the Minister for making it to the Floor of the Assembly to move the order. It is not easy when you are down in the dumps and suffering from sickness, so well done, Minister. <BR /> <BR />The DUP supports the Rates Order, which limits the increase in rates in line with inflation, rather than providing the 15% increase sought by the UK Government.”
“Look at the absence level for pupils who missed a lesser degree of school. In 2018-19, 23·6% of pupils had at-risk levels of attendance, which means being absent from school for 5% of the year or more. In 2022-23, that figure rose from 23% to 29%. For pupils suffering from chronic levels of attendance, which means 10% or more, it was 11·8% in 2018-19, but that percentage rose to 19·3% in 2022-23. The proportion of pupils suffering severe chronic levels of attendance, which means being absent for 20% or more — still a significant amount of missed school — was 4% in 2017-18 and 2018-19. In 2022-23, the percentage was 8·7%. Each of those measures has at least doubled. <BR /> <BR />We sacrificed our children's education and development for a "Stay at home" message. That is utterly shameful.”
“Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. You have left the best to last, I just know it. <BR /> <BR />It has been great to see so many young people and schoolchildren in the Public Gallery of late. Some have just left. I want to talk about chronic school absence. From September 2017 to June 2018, 1,731 pupils had an absence level of 50% or greater. Of those, 523 pupils missed over 80% of school. That was from September 2017 to June 2018, but look at what happens with lockdown philosophy. Figures on absence levels for pupils from September 2021 to June 2022 show that 4,145 pupils had an absence level of 50% or greater. That is 4,145 compared with 1,731. Of those 4,145 pupils, 1,280 missed over 80% of school. <BR /> <BR />It is vital to put those numbers on the record, but they do not show the full picture.”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. Minister, you talk about how you are going to design and implement an exemption scheme. What will the exemption scheme be designed to do? What is the difference between a register and a licence?”
“I will end on this, Mr Deputy Speaker: I value the work of an Opposition. I wish you all the best. I really hope that you are effective.”
“The party in opposition has used that as a mantra since the Assembly has been back. I get why the SDLP is doing that, but it is not really constructive, as the party claims to be, to keep raising this issue when every single one of the parties in the Executive is looking forward. You are creating a ghoul that is not actually there.”
“I will in a wee minute, once I make progress. <BR /> <BR />Not only that, you are also saying that you want to burden the private sector. I grew up in construction, and you are basically going to burden the private sector with further taxes, rate rises and everything else that goes with having more fiscal powers. I will give way.”
“<BR /> <BR />I have also heard today about fiscal powers, and that scares me, because I do not believe that the Assembly — the Executive, more to the point — has the maturity to have more fiscal powers. At this stage, you are basically saying that we want to give public-sector workers pay with one hand but then we want to take it off them with the other hand.”
“<BR /> <BR />However, the truth is that the money that has been allocated as a one-off — the £584 million — will not cut it, because it really is looking backwards to the 2023-24 year. What about next year? What about the recurring costs? What about the year after that and the year after that? It is important that we make sure that we get the funding that we require. It is true to say that Barnett just does not cut it any more, that there now has to a better measurement of need and that we should look towards Wales to see how it is getting on and make sure that we get sufficient pay and funding for our need in Northern Ireland. Of course, our public sector is bigger than those in Wales and Scotland, so it is inevitable that we will probably require more, especially in the short term, to counter the size of our public sector.”
“Given the enormous size of our public sector, there is an enormous burden on this place to fund it, but we must also recognise that, within that massive monster of a public sector, there are people. They are the people who help our population every day, so it is important that we recognise that. It is also important that those people — the people who work on our behalf in our Departments and in our front-line services — are paid respectably and paid what they deserve. That has not been the case, and I am glad that most of the Executive Ministers who are now in post see this as the number-one priority, because it is about people, and our public sector will not function without paying those people the correct remuneration.”
