Colum Eastwood
Foyle · Social Democratic and Labour Party · Northern Ireland
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Given the fact that the Good Friday Agreement envisages an Assembly, a power-sharing Executive, North/South Ministerial Council and other bodies, is it the case, today, that, if we do not have the nominating officer here from Sinn Féin, no Executive will be formed?”
“Mr Allister has made my point for me. The Good Friday Agreement is absolutely 100% clear. The power-sharing Executive, the Northern Ireland Assembly, the North-South Ministerial Council: at any point over the last 1,000-plus days, those institutions could have been restored. People on these Benches have tried hard.”
“That is why we are here today. We will gladly take part in those institutions but we will not be party to a stunt that is using and abusing people's emotions and sensitivities over a very difficult issue, which could have been dealt with at any point over the last 1,000 days.”
“<BR /> <BR />Is it the case, Mr Speaker, that without Members here present to my right or who should be to my right that there will not be an Executive formed today? If that is the case, we will be in no position to support a Speaker and allow for the undermining of the Good Friday Agreement through a unionist-dominated shadow Assembly.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is, of course, true that because of the DUP's despicable and disgraceful behaviour, not just around RHI, we have got to this point. It is also true that they were let do all those things. They were allowed to do all those things.”
“We put the papers in on all manner of subjects, topics and areas, but nobody wanted to negotiate back. Nobody wanted to talk to us about how we can invest in the Irish language, protect equality for LGBT people and tackle poverty and discrimination right across our society.”
The complete record
Every one of 448 lines we hold for Colum Eastwood, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 9.
“I will not be nominating a Minister to this Executive.”
“I will begin, on a personal basis, by wishing Claire Sugden well. In the same vein, I congratulate David Ford on a job well done. It is clear, though, that we are in absolutely no position to support a nomination for somebody when we have corrupted the process. We corrupted it once before, and we are doing it again now. Our strong view is that the position of Justice Minister should be allocated by d'Hondt. What is even more disturbing is that, even though we have had some evolution in our politics this last few weeks, the opportunity to evolve our politics even further today has been missed. It is very clear to our electorate that this is a position for which no nationalist need apply.”
“I do not often quote Peter Robinson, Mr Speaker, but I think, on that particular occasion, he was speaking sense. I do not think that anybody out there will say that we have delivered what we could. In this mandate, whether we are in government or opposition, we will work constructively to ensure that we can deliver as much as we possibly can for all those people who so dearly need our help.”
“We want that Programme for Government to look after the people and the areas that have been left behind and to begin to make this place about delivery. <BR /> <BR />This time five years ago Peter Robinson said:”
“No announcement is coming, just so you know. <BR /> <BR />I first of all offer my sincere congratulations to the First Minister and the deputy First Minister. The people have spoken, and we are very glad to support your nominations. It is a very difficult job; you both know that. You will have our support when you deserve it. I think we have some work to do before any of us should be making announcements about whether we are going into government. We fought the election on the basis that we would negotiate hard, work hard and put forward proposals for the Programme for Government. We continue to do that, and we will see where that goes. We want to see a Programme for Government that we can sign up to. If we cannot do that, we will be in opposition; if we can, we will be in government.”
“Just to make it clear, we were very happy to vote for and support Ms Ruane's nomination to be Deputy Speaker. Unfortunately, though, we cannot support her nomination as Principal Deputy Speaker, nor can we propose anyone for that position. We do not believe the position has any point. It is a pointless position that is more about carving out positions than actually making this place work more efficiently and effectively. Therefore, we cannot support the proposal.”
“<BR /> <BR />I am very happy to propose somebody today who was first elected to the House in 2003; someone who is a previous general secretary of the SDLP; a Gaeilgeoir; a champion of rural issues, and somebody who, in his position as Chair of the Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment, showed a great wisdom and fairness and an ability to get to the point. We are very glad to propose Mr Patsy McGlone for the position of Deputy Chair — sorry, Deputy Speaker.”
“I begin by congratulating you, Mr Speaker, on your elevation. I know that you will carry out your role with fairness and impartiality as you have done in your previous roles. I also thank and congratulate Mr Mitchel McLaughlin for all the effort he put in. He was a fair, impartial and, at times, tough-when-needed Speaker and he deserves our thanks for that. I give praise to all the previous Deputy Speakers, and Mr John Dallat in particular who is no longer in the Assembly. He is somebody that we in the party will miss very much, and I think that the people of East Derry will miss him as a public representative too.”
