Jim Allister
North Antrim · Traditional Unionist Voice · Northern Ireland
“<BR /> <BR />Last week, a 'News Letter' editorial rightly drew attention to the fact that there is a chorus of demand that it is up to the British Government to pay for that, but no pressure whatsoever on the GAA — the primary beneficiary — which still persists that its contribution will be a miserly £15 million.”
“Public money, we are constantly told, is in short supply and scarce. I am sure that it is, and will continue to be so. Yet, while many in the House pay lip service to the need to prioritise health, there seems to be a majority here who would prioritise public spending on a sporting facility, namely Casement Park.”
“That editorial stated that the DUP "should make clear" its view on the Casement Park costs. Yet, yesterday, we had the launch of the DUP manifesto and not a mention of Casement Park. We have a Minister — Minister Lyons — who has ruled out clawback for non-GAA use of that stadium.”
“Therefore, the Minister comes to the House with a proposal that, effectively, has been written in Brussels, because it tells us how much we can give to our fishing industry in Northern Ireland.”
“The Minister told us that this is a scheme under the Fisheries Act, which it is, whereby all the devolved regions and England and Wales can make their own provision.”
“Rather than removing the green lane, the introduction of the new customs border arrangements will further advance the development of the green lane, thereby helping to make the Irish Sea border and our alienation from the rest of the UK more firmly established.”
The complete record
Every one of 4,749 lines we hold for Jim Allister, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 32 of 95.
“How has the supply line of medical devices, products and medicines been impacted by the protocol? Where do we source most of our supplies? How is the protocol impacting on that? How does the Minister anticipate how that will work at the end of the grace period? What awaits us on 1 January 2022 when we come fully under restrictive EU laws?”
“That is protected as an absolute by article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights but would be trampled by this motion if it got the sort of legislation that embraced its terminology of "in all its forms". <BR /> <BR />Mr Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to speak. I support the amendment because it does preserve the fundamental imperative of religious freedom, and I will oppose the motion because it does not.”
“If a minister of religion is approached by a young person or an older person who wants counsel and guidance on sexual issues because they are a person of faith or who is attracted to faith, is that minister of religion to be criminalised? There is a great phrase to the effect that the Government should not intervene between consenting adults in the bedroom. Fair enough. Now, however, there is the desire to intervene between consenting adults in the minister's counselling room because it offends thought processes by daring to uphold what is clear to anyone who holds to Christian faith as set forth in the Bible. It is sad to me that those who want, rightly, to ban conversion therapy are not prepared to stand up and accept an amendment that would put it in the right context that preserves, outside that ambit, freedom of religion.”
“In a moment. <BR /> <BR />We are in a situation where it is abundantly clear from the lobby groups that advance this motion that they are in no doubt that they want to suppress and, indeed, criminalise religious activity. By their standards, that giant of Christian heritage St Paul would be a most offending criminal. Anyone who has ever read — maybe not enough have — his letter to the church at Corinth, First Corinthians chapter 6, will know that he, apparently, could readily be accused, in the terms of the LGBT community, of conversion therapy. When he referred to changes in lives and said, "such were some of you", was that not conversion therapy in the terms that are being proposed? It seems to be. <BR /> <BR />It is critical that religious practices are protected.”
“Absolutely. That is the nub of the matter. That is why I am astounded that Mr Beattie tells us that he is not in the business of suppressing religious expression and exercise but is opposed to an amendment that seeks to protect it.”
“What are "all its forms"? If we take seriously some of the lobbying from the LGBT community, it patently and indisputably includes religious exercises. We have all received — I know that I have — lobbying from that community making it very clear that it wants a ban not just to extend to the gruesome and the horrible practices that I have talked about but to religious exercises. They want to criminalise preaching in accordance with the sexual ethics set forth in Holy Scripture; they want to criminalise praying in accordance with the sexual ethics set forth in Holy Scripture. Where there has been legislation, as in Victoria, Australia, that is exactly what happened.”