“Of course, interventions are meant to be short, but, yes, I can do that. Again, it is disappointing to know that the SDLP has only been in opposition for a matter of weeks and there are already more cracks showing in the party than in the car lifts in our MOT centres, which you failed to address at the last run-in. The hypocrisy is astounding from the party that was prepared to sack nurses. The party that is in opposition was prepared to sack nurses if they did not adhere to a vaccine mandate. That is the sort of party that is now in opposition, and I am glad that it is not now in government. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the fact that the second motion brought by the SDLP is about public-sector pay, because it is fundamentally about people.”
“<BR /> <BR />I wish the SDLP all the best in opposition, and I am glad that the second motion brought by the SDLP —.”
“I am really enjoying this Opposition day for a number of reasons. One is that I like the idea of an Opposition. I believe that this place has been lacking because we did not have one, so I like the idea of having an Opposition and Opposition days. For the process of democracy, it is only right that the Executive be held to account. Another reason that I like the fact that the SDLP is in opposition is that, frankly, it was woeful in government. Let us hope that it can do better in opposition. Earlier, in my room, I was watching the proceedings shown on this camera, here. It is brilliant because, when you are all sitting in your place, one camera can get you all in shot at the one time. That is really effective-looking, although you have a Member away at the minute.”
“The Minister talks about fiscal devolution. Will she outline to the House the taxes that she will invent and the taxes that she will raise?”
“It is not a matter just for Education. Health has massive issues in this in that it can pick up these children when they are very young and identify their needs before they even get anywhere near the school path. Yet, we go for years with children not being statemented. <BR /> <BR />A statement is a very important thing nowadays. What if we gave those children support before they are statemented, so that they do not need to push and battle so hard to get a statement? Why is the support not there at the earliest stage? Of course, the pressure on schools to statement children in P1, P2, P6 and P7 becomes a completely different equation. That is not fair on the school, and it is certainly not fair on the child. We need to do this better.”
“The Member makes a valid point, because I preach in this place about reform and about how, if we just worry about budget lines and are asking for, requesting and demanding more money to throw at a system that is failing, we will throw that money down the pan. I assure you that those parents of special needs children, for whom that pound in their pocket is just as valuable as anybody else's, will be giving that money into taxation and it will not serve their purposes one bit. In fact, it will be wasted money. They would be able to spend the money far better than any Department. <BR /> <BR />One of the issues about the Programme for Government that I keep going on about is that we have a classic example of where a Programme for Government can pick up something like this and actually make a real difference.”
“They deserve to be in those settings, because every child deserves an education. Can we say that we are delivering that at the present time? No, we cannot. That is why the debate is so important. It is one thing debating these things and talking about them, but when are we going to see action on catering for those children? <BR /> <BR />There are 149 children who are not being placed, and they are not being placed because of their needs. It is not because there is no provision or no places; it is because of their needs. That is absolutely and totally wrong. Are we catering for and looking after our most vulnerable? No, we are not. We are failing so many people, and that has to stop because we are failing not only those children but their wider family.”
“<BR /> <BR />I pay tribute to the special educational facilities that we have — the schools that we have. In my constituency, we have the first-class Castle Tower School, which is one of the most modern schools in our stock in Northern Ireland. Yet, it had to open a second campus in the old, disused Ballee High School building, where I was educated. Other schools outside my area cater well for the educational needs of some of my constituents. Those include Riverside School in Antrim town; Roddensvale School in Larne; Kilronan School in Magherafelt; and Sandelford School in Coleraine. The list goes on and on. Those schools do sterling work in really challenging environments, and they do their very best for the children. I hear nothing but good reports when we get children placed in those settings.”
“This quote is used very often by many Members, including me, but it is attributed to Gandhi. It is absolutely right. Here we have a number of boxes ticked: children; our most vulnerable in society; and children with special educational needs. Yet, we fail them, and we fail them badly. Not only do we fail the children but we fail the parents and all the other family members who then struggle, either with education, social issues or pressure at home. What will we do about it? What will the Assembly do about it? <BR /> <BR />I am sure that every one of us deals daily with those issues in our constituencies. I can tell many stories about work that I have completed, and they are heartbreaking. One family that moved into my area of North Antrim from another part of the Province struggled to get their child into a special educational school.”