“They tell us that they are fighting the British state and elements of it, but the people those so-called dissident republicans are actually fighting are the Irish people, and there will only ever be one victor in that battle.”
“I thank Mr Allen for raising this Matter of the Day. He spoke with great eloquence and experience of these matters. Our thoughts and prayers are, obviously, with this public servant — for that is what he is — who goes about his everyday work and should not have to expect a bomb underneath his car. The people who carried out this attack did so with a mix of vanity and insanity and are deploying what has been proven to be a failed strategy. They are deploying it today when the people of my generation and the generations to come want to move on and are fed up with this type of nonsense. These people think that they can drag us back to the past while, at the same time, talking about the future. <BR /> <BR />It makes absolutely no sense, and the people of this part of the world stand in opposition to them.”
“We believe that the politics of this place can reach for more. We believe we can have different priorities — different priorities that invest in people and in the future. We believe that the North can do better than this. We believe that this place has to do better than this. That is the choice in May. That is the alternative on offer.”
“No thank you. They will accuse us of negativity. They are not great at taking criticism; they get very annoyed. Despite their shouts of negativity, it is, in fact, they who have invested most in the currency of cynicism. They are cynical about what politics in this place can actually achieve. They believe that Stormont only has to exist, nothing more. Theirs is the ideology of keeping the show on the road, nothing more. They believe that that will be enough for the electorate. It is as crude a calculation as this Budget. <BR /> <BR />We do not think that people will be fooled. In the SDLP, we believe in more. There is £1·7 billion: £1 billion in the RRI, £600 million in the HS2 consequential and £100 million in the Northern Ireland investment fund that could be used to prioritise and to achieve more.”
“<BR /> <BR />No doubt they will say that the criticisms of the Budget by the SDLP are about the election. Well for once, they are right: it is about the election. It is about the choice that May's election will offer. This Budget exposes the personality behind the power. It seems their only belief, their only ambition is for themselves. They will accuse us —”
“The attack on education is particularly significant in Northern Ireland. Ever since the 1947 Act, education has played a massive role in the story of the North. History records its role in creating the civil rights generation. That is something that obviously runs deep in the hearts and minds of the nationalist community. We know the importance of access to education. We know the change it can bring to the lives of individuals and communities. For Sinn Féin to acquiesce today in stripping that progress away, piece by piece, student place by student place, for them to be helping to remove that access to education for this generation is nothing short of a disgrace. They are walking on very dangerous ground. Let them be warned: the Nationalist community in the North — this generation — will not forgive them for it.”
“Not only does that mean that more and more of our young people are forced to leave this place in search of education and training, it leaves a huge hole in our economy. That continued exodus of our young people is hurting our economy, hurting our families, hurting our communities and hurting our ability to grow jobs. As Professor Patrick Johnston pointed out this week:”
“It is an expression of optimism comparable only with the plenty provided by the biblical loaves and fishes. I fear, however, that there is a key difference here, in that there are no messiahs on either the Sinn Féin or DUP Benches. In reality, someone is either bad at maths or bad at lying. <BR /> <BR />With my limited time, I will focus in particular on education and skills. Forty-eight hours after the two vice chancellors of our two universities gave a warning on Radio Ulster that higher education faced dire choices, this Budget cuts a further £24 million from higher education and skills. Two thousand student places have already been cut, and this Budget ensures that that number will spiral further.”
“Instead of fighting crime, it cuts the police and prisons budget further. That is welcome news for the criminals who attack our elderly people and burgle our homes. This is the Budget that is before us today. <BR /> <BR />I want to say something positive. In fairness, there is one stand-out area of ambition. They have identified moneys for seven major capital projects: part of the A5; part of the A6; the Belfast rapid transit system; the Belfast transport hub; the mother and children's hospital; Desertcreat; and regional and subregional stadia. According to today's Budget, those will cost £1·1 billion, yet this Budget tells us that these projects are to be funded from the £100 million of borrowing provided under the Stormont House Agreement. Getting £100 million to stretch to cover £1·1 billion of capital projects is some ambition indeed.”