“I have no difficulty whatsoever in condemning some of the gruesome practices that, historically, were associated with what has been called conversion therapy, including the use of drug and aversion therapies. All of that was obnoxious. My problem with the motion, however, is, very simply, its deliberate obfuscation by the fact that it fails to define conversion therapy. In fact, in its very last words, it embraces the banning of:”
“Ultimately, this pretty awful saga will result in a considerable draw on the public purse through the redress scheme and the private litigation that will undoubtedly be pursued. What redress will there be for the public purse? We know that Dr Watt has left the service of the Belfast Trust: is he on a full pension, paid by the public?”
“Given the rush to allocate and spend the further Treasury largesse before the end of the financial year, it is understandable that mistakes will be made. If funds are recouped from organisations that should not have received them, what is the destiny of those funds? Can they be retained? Do they have to be returned? How much headroom do you have in your carry-over?”
“Does the Minister have any plans to visit the linkage, which was created by his predecessor from Sinn Féin, between the number of free school meals in a school and the level of funding for which that school qualifies? That linkage is causing a disparity in the general funding of schools and putting schools with a low level of uptake of free school meals at a great disadvantage. Is that disparity going to continue?”
“Does the First Minister have any comment on the repetition last week of the false propaganda by the vice president of the European Commission that the protocol is the only way to protect the Belfast Agreement and to preserve peace and stability? Is there a single passage in the Belfast Agreement that prevented the United Kingdom leaving as one nation, that prevented the two parts of Ireland belonging to different single markets and that required a border in the Irish Sea? If the protocol, by its very authors, is built on such flagrant falsehoods, how is such a warped and intolerable imposition meant to be experienced and endured? Does she agree that it must go?”
“The Member rightly indicates that it is not yet clear whether the charges that initially apply to the vendor will be passed on to consumers here. However, there is a certainty, is there not, about the charges that will result from the protocol checks in that the EU 2017 Official Controls Regulation requires it as a matter of law that the cost of those checks be charged to the supplier? Those costs will inevitably fall on the consumer, and yet today we have not heard one cheep of opposition from the rigorous implementers of the protocol to the fact that their protocol will impose those charges on all of us.”
“The Member recites cost figures. Has she any figures for the cost of the protocol on the goods that those cards would pay for, particularly in circumstances where, under EU regulations, the costs of checking will have to be charged out to the suppliers and consumers? Does she agree with that as well? Do those costs not interest her?”
“Congratulations and every success to them as they go forward to Euro 2022, carrying the banner of Northern Ireland with all of us behind them.”
“Everyone loves an underdog. The TUV can say that with feeling and some experience. I join in the Assembly-wide congratulations to the team for their remarkable success. Of course, having come in as outsiders, to make such progress adds to the pleasure that even some football philistines will feel about the achievement, so very well done. It also presents a timely challenge and message to the Executive to examine whether the support — financial and otherwise — given to women's football is sufficient and whether they, too, could not do much better in that regard. The success of last week was a cheering moment for us all and an encouragement of what dedication and commitment can deliver. They have lifted spirits right across the community, and that can only be a good thing.”
“On this issue, when is the Minister going to start being the Minister for all communities and not just the Minister for the Sinn Féin community, despite her pious words?”
“— or organisations that want to celebrate the centenary.”
“The title that the Minister holds in the House is "Minister for Communities". She knows that, for the unionist community, the centenary of Northern Ireland is very important. However, consciously and deliberately, she did not seek one penny for her Department's budget. It does not have money for unionist community groups —”
“I hear what the Minister says about tackling waiting lists, but I have been in the House for 10 years and have heard every successive Health Minister make similar affirmations. Yet, we are where we are. During those same 10 years — indeed, during the entirety of devolution — almost 2,000 beds and all the necessary staff who go with them have been removed from our health service. What reason is there to believe that today's affirmations will be any different? Is the Minister confident that the Executive are prepared to reverse the disastrous policy that denoted the previous Executives that were made up of the same parties?”
