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 66 of 95.
“Would the Member agree that one of the greatest punitive impositions of the single market is that its hideous regulations apply to every company whether it exports or not and, therefore, every company in the United Kingdom is pulled down by regulations that have no relevance to it, in the sense that it is not even going to export? By escaping from the single market, we escape that hideous burden.”
“— grasping the opportunities to build our future where the growth is: outside the EU.”
“That can happen only on an opt-out. Did we not hear the Prime Minister say there can and will be no opt-outs? We entered as one nation, we leave as one nation and the United Kingdom Government negotiate for us. I am disappointed at the tendency towards accepting that amendment. The DUP was absolutely right not to accept the Taoiseach's invitation to whatever forum he is setting up. It would be absolutely wrong to accept the amendment, which, in the same tenor and towards the same direction, takes out of its motion the very thing that is most important, namely —”
“No, I have been very generous with my time. <BR /> <BR />I was disappointed to hear the proposer from the DUP say he is minded to accept the Sinn Féin amendment. It takes the one salient, useful thing out of the DUP motion, namely recognising the opportunities that leaving the EU presents to improve external sales. The DUP, having put that in the motion, is now prepared to see it written out of it in pursuit of a negative spin about recognising the effects of the result of the referendum and its significant implications for businesses. Worse than that, the last phrases of the Sinn Féin amendment are about setting the ground for opt-out. It says:”
“Yet, there are those who want to tie us haplessly to the very place in the world that is failing economically instead of lifting their eyes to the vision of what lies out there in the world where the growth is. That is why we have to get mastery over our trade deals and our regulation.”
“We would be master of our own negotiations. We would not have to depend on Brussels, with all its attachment to endless hideous bureaucracy, to negotiate anything for us. We would, in fact, have a seat at the table, which we do not have in the WTO. We, the United Kingdom, would have a seat at the table and therefore could negotiate for ourselves. Outside the EU, we could also make the trade deals. The whole economic argument about leaving the EU is made on the simple premise that you want to follow the growth. The growth in the world is not in the moribund EU, where the economies are failing and falling; the growth in the world is elsewhere.”
“It is technically possible, but it totally negates the effect of leaving the EU. It leaves you in the worst possible position and leaves you shackled to all the restraints, the bureaucracy and everything else that comes with being in the single market.”
“The baggage of its relationship with the customs union, of not being able to make a single trade deal for yourself and of having to accept untrammelled free movement of labour are the very things that caused the wise people of the United Kingdom to vote to leave the EU. Saying that we must remain within the single market is to utterly disrespect that decision. I am disappointed to hear that the Ulster Unionist Party, having said that it accepts the outcome of the referendum, intends to vote for the Alliance Party amendment.”
“I support the motion and oppose both amendments. The Alliance amendment, of course, wishes to take us back. It wishes to drag us against the democratic will of the people of this United Kingdom to effectively remain in the EU. Members will have heard me probe with Dr Farry whether it was about access to or belonging to the single market, and he made it plain that their amendment was geared to remaining in the single market. By the act of staying in the single market, we utterly disrespect the decision of this United Kingdom to leave the EU. It is all the baggage of the single market that caused people to want to leave the EU.”
“Does the Alliance Party want us to belong to the single market or have access to it? The wording used — "continuing to participate" — would cover both. Will you nail your colours to whichever mast it is?”
“I would like some clarification on what the Alliance Party's amendment means, because it uses the rather equivocal language of:”
“Indeed. Would the Member agree that, in setting out the export figures, we need to be mindful that, in fact, our greatest external market outside Northern Ireland is GB? We export 60% to GB, and, of the balance, a fraction goes to the EU.”
“What hope is there of bringing plans to fruition? Can he tell us whether there is any contamination issue on any part of the site?”
“Now we are facing a further consultation —”
“The Minister will understand that it is over eight years since the barracks closed and over five years since it was transferred to the Executive. Can he understand the level of impatience locally at the failure to progress this matter to the point of real decisions, and now —”
“Although we recognise the limitations of what we say, it is still right that we utterly condemn the carpet-bombing by the Russians and others of Aleppo and think of and pray for the innocents of that city.”