“No, I will not. <BR /> <BR />This is the height of their ambition — nothing more. Our new joint First Minister may well decry the fact that Stormont has become a watchword for stagnation. She is, of course, right, but she does not seem to understand that she must take some responsibility for that reality. The DUP and Sinn Féin have now been in charge of this place for nine years. By any standards, in any other job, that is time enough to take some responsibility and be held accountable. Some would say that it is time enough to be sacked. <BR /> <BR />As my colleague Claire Hanna said, this is a Budget that gives up and gives in. Instead of investing in people, it invests £700 million in redundancies. Instead of investing in the future, it cuts into services for our children and young people.”
“It is a Budget that has been cobbled together by two parties whose only interest seems to be staying in power.”
“The SDLP will not support this Budget, and I will be making a very critical speech about it. I will not, however, question the integrity of anybody in the Chamber. I do not believe that that is a good way to go about our business. I will begin by congratulating the Minister on his elevation; he has clearly shown himself to be a very competent and capable Minister, and I look forward to working with him in his new role. <BR /> <BR />It has to be said, however, that, if yesterday was Blue Monday, this is truly a Blue Tuesday Budget. As one of the final acts of Stormont's current leadership, this is a Budget that is depressingly familiar. There is no fresh start here. It is a Budget that is characterised by its lack of ambition, lack of creativity and lack of ideas.”
“It is good to see that our two First Ministers are now from west of the Bann. I am sure that the people whom I and, indeed, they represent will be glad to hear that. We will wait and see what that means for delivery for those people. I wish them all the best. <BR /> <BR />Mrs Foster talked about the fact that we are all shaped by our history. I think that she has obviously been shaped by her personal experience; but, as a people, we are all shaped by our history. That history includes the events of 100 years ago. I would like to see all leaders of this place engaging positively and respectfully; not necessarily celebrating events if they cannot do so, but commemorating them, learning from them and thinking, talking and planning for the next hundred years. With that, I wish both First Ministers all the best in their endeavours.”
“I spent quite a bit of time on Saturday in your constituency up to my knees in water, and one of your first duties should be to try to develop long-term solutions to those problems. There are people in Fermanagh and other parts of the North who have been under water since 5 December. I do not think that it is good enough, in this day and age, that that can continue. <BR /> <BR />Her predecessor's first words in, I think, the first days of this mandate were that we would be judged on delivery. She and I will probably disagree on how good that delivery has been in this mandate, but we need to get to a position in which this place is judged on delivery, where we are setting out positive agendas for the future and making changes that people can touch, feel and understand.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, and I join others in congratulating Arlene Foster on her new position and Martin McGuinness for continuing as deputy First Minister. In our view, it is a joint position, and it is very important to note that Mrs Foster is the first woman to hold that post. Another glass ceiling in the North has been smashed, and I am very glad to see that. I also welcome very much her very positive speech today about the renewal of politics and a new generation stepping forward. We in our party recognise that as well, and we are beginning that process. <BR /> <BR />Whilst we all wish you all the best today, there will be no honeymoon period. I am sure that you are aware of that.”
“<BR /> <BR />After years of rejecting, it has to be said, what we saw as possible solutions to the problems here, Peter Robinson has cemented unionism's commitment to these institutions and ensured that we have lasting institutions in this part of the world. The SDLP had long argued and struggled for the creation of these types of institutions, and it has to be said that, although we might disagree on how they have evolved or delivered, it is clear that Peter Robinson's commitment and leadership has ensured that they will survive the test of time, as they have over the last number of years. I wish him a very long and happy retirement and hope he gets the time to enjoy it.”
“My political career does not go back decades like the former First Minister's, but we have come from different places and have been on different sides of different arguments. I understand, as does everybody in this Chamber, the commitment that it takes to be a full-time political representative, the toll it takes on your family and the toll it takes personally. I have no difficulty in recognising the effort and commitment that Peter Robinson has given to Northern Ireland and the people he represents. He is a formidable political character and, obviously, a capable strategist and party builder. He has a tremendous work rate, although maybe not the best diet in the world.”
“We know what it is like to face the threat of terror and violence, and to face down those who seek to murder and maim their way to political goals. Today, we stand in solidarity with the founding principles of the French republic: the liberty to live our lives free from the threat of violence; the equality of all peoples, regardless of colour or creed; and a fraternal bond between all peoples and all parties committed to the power of peace as a tool for change. We are all united in the Chamber, across these islands and across Europe against those who seek to shake the foundations of our peace. Let that spirit of unity be the message that we send to them. It says more than anything else we could do.”
