Mike Nesbitt
Strangford · Ulster Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“Think public service, wisdom, generosity and courtesy. Think integrity, insight and curiosity, the lack of which is a key criticism of the two public inquiry reports of recent days.”
“I spoke during Members' statements earlier about the untimely passing of the Western Trust's chair, Dr Tom Frawley CBE. I repeat my condolences to his family, his friends and his many admirers.”
“I absolutely share the Member's ambition to see people living in the community. The trusts provide a range of evidence-informed programmes for individuals who are awaiting assessment. For children and young people, early intervention teams deliver proactive needs-led programmes that are neurodiversity-affirming and trauma-informed.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Western Trust has assured me that it has undertaken a comprehensive early engagement exercise with stakeholders, involving all political parties, local businesses, service users, community groups, the Patient and Client Council (PCC), local media, community planning partners and Departments, including mine and D…”
“The role played by social workers in delivering safeguarding and family support interventions is complex and challenging. The work frequently pivots on multidisciplinary collaboration, with parents and carers positioned as partners in the formulation and delivery of safeguarding and support plans.”
“I fully recognise the impact of the current delays on individuals and families. The situation has arisen due to a combination of factors, including funding that falls short of objectively assessed need and previously missed opportunities to reform health and social care delivery.”
The complete record
Every one of 5,312 lines we hold for Mike Nesbitt, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 72 of 107.
“In fact, that evidence made very clear that, if a citizen were to go to a court and say that they wanted a judicial review of the Budget on the basis that, for example, not enough money was going into housing or that too much money was going into something else, the judge would chase them, saying that that was a political decision and not one that the courts would take under their notice. What the courts perhaps would take under their notice would be a complaint that said that a Minister for housing — I am not choosing that role as an example because of who the current Minister for housing is — was clearly putting out budgets that advantaged one community over the other. That would be judicable, and a judge would take a view on that.”
“As many people, such as Sir Declan Morgan and Sir John Gillen, made clear in their witness evidence, we should be as detailed and as specific as possible when we are detailing our judicable rights, because those are the ones that the judges may have to rule on. <BR /> <BR />Mr Frew, in his comments, talked about handing over control of our Budget, potentially, to judges. I have to say that that runs utterly contrary — utterly contrary — to all the judicial evidence that the Committee received.”
“The condition was that he and our MLA group understood that I was instinctively in favour of a Northern Ireland-specific bill of rights and would work to try to achieve one. There were no dissenting voices. <BR /> <BR />Two things struck me very quickly during my time on the Committee. One was how we would shape a bill of rights, which effectively would be in two parts. The first part would be a preamble, which would set out our vision. It would be an explanation, particularly for younger generations, of why we were doing this. It would therefore be, at the same time, aspirational and inspirational. On its own, however, that would not be of great use, so the second part would contain the judicable rights.”
“As has been mentioned, I served on the Committee for a period. Indeed, I was the Deputy Chair to Ms Sheerin. When Steve Aiken, our party leader at the time, asked me if I would be the Ulster Unionist Party representative on the Ad Hoc Committee, I said, "Yes, but with one condition".”
“I thank the Minister. 'New Decade, New Approach' describes the anti-poverty strategy as an Executive one; therefore, you need sign-off. What is the impact without sign-off on the 17% of the population living in relative income poverty, not least the 100,000 children?”
“<BR /> <BR />I am reminded of the words of Charles Dickens, writing in 'Great Expectations'. He speaks of memorable days in people's lives, by which he means a day that shapes the rest of your life and wraps you in a chain, sometimes of glorious roses but sometimes of thorns. The victims and survivors of institutional abuse have been wrapped in chains of thorns for their long and brutalised lives. Here is an opportunity to do something that will mean the whole world to some of those victims and survivors. They do not want money or help; they simply want somebody to say, "Sorry. You were hurt through no fault of your own, and that has impacted the rest of your lives". I encourage the five leaders of the Executive parties to come together and make the apology that the victims deserve.”
“At a certain point, it needed the Executive to sign off on certain assurances. Without the Executive, the head of the Civil Service came to the leaders of the five parties that were entitled to be at the Executive and encouraged them to sign a letter saying to the effect of, "We are entitled to be in the Executive, and if we were and it was meeting, we would sign to underwrite the financial guarantees". The same thing can happen with the five party leaders today in order to ensure that the apology is made on 11 March. On 11 March, they can stand shoulder to shoulder with the remaining Executive Ministers, and possibly even the Secretary of State, and make an apology, at an appropriate time, that is essential to the mental health and well-being of those people who suffered physically, mentally and emotionally through no fault of their own.”