“<BR /> <BR />Western interventions in the Middle East, where many monsters and tyrants have been in charge, do not have a very good track record, but the situation created in Syria is one, as Mr Beattie said, that is crying out for effective international action. He is right: the UN is being exposed only for its impotence in this situation because, of course, of the Russian veto. If the United Nations is an organisation worth having, this is a moment when it needs to provide the humanitarian lead and the delivery to safety of the ultimate innocents: the children of Aleppo. What sort of human beings are we if the United Nations organisations, which are supposed to protect humanitarian interests in the world, cannot and will not take even that most basic of steps? <BR /> <BR />Today we join in the condemnation.”
“I do not suppose that anyone in the House is foolish enough to think that the contributions in this debate are going to change very much, but that does not mean that we should not speak up when we see unfolding before us unspeakable horror in different parts of the world. When we see on our television screens what are only snapshots of the terror and horror in Aleppo, you could not be human and not be moved by the horrendous circumstances prevailing. A ceasefire was negotiated and then breached by a grotesque act of war by the Russians in the bombing of, of all things, a food convoy of humanitarian aid. That really underscores the depths of degradation to which that conflict has gone.”
“— hence the sensible amendment from Mr Agnew that we need a process to hold to account those who abuse the ministerial code.”
“There were protestations in those manifestos of delivering for people through the Assembly and through the Executive but not a mention that their primary purpose, function and focus would be on concealing that which it did not suit them to reveal. It is abundantly clear that this Executive have abused their powers enormously —”
“The appointment of Mr Gordon is pregnant with irony. One of Ian Paisley's most memorable assaults on journalists was when, agitated by the lawful use of freedom of information legislation, he turned and said that it was being abused by lazy journalists. Of course, one of the lazy journalists, in his terms, was David Gordon, who used it more than most to great effect. The irony is that the bête noire is now the spin doctor of this Executive. <BR /> <BR />Some remarkable things were said during the debate. Mr Edwin Poots told us that it was not the job of the Government to reveal information. Mr Irwin, reading from his script, told us, "We won the election, so just suck it up". There was nothing in the manifestos of Sinn Féin and its partner the DUP that said, "We want a mandate for secrecy, chicanery and tyranny". No.”
“They will not even tell the Assembly. Indeed, they will go to great lengths to conceal it from the Assembly. The truth has to be dragged out of them. Then we have protestations about anyone daring to ask questions about openness and transparency.”
“<BR /> <BR />The mischief here of, course, is not the making of the appointment — many would say that the Executive need all the help that they can get from people like Mr Gordon — but the manner in which they surreptitiously changed the law and, Henry VIII-style, rewrote it. We think that we are Members of a legislative Assembly. That cons us into believing that we make the laws, but, oh no, not when, Henry VIII-style, Arlene Foster and Martin McGuinness decide that they will make the law.”
“Ah, the kingdom of "Marlene". What a dark and secret place where boundless energy is expended on keeping secret their hidden things of darkness. There was no better example than the recent abuse over the amendment to the Civil Service Commissioners (Amendment) Order 2016, when the Executive Office went through all sorts of contortions to seek to conceal why, when and how the law was changed. They took it to the point that, when an investigative journalist, Mr McBride, asked what legislation they were using, they provided an incomplete answer, "The Civil Service (Amendment) Order", without daring to reveal that it was the order made two weeks before in 2016. Why? Because they wanted to conceal that they had used the Executive prerogative powers.”
“It seems to me that the fact that these figures got so bad suggests there was some deficiency in the departmental or other oversight, because surely the purpose of oversight is to identify and arrest the trends. Therefore, is anything new being done through oversight to identify and arrest such trends in this trust or anywhere else?”
“On messages, does the Minister have any comment to make on the fact that, recently, an individual with a previous terrorist history, who was convicted of possession of a submachine gun with intent to endanger life — the most serious offence of possession of which you can be convicted — was gifted a mere four and a half years in prison? Does that not suggest a message that we are only half-hearted in fighting terrorism?”
“Does the Minister accept that those anxiety levels and the resulting consequences for prisoners are greatly accentuated by losses of control in prisons, such as that which was seen at the weekend when, in Quoile House, three prison officers were left to deal with 100 marauding prisoners on the landings and had to retreat to the circle? Meanwhile, there were fires in Erne House and Bush House. Is the loss of control and the failure to keep control in the prison not a big contributory factor in the huge dropout rate amongst prison officers?”