“Our nation and our people are the richer for his living, so today, on behalf of my constituents and my party, I join in mourning his passing, and, in grateful memory of the life of His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, I convey the deepest sympathy to Her Majesty and record thankfulness for the lifetime of service and devotion to our monarch, our nation and our people.”
“Today, we remember a great — a giant in our lifetimes — whose contribution to our national life has been immense but whose life inevitably, in the mortality that denotes us all, has run its course.”
“That is a characteristic that is often lost in public life, but not with the Duke of Edinburgh. <BR /> <BR />Prince Philip was not immune, of course, from pain and suffering in his life. Indeed, something that marks an affinity with so many in the Province was the brutal murder of his 79-year-old uncle, blown to bits by the IRA with other relatives and friends: a wicked act of the calibre that left so many in the Province also bereft of friends and relatives at the hands of terrorism. Today would have been a good day for the republican movement to unequivocally say, "Sorry", but, of course, the deputy First Minister does not do "Sorry". At most, all that Sinn Féin can muster is what journalist Jenny McCartney aptly described as a:”
“I pray that she finds the strength to carry on in the remarkable era that has been her rule over us. <BR /> <BR />Today, however, we also celebrate a remarkable and incredible life of service to country and to people, from Prince Philip's service in the armed forces to his decades of service as consort and his dedication to that cause and to the people whom it served, filtering down throughout our society through the Duke of Edinburgh's Award scheme, which reached and empowered so many. Everything else apart, that is a lasting legacy of particular note. Yet he was a man who, although in that elevated position, refused to allow the position that he held to mould him. Despite his exalted position, his willingness to speak his mind brought a stamp of authenticity and sometimes, indeed, a smile to our faces.”
“As with any death, whether from lowly or high estate, our first thoughts are properly with the immediate family. My condolences and those of my party, first and foremost, go to our Queen, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth, to whom, as consort, Prince Philip was such a rock and a support for so many years, and then, of course, to his grieving family: his children and their children and all in that wider family. They will all grieve as we do when we lose one so close. There will be no difference to their grief. They will feel the same emptiness, the same pain and the same suffering. Now, after 73 years of married life, Her Majesty must face her public and private life without her rock. There will be difficult, tough days for the Queen in all of that, particularly for someone who is herself of advanced years.”
“The Minister will be aware that the present absurd system of devolution was sold to many in the pro-life lobby on the basis that it guaranteed control over issues such as abortion. Now that that is lamentably not so, what value is there in devolution for such people?”
“I suggest to the Minister that she let herself and the people of Northern Ireland down by her pejorative, contemptuous, ill-considered response before the ink was dry on the interim report. Why would any Infrastructure Minister with the commercial interests of Northern Ireland at heart not want to see radical improvements to the A75, by way of example? I suggest to the Minister that it is time that she took off her nationalist blinkers and was something more than a Little Irelander.”
“Bearing in mind that New Decade, New Approach brought the deputy First Minister back to rule over us, its commitment to Northern Ireland's continuing to be an integral part of the United Kingdom internal market and its guarantee of unfettered access in EU trade, do the deputy First Minister and the office that she represents support the rigorous implementation of those pledges?”
“Does the Member recognise that, on this day in the House, this place is probably the last place that can talk about tolerance and understanding, given that we are coming off the back of a disgraceful decision last week from the Assembly Commission, which runs the House, indicating that the centenary, which is so precious to many, cannot and will not be marked on a permanent basis within the curtilage of the House? Does he not think that trampling in the gutter the wishes of unionists shows anything but respect from the House?”
“Sinn Féin tramples in the gutter the rights of unionists.”
“It is an absolute shame that the centenary of Northern Ireland, by virtue of the Commission that you chair, is denied to be celebrated within the premises of Stormont.”
“On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I want to ask how the Assembly Commission, which you chair, hopes to carry the confidence of the unionist community —.”