“I wish to discuss the proposed — correction: the promised — apology to the victims and survivors of historical and institutional abuse. <BR /> <BR />It was on 20 January 2017, at the conclusion of his public inquiry, that Sir Anthony Hart published his report. One of his recommendations was that the victims and survivors deserve an apology. It took another five years to the day before the Executive announced that that apology would be made next month, on 11 March. That apology is now in doubt through the lack of a First Minister and deputy First Minister. <BR /> <BR />There is a workaround. There is a precedent, going back a few years, when, during the hiatus when there was no Executive, the Irish Rugby Football Union (IRFU), of all things, was bidding to host the Rugby World Cup.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention, and I accept that that is exactly what he said when he decided to pull his Bill. What he said about this Bill may be what the Bill sponsor wants to say, but that will be up to the Bill sponsor in her concluding remarks. I conclude here. Dr Aiken will have a lot more to say when it is his turn to contribute.”
“I will in a second, because the other point that I want to make is the contrast with Mr O'Dowd, who has been passionate about his private Member's Bill on small-scale green energy generation. He told the Committee last Wednesday that he was pulling it. The Member will explain, but my impression was that, with the publication of the energy strategy, he needed more time to reflect and, perhaps, reshape his Bill. That is a very mature attitude to take. I give way to Mr O'Dowd.”
“That said, it is my impression, from discussions with MLAs, many of whom are in the Chamber, and advisers to MLAs who are in the Building, that there is no chance of the Bill progressing through all its stages before dissolution. That raises a question for the Bill sponsor: why are we here tonight? It is 7.25 pm. There are many Members here from your constituency of Fermanagh and South Tyrone who want to get home tonight and who have other business to do, so why are we here?”
“It is a pleasure to speak in the debate. Let me front-load my remarks with all the good news for the Bill sponsor: we will support the Bill going through its Second Stage. The Ulster Unionist Party does not support onshore exploration for gas or oil. As Members have made clear or referenced, we have spent considerable time in recent sessions in the Chamber talking about the climate and appropriate targets for reducing our dependence on carbon and reducing our greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, drilling for hydrocarbons would be totally counterproductive and counter-intuitive to that aim. The Ulster Unionist Party will not support licensing, either in the Executive or on the Floor of the Assembly, and we hope that others will join us in adopting that position.”
“On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I failed to declare my membership of the Policing Board. I apologise to you and the House for that omission.”
“Had we all committed to peaceful change, we would not be having this debate in the House today.”
“That applies to the Troubles. Violence was not inevitable. As an Ulster Unionist and a trustee of the John and Pat Hume Foundation, I am committed to peaceful change.”
“Looking back on our Troubles, she said there were:”
“The policeman said, "You see, I never woke up in the morning thinking, 'Who can I hurt today?'", and the IRA man replied, "Ah, but I did". <BR /> <BR />There are things in life that you can explain but you cannot excuse. I am not standing here trying to excuse wrongdoing by anyone who served in the Royal Ulster Constabulary. However, if you think about the length — decades long — and intensity of our Troubles and the number of fallible human beings who put on the uniform of the RUC, inevitably you have to conclude that mistakes and bad decisions were made. I do not excuse that; I just accept it as part of the human condition. <BR /> <BR />Yesterday, the House marked the platinum jubilee of Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II, and I am reminded of what she said in Dublin during her state visit in 2011.”
“The Ulster Unionist Party is a party of law and order: no ifs, no buts. No one is above the law. Anybody who is guilty of wrongdoing should face the criminal justice system. That said, we are possibly in the worst of all places. Not for the first time, the Police Ombudsman has concluded that there were murders that could not have been prevented and could not have been stopped, yet she points the finger at police officers with the expression "collusive behaviour". What does that really mean? <BR /> <BR />During my time as a victims' commissioner, the most powerful conversation that I overheard in this area was between a retired senior police officer who had served in the RUC and a man who had spent time in prison as a member of the Provisional IRA.”
“The Minister referred to the EU recommendation that people moving here from Great Britain should have their cars and personal luggage searched. Does he agree that the logical end point of that policy is strip-searching?”