“Principal Deputy Speaker, everybody struggles with these titles. I think that we should go back to referring to Mr or Mrs Speaker.”
“Minister, the MP for North Antrim, Ian Paisley, and I have spoken to you of late about how important the Ballycastle shared education campus is to the local area. Can you provide an update on that vital project, which was part of the Fresh Start Agreement?”
“Not only that, but no one wants to talk about it. I assure you, Mr Speaker, that I will keep talking about it until those figures are reduced.”
“Waiting lists are one thing, but the sheer number of children who need to use the service is astronomical. It is absolutely shameful. Children as young as two years old are on mental health waiting lists. The figures correlate with school absence figures. The number of children missing 50% of school time has doubled. The number of children missing 80% of school time has doubled. Those figures have doubled since the onset of lockdown philosophy and the deployment of fear. <BR /> <BR />Anxiety levels in children have gone through the roof. Children and infants are struggling with developmental and social problems that they should never have had to deal with. When they seek support, they have to go onto a waiting list and wait nine weeks to get it. Not only have we let those children down through the pandemic, we are letting them down now.”
“As reported on Downtown Radio and Cool FM news by journalist Tara Griffiths on 16 February, the child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS) waiting times statistics for Northern Ireland were published on 14 February. Those statistics were for the period up to December 2023. As of that date, more than 2,000 children and adolescents were waiting for a CAMHS appointment. More than half of those 2,000 young people had been waiting for more than nine weeks. In December 2022, nearly half of the total number waiting were in the Northern Trust area. As of 31 December 2023, the Northern Trust had reduced that number to 697 out of the 2,095, but, out of that 697, 415 were waiting more than nine weeks. <BR /> <BR />It is important that those figures are on record, because those are our young people and adolescents.”
“I thank the Minister for giving way, I really do. She has explained the process that we are in and the reasons why we are in it as regards the limited time that she and her officials have had to work on the Budget. She has talked about the work on the 2024-25 Budget, which could go on well towards the summer recess. Then, of course, you have monitoring rounds. We know that the Budget rounds usually take nearly a full year; so will she assure the House that the work on the 2025-26 Budget will be on schedule?”
“Having been to look round some of our prisons, I agree with everything that the Member says. There are also issues with the built form, with the tiny corridors and the doors opening out. Those can all lead to massive problems for the staff.”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. He will know, having lived through it, the issues around contracts with the Housing Executive last summer. Can the Minister assure the House that he will do everything in his power to resolve those, so that, when contracts end and new contracts start, there is not a massive gap that impacts not only on the maintenance of houses but on housing allocation?”
“I name the climate Bill, which was costed at billions of pounds — £2·3 billion was reported in the press at the weekend. Where is that factored into this Bill? Where are the burdens of the past — of the previous Assembly and Executive — factored in? Where is that costed? That is a massive question that the Assembly cannot yet answer. Not only can the Assembly not answer it; the Executive cannot answer it either. <BR /> <BR />There are many issues going down this road that I really worry about. We in the House should be assured that we will have to take a lot of difficult decisions. I hope that all the parties in the Assembly will scrutinise this properly to ensure that we do not hurt people, as we have in the previous two years when the Assembly and Executive were not running. I hope, but we will wait and see.”
“We have done that simply to make sure that some of the Departments — not just the two I mentioned; there will be others — do not run out of money. What I really worry about, however, is what we will put in place for the next financial year if we have already allocated 65% of that Budget. It seems to me that the Finance Department officials are not that hopeful that there will be a Budget in good time for next year, given that they have allocated 65% and say that that will take them well into the summer recess. It looks like a rocky road with regard to finalising strategic streams of finances to our Departments to ensure that we cover the costs and burdens. <BR /> <BR />Another important issue relates to some of the decisions that the last Assembly made.”