“On behalf of the SDLP, I express our sincere sympathy and solidarity with the people of Paris following the devastating scenes that unfolded on the streets of the city over the weekend. As our party members gathered in Armagh, we were acutely aware of the tragedy that was taking place in the French capital. It cast a shadow over our proceedings. <BR /> <BR />I also express our profound sadness following the suspected ISIS bombing of a busy Beirut marketplace that killed over 40 innocent people. These attacks, no matter where they happen, the scale of the destruction or the culprit, are an attack on all of us who value the primacy and power of peace. As a people and as an island, we acutely understand the suffering of the people of France and Lebanon.”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. Does her Department have a preliminary plan in place to deal with those moneys?”
“That has changed the image of Ireland. That has changed the prospects of attracting investment to Ireland. That has changed how we look at young people who are homosexual, who have been faced with bullying that was, over the years, supported and enabled by a society and a Government that allowed it and turned their head away when it was happening.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. I am not sure that some people in this House are always sure of where their journey will take them, but, in my view, the journey is about ensuring that all citizens on these islands who love each other and want to get married can get married and can feel that they are properly and fully embraced by society and by government. That is the journey. That is the destination. I think that we will get there. We might not get there today, because a petition of concern has been put down to try to stop equality. That is not what it was supposed to be about. <BR /> <BR />Look at the people across the border and the way that people from same-sex relationships have been embraced by the community. That was the change that was made. People were embraced by the community, the society and their country.”
“The Member is absolutely right. Thank God that homosexuality is no longer illegal, and thank God that this society has moved on and moved forward and that the communities that we come from have moved on and moved forward through experience in people's families and in people's communities. People have been able to move forward. I come from a different generation from many of the people in the House. I recognise that people are on a journey, and I am prepared to accept that. I am prepared to try to persuade and convince people of the rights of this argument. I wish that the Member would have the same openness and have the ability —”
“— who believe that they should be entitled to the equal rights that everybody else in this country is entitled to. The idea that you can equate polygamy to two people loving each other in a same-sex marriage is absolutely ridiculous and is offensive to say the least.”
“It is offensive to all the people in the Public Gallery, outside the Chamber and in this country —”
“I thank the Member for his intervention, I think. You always know that you are winning an argument when points like that are brought into the debate. He has done this a number of times. The idea that we are saying that two people who are in love and who want to make a commitment to each other through the institution of marriage is the same as polygamy is ridiculous and is offensive to all those people —”
“<BR /> <BR />So, I am coming at this from a pro-marriage perspective — I am married myself — and not as somebody who wants to undermine anybody else's marriage. I think that we enhance all the marriages that we are involved in in this part of the world by allowing others to take part. Why do we put up barriers to people who want to embrace the idea and the institution of marriage? Surely we should be much more open than that. Surely we should break down the barriers to that.”
“That sent a message across the world that Ireland had moved on and moved forward, and I think that we should all be very proud of that. <BR /> <BR />The difficulty that we have, as Irish citizens on this side of the border, is that we do not have the same rights as people across the island. Equally, people who see themselves as British subjects or citizens do not have the same rights as people in Britain, because, of course, they have taken that step not through a referendum but through the parliamentary process. This is not about being unionist or nationalist, Catholic or Protestant. It is about people understanding that, whatever our political or religious background, we should embrace all the people in our society who want to be embraced and to play their full part in civic life in this part of the world.”
“If we look at what happened just across the border in the South, we see that an enormous campaign was undertaken to persuade the people of the South — and that is what they did. They understood very clearly that you will not be able to browbeat people into supporting civil marriage. They also understood very clearly that the country is on a journey. I think that we were all — many of us, anyway — delighted to see that that journey culminated in the legislation passing through the Houses of the Oireachtas very recently. Think of the positive image that that sent around the world to people about Ireland being an open, all-embracing, positive, progressive country that embraces all its citizens, no matter where they come from and no matter what their political persuasion or sexual orientation is.”
“The SDLP's position is that this is about civil marriage. It is about two people being allowed the opportunity to take part in an institution that I and many other people are allowed to take part in. It should not be the case that we have a barrier to civil marriage just because of people's sexual orientation. If we really want to promote marriage as a positive thing for people to be involved in, we should open it up to all people who wish to make that commitment because of the love that they have for their partner. <BR /> <BR />The motion is a simple one, but we are very clear in our position that there needs to be protections for Churches. I will never be heard criticising people for having a different point of view from the one that I have. What I want to do is to try to persuade people of the particular point of view that I hold.”