“It is interesting that we do not have a Minister, but we have a collection of wannabe Ministers here to impress those in whose hands they think their future lies. When the Member pontificates about not debating all those issues, that of course, is a mere distraction from a party that has made a lifetime's existence out of failing to come to the House —”
“Is the parallel not in fact that it would be like having the criminal law but no courts to adjudicate on whether there had been a breach? We have a ministerial code but no process to adjudicate on whether there is a breach. It is as farcical as that.”
“There are now nine waste sites awaiting repatriation, five of them known about for quite a long time, yet if I understand the Minister correctly, there is no agreed work programme to deal either with those five or the four new ones. Why is that? Is the Republic of Ireland dragging its feet because of the cost involved?”
“Why has the management of a social investment project in east Belfast been handed over to a UDA front organisation? How many Provo front organisations are set to run SIF projects? Is that what the social investment fund is all about?”
“The panel on paramilitarism commented adversely on officialdom pandering to paramilitary groups. It said that those that Government do business with:”
“I note in the statement references to a plethora of joint ventures on inspectorates, history projects, teacher mobility, youth and teacher exchanges, professional development etc. What parallel cooperation and deepening involvement in education is there with other parts of the nation of which we are a part?”
“As the Minister recognises, the Dark Hedges have been a victim of their own success. Is it not rather neglectful that, in looking after them and exploiting them to the maximum degree compatible with their future, there is no structured management arrangement, given that there are so many cross-cutting departmental and council interests? I was rather surprised by an answer six months ago or so from the Department saying that there were no structures, for example, in place between the preservation trust and Departments such as the Minister's. Is it not imperative that there is more structure brought to this? Many local residents have their own concerns. There are issues about access and Transport NI issues, yet there is the capacity, because of the lack of structure, to pass the buck. Is it not time that there was a more structured input?”
“The Fresh Start document boasted that there would be a ring-fenced £25 million to hunt down fraud. I ask the Minister for an update. Is that money being drawn down? How is it being spent, and with what effect?”
“We know that we are entitled to talk about and investigate these matters. Some would rather hide from them. It will be a test of this House whether or not it hides from them.”
“Is that not something of political influence that this House should be investigating? It patently is. <BR /> <BR />Then from that programme, there is the suggestion from Mr Cushnahan that Peter and Sammy could lobby for a bit of a discount on the NAMA price. Did that happen? Is the House not interested to know whether that happened? Does the House want to hide its head in the sand? I understand that some to whom this comes too close do want to hide their head in the sand. They want to build a barrier and say, "Oh, the National Crime Agency is interested". As we heard at the start of the debate, there is no sub judice issue here.”
“<BR /> <BR />The second issue of political investigation is one of the things in the programme that intrigued me most. Frank Cushnahan explained to Mr Miskelly years before this became DUP executive policy that the way forward in NAMA was to extricate the NAMA debt and transfer it outside of NAMA to a third party so that deals could then be done. Lo and behold, that exactly became the policy of the First Minister and the Finance Minister, and, it seems, the deputy First Minister. It was to back foreign vulture companies coming in and buying the debt, and, of course, we know that the very reason that the PIMCO deal fell apart is that one of the beneficiaries of that apparently was to be the man whose original idea it was and whose friends — they professed themselves his friends — then took it up and ran with it and delivered.”
“Of course, there are many issues to investigate that do not impinge on the criminal investigation. There is the issue of how and why Mr Sammy Wilson as Finance Minister made the three recommendations that he did for suitable persons to serve on the committee: Frank Cushnahan, Mr Pengelly and, as we now discover, a third individual, Mr Adair, who never even knew that he had been nominated. He did not discover that until years later, and he himself had the wit to say that, because he was a debtor to NAMA, he would be wholly unsuitable to be appointed. What does that tell us about the due diligence that was conducted by Sammy Wilson in making those recommendations? Was there the same lack of due diligence in recommending Frank Cushnahan, whom the PAC of this House said had behaved totally unethically over Red Sky and the Housing Executive?”