“It is. It is a different place. When that is blurred — this man is now a member of the Opposition. From what I see, there is more opposition in my little finger. The Opposition said today that they were not happy with accelerated passage, and then they abstained. What sort of opposition is that? Deadly. There is more opposition and more scrutiny in my little finger than we see in the official Opposition. I look forward to seeing them up their game as we go along with this procedure and process. <BR /> <BR />The fact remains that we do not see enough detail quickly enough to be able to make informed decisions around the Budget for this place, and that will hurt our people. At the minute, there is no strategic vision whatever. We have lifted the handbrake from the vehicle, and it is running down the hill.”
“Yes. I will, Mr Deputy Speaker. I respect your ruling. <BR /> <BR />The Member must realise that the Assembly is a different place from the Executive. When decisions are taken —”
“Frankly, if it does not scare me — for the benefit of Hansard, I see Members around the Chamber laughing. How funny it is. We have hurt people, destroyed businesses, hurt children's education and hurt toddlers' development, yet people think that it is funny. That is the state of play as we see it.”
“Yes, Mr Deputy Speaker. <BR /> <BR />I raise those figures because, frankly, I see nothing in the Bill that recovers the hurt caused by the last Executive and the Assembly, which did not scrutinise and do its job properly. Where in the Budget Bill do we see an acknowledgement that hurt was caused and that we could have done it differently and a plan for how we fix it? Nothing in the Budget Bill fixes the hurt that was caused by the previous Executive, when the Assembly should have been scrutinising them. <BR /> <BR />Given my lack of faith in this place to scrutinise bad legislation, you can understand my nervousness around allowing a Budget Bill to allocate 65% of next year's Budget without seeing any real detail, strategic vision or direction as to how we will proceed. That scares me.”
“Yes, Mr Deputy Speaker. <BR /> <BR />I am sorry, but it is not good enough for Members to say, "We didn't want to do this", and, "We didn't want to do that", when you caused so much hurt to our people out there. <BR /> <BR />From September 2017 to June 2018, 1,731 pupils had an absence level of 50% or greater, with 523 pupils missing over 80% of school. That changed dramatically with lockdown philosophy. The absence levels for pupils from September 2021 to June 2022 show that 4,000 —”
“The Member mistakes me: I am talking about the Assembly being a zombie Assembly, not the Executive. The Executive make decisions, and they have been hurtful. My party has stood up against and voted against those decisions many times and has sped up the return to normal.”
“I thank the Member for his contribution, because he makes a valid point. Stop-start government does not always work or should not work. It hurts people; I get that. Parties over the years have made strategic political decisions on that stuff. However, I can tell you this now: even when we do have government, it hurts people. For two years, when the Assembly was up and running, it hurt people. It closed businesses down; it ruined livelihoods; it closed our schools; it deprived our children of their education; and it stumped development in our toddlers. All in all, the Assembly sat like a zombie Parliament and let that happen. <BR /> <BR />Where in this Budget —.”
“How can you talk about austerity and not having enough money when the Department of Health and others — this is not just the Department of Health — hand back millions? We have to get real in this place. The Departments here do not spend money well — they do not.”
“What about the organisations that do sterling work out there and do it far better than government ever could? What about funding for them? What about infrastructure and capital investment? If we do not get our act together — we have never had our act together on infrastructure — people will die. It is not just health-related spending that saves people's lives. People die when we do not invest properly in our infrastructure. We have not done that — ever. <BR /> <BR />I have heard many people talk today about big, bad Tory austerity. I get that with regard to how the Tory party has governed over the past number of years. However, you cannot really talk about big, bad Tory austerity on the one hand when, on the other hand, our Departments hand money back.”