“Of course, we come from a society in which young mothers were killed for political reasons. We have just passed through the census weekend. Forty years ago, a young mother from Londonderry, Joanne Mathers, was deliberately and consciously murdered in the pursuit of some perverse and wicked political end. Her death continues to cause shock throughout this community. Sadly, the shock did not end further such deaths. My prayer and hope is that the shock of this occasion will contribute to there being no further deaths of this nature, but, in this flawed society, that is probably too much to hope for.”
“I join in the expression of condolences to the two families who have been ripped apart by these gruesome murders. I suspect that we all struggle to understand how anyone can kill their own mother and their own loved one. It is such a horrendous act that it is quite chilling even to think about it, and yet these horrific offences take place in our society. Through the relatively short passage of time, the victims become mere statistics, which is a tragedy in itself. When violence is resorted to so readily, a great change of attitude is needed. This past weekend is yet another tragic example of that.”
“I welcome the overdue return of our children to school, but this timid Tuesday will be a disappointment to many, most particularly our retailers and critical businesses. The last statement was built around a buzz phrase about being data-driven. This statement is built around a new buzz phrase, "social contact capital", although it seems to be blighted by a lot of Executive austerity when it comes to spending that capital. If we are still data-driven, what targets were attained today to enable the first triggering of relaxation? What will be the next targets for each of the data transmissions, hospital admissions etc that will enable the next phase to be triggered? I think that the public should be trusted by knowing that rather than having to wait hopefully. They should know what the standards are, surely.”
“Whatever the ultimate reshape of the health service, there is going to be a critical need for adequate surgical departments. I draw the Minister's attention to the unsatisfactory situation at Antrim Area Hospital, where, because of underinvestment, the surgical department was unable to provide a safe green pathway for cancer patients during the recent pandemic. What is his response to the Northern Trust's request for a new theatre, a new critical care block and a new ward block? It is clear that Antrim hospital cannot continue to serve patients' needs without those.”
“<BR /> <BR />For as long as babes in the womb can be summarily killed by the gruesome practice of abortion, as legislators, we fail the unborn, and I do not want to be in that category.”
“Yes, Mr Speaker. The Assembly is being invited to do the very thing that the Government said that it could do: amend the legislation on abortion. That seems to me to be what this Bill seeks to do. <BR /> <BR />I believe that we need to go further. Seventy-nine per cent of the people who responded to the Government's proposals expect us to go further, because they rejected those proposals. I regret to have to say to the Member that the long title of the Bill probably impedes much by way of amendment to make a real assault on the abortion trade. However, at least it is a start, and I hope that no one who supports it sees it as an end; rather, it should be seen as a beginning.”
“However, when it comes to this devolved issue of abortion, it is saying, "Oh no, we will kowtow to those who have put this upon us". Is that the best that Sinn Féin can do?”
“I have two points to make about that, if I might, Mr Speaker. Of course, the legislation had already been passed last June when the Member proposed her opposition to this tenet, so it is the Member who has shifted her ground, not anyone else. Is it not intriguing that, when it suits, the ally of the Secretary of State is Sinn Féin? It is Sinn Féin that is saying to the House, "We have to accept British rule. We have to accept what the Secretary of State has said on this issue." Of course, in doing that, Sinn Féin also seems to have forgotten that abortion is, in fact, a devolved matter. Is Sinn Féin not the great champion of wanting to extend the realms of devolution? My goodness, Sinn Féin even wants to put its hands in our pockets through taxation under devolution.”
“Unlike the Member who seeks to intervene, who refused my intervention, I will.”
“The very people who proposed the very wording in its amendment, which lays the basis for the Bill, are today the people who are saying, "No, we must not do it". They find all sorts of excuses, none of which are credible. I have never heard such porous excuses in all my life for not standing up for what you told us nine months ago you believed in. Which was the real Sinn Féin? Maybe I had better not know the answer to that question; it might be even more disturbing. <BR /> <BR />So, here we are today, with a most modest proposal. I say to the House —.”