“However, as the Republic of Ireland's Audit Committee said, there is also the question of whether there was political influence. That is where this House should come into the equation, in seeking to hunt down whether there was political influence that laid the basis that facilitated and was part of that which was rotten in all of the NAMA escapade.”
“Just this time last year, the then First Minister, Mr Peter Robinson, described Mr Frank Cushnahan as a pillar of the establishment. Anyone who watched the jaw-dropping 'Spotlight' programme of a couple of weeks ago might well have thought that that statement said more about the establishment than anything else. Of course, the establishment, then as now, is the DUP and Sinn Féin. <BR /> <BR />As Steven Agnew rightly said, there are two distinct aspects to this. There is the potential criminality, whether it was rucksacks of cash or hoards of money in secret accounts in the Isle of Man. Who were they for, and was there any corruption involved? All of that is for rigorous, relentless and uncompromising criminal investigation, and I am happy that that takes its course.”
“On a point of order, I understood that there are obligations on us all, when we rise to speak on an issue, that we declare any relevant interests. We have just heard a speech from Mrs Pengelly, who is the wife of Richard Pengelly who was at the heart of the Department which made some dodgy recommendations in respect of NAMA and who also served as a special adviser to the First Minister, who has also been implicated in these matters. Should there not have been a declaration of interest by Mrs Pengelly before she embarked on her excursion of deflection?”
“In this debate, we are laying down markers for what is needed.”
“I hope that this debate will be timely. I hope that it will not be overcome by disappointing news when the Bengoa panel reports.”
“Thankfully, that was derailed, but the mentality that induced that situation still, I fear, exists in many of the management structures of the Northern Trust and elsewhere. <BR /> <BR />We have seen successive Ministers, not just this one but her DUP predecessors, refuse to take the fundamental liberating step for the statutory nursing homes of removing the shackles and allowing admissions, underscoring for many of us again the agenda to try to run down those homes. You cannot say, "I am committed to a statutory home and see a future for it", if, at the same time, you deny it the lifeblood of admissions. By failing to take that fundamental step, Ministers from both parties have failed in that fundamental task of securing the future of those homes”
“We do not see the advance of community care. What we hear about from many of our constituents is a contraction, not an expansion, of community care. There is less time, not more, for individuals in their own homes. <BR /> <BR />We have the dichotomy of a protestation that everything looks rosy: by moving forward and intensifying community care, we can have fewer acute hospitals; but the reality that we see in our constituency is very different. Hence the necessity to underscore and commit irreversibly to the retention of the Causeway Hospital and the other facilities. <BR /> <BR />We saw the attempts — the crass attempts — to undo the provision in Ballycastle's in the Dal.”
“My first question to the Minister is this: can she reaffirm that commitment? With or without the Bengoa panel report, is there a commitment to maintain that? It is vital to the services afforded to the people in North Antrim. <BR /> <BR />Equally, we need to maintain the maternity unit there on a consultant-led basis. That is the ideal, and it must be maintained. Mr Storey refers to people raising rumours and attacks. Of course, the primary individual with profile who raised a rumour 18 months ago about the future of the Causeway was his MP, so I am a little surprised that, in this debate, he has been attacking him in that regard. However, there is concern in the context of the Bengoa report, in which the whole ethos, we are told, is about moving towards more community care, yet many of us cannot see it in our communities.”
“To distil the health needs and issues of North Antrim into four minutes is probably impossible. I think if there is one core issue of concern as we go forward, particularly as we await the Bengoa panel, it is to underwrite and underscore the necessity of maintaining the acute facilities of the Causeway Hospital. Without them, there is such a gap in provision for the whole northern part of North Antrim that it is unthinkable. The Minister's predecessor made this commitment in the House. He committed to retaining Causeway Hospital as a small acute hospital and said that:”
“Does the Minister agree that one of the greatest opportunities for growth after Brexit lies in the fishing sector, which has been mercilessly destroyed under the common fisheries policy? In preparation for our liberation from that, is there active work in hand to plot out a way forward for the growth of the fishing industry and its re-establishment as one of the key cornerstones of our economy?”
“Can the Minister tell us something about the composition of the working party, and can she assure the House that it is not made up solely of clinicians and other personnel with a predisposed preference for termination as the answer?”