“Basically, what we have done with the Budget is pack £18 billion, wrap it up in black boxes, as Steve Aiken said, into the back of a car and release the handbrake. We do not have a satnav, a direction, an outcome or a place to go to yet, and we have just released the handbrake. That worries me. It should worry us all with regard to the detail. <BR /> <BR />What also worries me is that some in the Chamber think that it is a good idea to have additional fiscal powers. Really? You want additional fiscal powers when we do not even get to see the detail of a Budget that we are being asked to pass and that will distribute 65% of next year's Budget. Without seeing the Vote on Account and without seeing the detail, that is worrying. <BR /> <BR />What about our charitable sector?”
“I do not know how much the Finance Minister deals with the Education Minister and the other Departments in those negotiations, but we have to be mindful of that in the Assembly when we scrutinise those things. <BR /> <BR />I go back to the point that I have made endless times before. We are publishing and agreeing a Budget, yet we have no sign of a Programme for Government and no sign whatsoever of a strategic direction, so how can we really evaluate the need out there when we are doing this back to front? If we had time, we should have a Programme for Government that is then funded through our Budget system. We cannot get to that place. To be fair, we have never been in that place.”
“I do not want a message to go out that, now that the Executive are back and the Assembly is here, all is well and everything will be rosy. Quite frankly, it is not. <BR /> <BR />It is quite clear that the biggest burden on our Departments is the pay settlement. That is about right, because we need to invest in people. We need to ensure that, as the money sprinkles through the Departments, all pay settlements are resolved, not just those affecting parts of Departments or some workers and staff. I have a real issue — it has been raised here today — about non-teaching staff, bus drivers, classroom assistants and cooks. All of that worries me. We should look at not just the front-line services but all the ancillary services, and support those people. I hope that the Minister takes that on board.”
“That brings me to the briefing that we received in the Finance Committee today from departmental officials. They told us that two Departments in particular — the Department for Communities and the Department of Education — are at risk of running out of money before the end of the financial year. Think about what that means. By the way, Education and Communities are both under DUP Ministers. Think about the Department for Communities. When I asked whether it was about running the Department, the answer was no. It is about delivering the benefits system, including personal independence payments, DLA, universal credit and all those benefits that are sprinkled down to support our most vulnerable. That, basically, is the position that we are in.”
“However, we also realise why the Bill needs to proceed via accelerated passage. Worse than that, Standing Order 42(5) has been suspended, and accelerated passage has shrunk from 10 days to two. We are not in a very good or comfortable place. Not only are we, as an Assembly, not in a very good or healthy place, how can the Executive be? Ministers have been in post for only a matter of days, and we already have a Budget Bill before us. There is nothing strategic about that. However, I understand why: there are Departments that will run out of money. <BR /> <BR />Earlier today, I was interested in an answer that the Economy Minister gave to a question from Claire Sugden. He said that Ministers had been asked where they cannot spend money, rather than where they can. We are in a very bad place.”
“This Bill simply makes provision for Departments and arm's-length bodies to remain funded until the end of the financial year, as well as setting a 65% Vote on Account for next year's Budget and allowing movement between the Consolidated Fund and the Departments and their arm's-length bodies for the 2023-24 and 2024-25 financial years. <BR /> <BR />I always take exception to Standing Order 42(2), which gives the Finance Committee the power to grant accelerated passage, as opposed to Standing Order 42(3), which gives the Assembly that power. I always take exception to being asked whether appropriate consultation has taken place. On this occasion and on many others, that is simply not the case, so I have a problem with that question being asked. It is not true to say that there has been appropriate consultation.”
“I rise to speak again in a Budget Bill debate. From my recall of all the debates on finance and Budgets that I have taken part in, there has never been a satisfactory process in order that this place can scrutinise properly a Budget Bill and the finances of the Executive. We are no different today with this Budget Bill. <BR /> <BR />Under normal circumstances, the Committee would have had much more time to scrutinise the Bill, which would have followed on from the usual Estimates process and the Vote on Account. Those processes would have given a clear indication of the Budget's direction of travel.”