“I declare an interest as a member of the Policing Board. The draft Budget impacts not only on headcount. I would be grateful if the Minister could update the House on discussions between her Department and the PSNI on what it is calling its "campus", which will embrace the new policing college, the new headquarters and the crime and logistics branches.”
“As I say, those negotiations and discussions and that debate have not matured to the point where we have an agreed understanding of the implications. <BR /> <BR />That said, this is very good legislation about bereaved parents. The next debate will be about acknowledging the call from the Coalition for Bereaved Workers (CBW) for similar rights for those who lose a close relative or partner. I pay tribute to that coalition, which is led by Marie Curie and includes Action Mental Health, Alzheimer's Society, Carers Northern Ireland, the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD), NIPSA and the Irish Congress of Trade Unions. I support the coalition's call for similar rights for those who lose a close relative or partner, but I recognise that that is a debate for another day and another mandate.”
“It was not always easy, because, originally, the Department was seeking simply to establish parity with the legislation in the rest of the United Kingdom, but the Committee took the view that it wanted to go further. As the Minister said in his opening remarks, we now have what is arguably the best set of protections anywhere on the globe. As the Committee Chair said, that applies particularly to the introduction of week-1 rather than week-26 rights and the inclusion of miscarriage in the legislation. Breaking parity with the United Kingdom led to some interesting and ongoing debates in Committee about the potential implications of not just breaking parity but, further down the line, parity being restored from another place.”
“As economy spokesman for the Ulster Unionist Party, I say that it is a pleasure to commend and support the passage of this legislation. This is a good-news moment for the House — there is no doubt about that — because, undoubtedly and sadly, there will be occasions on which the Act will help people in their hour of need and tragedy. It is good to close a loophole and to say, "We're not going to leave this to chance. We're not going to leave it to hope and expectation that, in the event of a tragedy, every employer will always be empathetic, understanding and caring and be willing to offer paid time off. We're now putting it into statute". <BR /> <BR />I commend the Committee. The Committee's work on the Bill is a fine example of what we are here to do, which is to deliver power-sharing, consociational government.”
“However, what we have done with the protocol is what we often do in the House: we take a challenge, and we turn it into a crisis. If we were mature politicians, we would accept it as a challenge, and we would work together as politicians, as we are committed to do, consociationally, to achieve a resolution.”
“Who wants to buy that? <BR /> <BR />Making Northern Ireland work should be our common aim, and the Executive Office has a clear leadership role in delivering on making Northern Ireland work. Members will know — I find it a matter of deep regret — that it is the fifteenth year in a row that the two parties that occupy Stormont Castle are in that leadership role but, to my mind and to that of many others, failing to deliver that leadership. We see in the resignation of the First Minister short-term, self-interested tactics, when people want societal strategies and long-term visions for our health service, for our housing, for the education of our children and for our economy. <BR /> <BR />Yes, the protocol is an issue for many of us on this side of the House, and Mr Beattie has made clear how we might tackle that.”
“As we all know, there are 90 Members of the House. They represent different parties and none, different philosophies, different policies and different constitutional preferences. However, I would be bold enough to suggest that we should all have one common aim: to make Northern Ireland work, measured by the quality of our public services, by the sense of prosperity of our people, by their physical and mental well-being and by the sort of society that we bequeath to future generations. It is the same whatever your constitutional preference, because, after all, we are going to ask people to vote for the status quo or for change. What is the first rule of marketing? It is, "Whatever you are selling, make it easy to buy". That is why I have never understood why some in the House describe this place as a "failed statelet".”
“What if, as an employer, I decide to employ Ms Dolan for two months, then Mr Lyons for the next two months, back to Ms Dolan for the third two months and then back to Mr Lyons for the fourth two months? Is that not something that, because it is a potential legal abuse of the system, we need to consider? I am sorry to bring up negatives, but we are scrutinising legislation. <BR /> <BR />I will end where I began, however: with a positive. I am happy to support the Bill at Second Stage. I look forward to its arriving with the Committee in due course.”
“I may have totally misunderstood what she intends with the idea of somebody getting three times the hourly wage if they report for work and the work is not there. In the Member's opening remarks, she used the example of somebody who comes in for six hours but works only one hour being paid for an additional three hours because they did not get the rest of the shift. When she talked about that at Committee, I assumed that they would get one hour and then three times the five hours that they missed out on; so, one hour plus 15, not one hour plus three. Perhaps she will clarify that; maybe I misheard. <BR /> <BR />Finally on the rule of threes, a worker has to work for three months consecutively in order to qualify for a banded-hours contract.”