“So, as an aside, given the example that we have today, I think that we need to deal with the issue of petitions of concern, because they have been abused. They were there to protect minorities, but they are now there to stop minorities gaining protections in law that they have in other parts of this island and across these islands. <BR /> <BR />We are very clear in our position on this. We have been clear in this House and in other Houses, and we have put down amendments to legislation going through Westminster. I want to go back to the point that we very much see the need for protections for Churches. We do not want to impose our view of the world on anybody else. I recognise that this country is on a journey, and many Members in the House are on journeys, which, I think, we will find out as this debate progresses today.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is unfortunate that, once again, we are faced with a petition of concern on this issue. The petition of concern was originally created and put into statute as a way of protecting minorities. It was not to give the largest party in this House a veto, and it was not to give the largest party in this House a veto to the detriment of minorities. I think that that is what has been happening with the abuse of the petition of concern.”
“We are back again. It is unfortunate that we have to keep putting a motion like this to the House, but it is important to point out that we will keep doing it and keep trying to persuade people of what I think is the proper position. <BR /> <BR />The motion itself is a very simple one. I know that there has been some criticism that it is quite a simple motion that just calls on the Executive to table legislation to enable same-sex marriage. I think that that is as simple as it needs to be; it does not need to be much more complicated than that. We have a very strong position that there should be protections for Churches and that this is about civil marriage, not religious marriage. We assume that the Executive would take that into account when producing any legislation.”
“I thank the Minister for his answer. He is right: it was good to get the NCA operational. It was only after a lot of work was done by this party to ensure that it was properly accountable. Can he give us his assessment of how much in criminal assets has actually been recovered by the NCA, the Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) or anybody else?”
“I thank the Minister for his answer thus far. Given the very recent tragedy of the murder of the guard across the border and the fact that the culprit was somebody from the North, is he confident that appropriate levels of intelligence-sharing are happening to ensure that those kinds of things cannot happen again?”
“The ombudsman said that he would be happy for those reports to be anonymised. We will keep a watchful eye on how that plays out, but, if we ever get to the stage of laying one of those reports to the Committee, it is important that they are anonymised to protect the individual doctors concerned. There are other issues, but that deals with many of the issues about general practitioners.”
“We were slightly concerned about the size of a one- or two-person doctors' surgery compared with a trust or a Department and how all that fits together. We went through all the details, and, whilst we still have reservations, we are broadly content, having discussed the issues with the ombudsman. <BR /> <BR />The laying of reports concerned us. The potential for an individual doctor or a doctors' surgery being named at the Health Committee, for example, could be overreaching and have dire consequences for an individual doctor or a doctors' surgery. Given how connected and close our community is, the reputational damage to somebody around that type of activity could be very severe. We had those discussions in Committee and also spoke to the ombudsman, and we are broadly content now.”
“I give a broad welcome to the legislation. It is good and useful, and it is important that a Committee such as the OFMDFM Committee has done the work to bring such an important Bill to the House. It is a lesson for the rest of the Committees that that can be done well and properly. I sat on the OFMDFM Committee when the Bill was beginning its long process. I have not been on that Committee in quite a while, but we are here now. For my sins, I also sat on the Ad Hoc Committee, and we had some good debates on some of the issues. <BR /> <BR />I will focus on one issue in the first group of amendments: clause 37 and the laying of reports. We had concerns, as did the BMA, about the impact of general health practitioners being named on the schedule as some of the people who could be investigated by the ombudsman.”
“What is the Minister's assessment of the relatively high number of racially motivated hate crimes?”
“I thank the Member for giving way, and I agree with her in her characterisation of what has happened since the DUP started their hokey-cokey antics. Does she not agree with me, though, that the UUP stepped out of the Executive and handed over the important Regional Development Department to a Minister who is not even going to turn up for work? Does she not agree that that was a dereliction of duty? Your party allowed a hokey-cokey Minister to come in one day and out the next when it could be in there working and trying to provide infrastructure that we all need for places like my city, Derry.”
“I thank the Minister for that answer. Does he believe that it is acceptable for an independent to resign and then to nominate somebody who has professed to be a member of another political party as their substitute?”
“The Minister will be very aware of the real concerns that the anglers on the River Faughan have with some of these applications. Can he give us an update on where those applications are at?”