“Absolutely. I have it here. That is word for word what Sinn Féin said, through Ms Sheerin, in proposing its amendment. Of course, in the Republic of Ireland, to which it wishes to join us all, this is exactly the legislation that they have. Yet, today, it is unwilling to support the very thing that it called for in the House nine months ago. It is the very thing that it voted for in the Republic of Ireland, but, today, it is a different tune. We had Ms O'Neill talking to us about "injustice and cruelty", but not a thought of the injustice and cruelty to the unborn who are to be terminated. Not a thought. <BR /> <BR />Not for the first time in the House, Sinn Féin stands exposed in its rank hypocrisy on the issue.”
“<BR /> <BR />Here, in the Bill, we are talking about a very modest step to deal with one specific and discrete aspect of the abomination of abortion. It is just one aspect, yet it infuriates those who defend and promote abortion that the House would dare to even think of protecting Down's syndrome babies or those with other classifications of serious impairment. <BR /> <BR />As for Sinn Féin, it told us that the debate was a distraction from the DUP doing this, that or something else. Yes, it was a distraction. Its contributions are a distraction from the fact its Members were the very people who, on 2 June last year, proposed the very premise of the Bill. It was Ms Sheerin, no less, who proposed the amendment in the House.”
“It is that, we are absurdly told, to which we are tied by legislation. I say to the House that all of us have a choice to make. Are we on the side of the voiceless, the unborn and those who some would call imperfect, or are we on the ruthless side of terminating? <BR /> <BR />The legislation that brought in abortion will forever be infamously linked to the restoration of these institutions. The clue is in the title: the Northern Ireland (Executive Formation etc) Act 2019. Whether slipping through same-sex marriage and abortion in such legislation suited some, whose greater priority was a return to office, remains a matter for valid speculation. However, if we can roll back some of that, the bounden duty on us is to do so most assuredly.”
“However, it seems that we do not need to worry about that: we can just abort them. How callous is that? <BR /> <BR />If we are a caring society, why do we not care for the unborn with congenital anomalies? Why do we not care about them? I say most forcefully to the House that we should, and shame on us if we do not. Yet, those who support abortion want the right to terminate — what an ugly word — such children, and without a blush of embarrassment they do it in the name of human rights. What a perversion. <BR /> <BR />I will tell you what offends me, Mr Speaker. It is the invocation of human rights to justify the deliberate killing of human beings. That is the greatest offence. Thus, I have to say, what a charter for death and destruction — the very antithesis of human rights — is the CEDAW report.”
“If you look up congenital disorders in any respectable medical textbook, you will find this list. Common congenital disorders include the following: cleft lip and cleft palate, cerebral palsy, fragile X syndrome, Down's syndrome, spina bifida, cystic fibrosis and heart conditions. The legislation that the Member seeks to amend admits abortion for those suffering from congenital anomalies. I have listed them: that is what we are talking about. <BR /> <BR />When you go to the World Health Organization's website, you will discover, under a section called 'Treatment and care', that:”
“Should we not be the voice for the voiceless — those who cannot speak but those whom we would authorise the killing of? Should we not pause and think, as legislators, of being the voice of the voiceless? I would have thought that we should. <BR /> <BR />What are we talking about? At our briefing, representatives from the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists gave us a definition of severe impairment:”
“Really? Is that what we, as legislators, think we should be doing?”
“I heard talk in this debate about ensuring — I heard Miss McLaughlin talking about it — that we have a progressive, inclusive society. It is neither progressive nor inclusive for the aborted, the unborn, whose only crime under this limb of the legislation is that they are not as others.”
“It is quite shocking to me that today, from some, the saving of even one life of a Down's baby could provoke such opposition. <BR /> <BR />Tonight, this Assembly in this vote will decide whether it is on the side of life or the side of death. It will decide — this is the nub of the matter — whether disability justifies death. It will decide whether we as legislators are going to validate disability as justification, by the state, for death. That is how chilling and awful the proposition is: that if someone in the womb, which should really be the safest place for any unborn, has a serious impairment detected, the state can validate their death. <BR /> <BR />This House will decide tonight whether what some see as imperfection offends to the extent that we warrant the killing.”