“What I agree about is that the Member is a very decent man, so he was probably a very good employer when he had the pub, but we are talking about making sure that we are not reliant on the personality and attitude of the employer, and that we are putting in the right and appropriate protections and rights for workers. <BR /> <BR />The question is this: if I were to have a banded contract for a certain number of hours per week, does that mean that those hours are negotiable with the employer, or can the employer simply say, "You will work the hours that I demand you work"? That opens up the possibility that the employer will know exactly when people do not want to work or cannot work. What happens if he or she then tries to impose those hours on the banded worker? <BR /> <BR />I have another point for the Bill sponsor.”
“So, I have this question for the Bill sponsor, which did not occur to me when she was in front of the Committee: if a worker moves from a zero-hours contract to one of the bands, does the employer then have the right to dictate which hours that band is worked; in other words, removing the flexibility from the employer?”
“That just about sums it up for the Ulster Unionist Party. <BR /> <BR />On a technicality, we have heard the phrase "banning zero-hours contracts" bandied about in the debate, but the Bill does not ban zero-hours contracts. It is still an option for a worker not to ask to have a banded contract. I ask the Bill sponsor to confirm in her closing remarks that that is the case. <BR /> <BR />We liaised with Hospitality Ulster earlier today, and it was clear that, while it is very supportive of any legislation that will tackle abuse, it has concerns that outlawing zero-hours contracts will remove a lot of flexibility, particularly for small businesses and for those who wish to choose when they work.”
“I am pretty sure that I recall Colum Eastwood, the leader of Mr O'Toole's party, making the same point back in January 2020: his party was going back in, but that that did not mean that it endorsed every single proposal and commitment in the 'New Decade, New Approach' report. However, the Ulster Unionist Party will support the workers' rights in 'New Decade, New Approach'. On page 44, it states:”
“I welcome that clarification from the Minister. I understand that that is the position not just for him but for the Finance Minister and the Health Minister. Other Ministers make the same point, which, I believe, the House will consider to be entirely reasonable, given the unprecedented demands of the pandemic. <BR /> <BR />With regard to New Decade, New Approach more generally, the Bill sponsor has made the point that a ban was something that was signed up to by the five parties of the Executive. That is actually not the case. The Ulster Unionist Party went back into the Executive not because we had signed up to every line — or, to coin a phrase, every jot and tittle — of New Decade, New Approach but because it was the right thing to do at that time.”
“but the Executive are not moving to do that — this is a private Member's Bill — so perhaps the Minister will address that in his remarks. Maybe he will do that right away.”
“I think that the answer was no, no, no. I think that the Committee would like to hear directly from those organisations and from Hospitality Ulster, and actually, on reflection, perhaps the Ulster Farmers' Union, because there is seasonal work in farming, particularly around harvest time. <BR /> <BR />The Bill sponsor talks about fulfilling a commitment in 'New Decade, New Approach'. I just want to talk about that document for a moment. The commitment, which is on page 41, is:”
“Women's groups have made it clear that women are more likely to have their workers' rights affected due to zero-hours contracts just because of the fact that they have more caring duties and all the rest. As we move into Committee Stage, I would be keen for the Committee to hear from women's groups like the Women's Policy Forum and the Northern Ireland Women's European Platform (NIWEP) so that we can get a good, deep-dive grasp of how the issue affects people on a gender basis. <BR /> <BR />Mr Weir has made it clear that it appears that the consultation has been weighted to some extent towards trade unions and women's groups, both of which should quite rightly be consulted, but perhaps not so much to employers' associations. When the Bill sponsor was in front of the Committee, I asked about consulting the IOD, CBI and FSB.”
“Is it not great that we are back in the Chamber for the second week in a row to discuss workers' rights and employment legislation? That is to be commended. I will begin by reassuring the Bill sponsor that I remain instinctively supportive of the Bill, as I told her when she came to the Committee. There will be nothing from the Ulster Unionist Party today to block its passage. If we are going to use game show analogies, let me say that you are through to the next round. <BR /> <BR />Why am I instinctively supportive of the Bill? There are two main reasons. One is that, clearly, zero-hours contracts are open to abuse. We have a duty to do what we can to block off that abuse. The second reason is that, when she was in front of the Committee, the Bill sponsor made it clear that there is a gender issue here.”
“As the Minister indicated some time ago, there was, to my mind, shocking, unnecessary and unfortunate confusion over what was agreed politically about the regional trauma network. I welcome his commitment, which I reiterate: we will not leave behind the innocent victims and survivors, who know exactly what they were promised during the Stormont House negotiations. <BR /> <BR />As the Minister has covered co-design, will he give us his assessment of the importance of and focus on mental health in his Department on his watch?”
“Not my words, the Minister's words. Can the Minister update us on the COVID mitigation package for Belfast International Airport and Belfast City Airport? I welcome what he has said about future rate relief.”
“I recognise the Coalition for Bereaved Workers, which wishes to see leave and pay rights extended beyond the provisions that we are making in this Bill to make sure that there is leave and pay entitlement for anybody in employment who loses a close relative or a partner. That is work, however, for another mandate, for another Committee for the Economy and potentially for another Minister.”
“<BR /> <BR />As MLAs, we all employ people at constituency level. It is unconscionable to me that we could allow the possibility — although I know that this is a million-to-one shot and a horrible thought — that you could have two employees who lose a child, one of whom who would be entitled to leave and pay because they had worked for more than 26 weeks, and the other who would not be entitled, simply because they had not clocked up those few hours. That does nothing to recognise equality of grief. I am therefore very happy to support the amendments, including the Chair's amendments. <BR /> <BR />That is all that I have to say as our engagement with the Bill comes to the end, except to say that that does not end our engagement with employment rights and bereavement.”
“I will not delay the House very long, but it is worth putting on record that this is a good day — or, if not a good day, a good moment — for devolution, because we are giving effect to our principle of consociational working. It is a good day because the Department, clearly, has listened to the Committee and to the will of the House, expressed during the Bill's Consideration Stage, and reacted accordingly and appropriately. It is also a good day because the Chair of the Committee has reciprocated by reacting in kind to the amendments that have been tabled at Further Consideration Stage. I am very happy to support a Bill that states that those leave and pay rights are not just for mothers but for fathers or partners, who will potentially be equally devastated by what has happened.”
“On the theme of disinvesting in people, is the Minister taking any steps to ensure that the apprenticeship levy is hypothecated here, as it is in England?”
“The Minister will be aware that the Department for the Economy gets two mentions in the statement. The first is for handing back more resource DEL than any other Department, and the second is for handing back more capital DEL than any other Department. Given that travel agents, the night-time economy and hospitality — to name but three sectors — are on their knees, what is happening?”
“This is a very serious situation. We are not giving the police the money that they need to keep people safe. <BR /> <BR />Finally, on a positive note, I welcome what I heard on Radio Ulster this morning, when she was discussing the police budget and the Chief Constable's decision to postpone recruitment in March, the Minister of Justice commented on operational matters. That was potentially the first time that I have heard that. I welcome that precedent and look forward to more of the same from the Minister.”
“Where would that impact most likely fall? It is most likely to fall on neighbourhood policing, despite Patten's recommendation 44:”
“The Chief Constable made it clear to the Policing Board in writing on 7 January that, were we to go the other way and see numbers fall by 300 per annum, dropping 300 in financial year 2022-23 would mean:”
“If there is no money to recruit over the three-year Budget period, the headcount will drop by 900 and end up at around 6,100 or, at best, 6,200. Yet we have a commitment, not just from the Patten report of 20 years ago but in New Decade, New Approach two years ago, to increase the headcount to 7,500. On the current Budget projections, that will not happen. Over the three years of the Budget period, to increase the headcount from its current number to 7,500, the contribution would need to be north of £70 million, which the Chief Constable does not have.”
“I declare an interest as a member of the Northern Ireland Policing Board, as I wish to comment on correspondence published over the weekend from the Chief Constable to the Policing Board on budgets and his decision not to progress the planned recruitment drive this spring. <BR /> <BR />When the Minister of Finance came to the House to announce the draft three-year Budget, he mentioned a ring-fenced allocation of £14·8 million to the police for staffing. The 2% overall cut in budget of £14·6 million, however, largely and effectively offsets that money. <BR /> <BR />Let us be clear that, when the Chief Constable says, "I am not recruiting", that does not mean that the police headcount stays static. It falls because, annually, the police lose around 300 officers, for a variety of reasons but largely through retirement.”
“I have not seen a great deal of that today. I look forward to the Minister's comments.”