Stewart Dickson
East Antrim · Alliance Party · Northern Ireland
“Thank you, Minister, for your answer. Minister, you will have noted that the Government recently announced a VAT cut for some family expenses for a range of activities over the summer. That is perhaps a change.”
“Many do not know how to apply; others do not even realise that the opportunities exist. If the process itself is a barrier to participation, it is really not open to all.”
“I was born in 1950 in Thorndale House, which was one of the homes that is named in the legislation. I was born to married parents, and Thorndale House was a maternity home. It was where you went to have your baby in 1950 on the Antrim Road. My mum and dad went there, I was born and, a few days later, I left with loving parents.”
“I agree with Mr Brett: amendment No 6 is important because it will deal with persons who refuse to provide information or evidence to the inquiry. Amendment No 8 to clause 20 is a tidying-up amendment that will allow the Committee to make interim reports, which will be of benefit to the inquiry process.”
“That is why I want the inquiry to succeed and why it is vital that it succeeds. That is why it is important for us to see that cruelty in the full glare of a public inquiry. That is why it is important that the scheme goes through without further delay. <BR /> <BR />Finally, I place on record my thanks to the Committee Chair.”
“The Assembly faces stark choices, and agreeing the draft Budget as it stands is not a silver bullet, nor is it sustainable for us to continue in the absence of a Budget. It is vital, therefore, that we break the cycle of crisis and collapse that has been destroying our public finances.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,188 lines we hold for Stewart Dickson, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 35 of 44.
“I appreciate what the Member has been saying, but, to come back to the subject of the £585 million, there are those — I am not suggesting for a second that you are one of them — who suggest that this is money that the British Government have given to us as an extra. The reality is that this is money in the Northern Ireland block grant to be used for hospitals, roads and education. The decision that Sinn Féin and the DUP have made and others will support to a certain level is that that money will be taken out of the block grant and used to protect the most vulnerable — the recipients of welfare. This is not new money; this is our money being reallocated inside this Budget.”
“<BR /> <BR />When Professor Evason and others start to crunch the numbers in that respect, they will find two things: the mitigation that Sinn Féin has vaunted as a success is probably little different from what we had when the Bill came, and, when it comes to the Budget, the reality is that the DUP has given away more of departmental budgets to provide a small amount of additional cover. It is important that we spend money on welfare, but it has to be borne in mind that every penny extra that goes into welfare comes out of education, health and every other budget in Northern Ireland. The debate about how we balance those issues should be in this Chamber; it should not have been handed away to another jurisdiction.”
“<BR /> <BR />We have to act consistently, and the Alliance Party and I intend to do so with this. We have negotiated our way through welfare reform for a great length of time. It goes back to the time when our Member of Parliament was involved in the debate in the House of Commons and proposed a great number of amendments to the legislation. Ultimately, much of that was defeated in the House of Commons by democratic decision. A Bill was presented here, and a great deal of time and effort was put into negotiating on it and negotiating mitigating figures. I have questioned the mitigating figures as they stand today, and I honestly do not believe we are much better off or any better off than we were when the Bill was on the Floor. Some things have changed, but they have changed because of tax credits.”
“I sat on a number of occasions with the Secretary of State during the discussions that took place at Stormont House, as did other Members. I heard her very clearly issuing the threat that, if the discussions did not resolve welfare reform, she would, indeed, legislate. She was not prepared to give a clear answer on whether that would mean pure rest-of-the-United-Kingdom welfare reform, but it was clear to me that that was what she was hinting at. Sinn Féin has come perilously close to allowing that to happen through the way in which they have abdicated their responsibility for dealing with the Bill and their failure to negotiate a Bill in this House rather than allow what many of them see as the unacceptable face of the United Kingdom in the form of the Tory party.”
“I share Mr Beggs's concern about that. As he has heard, that is a question that I have raised with the Minister today, and it is one that I trust he will be able to answer when he responds to the debate. <BR /> <BR />Ultimately, I have to express my despair at the fact that it has taken us five months to get here and that this institution is to abandon its responsibility to legislate in this area. I find that incredibly disappointing, as, I am sure, will those who are listening to the debate. The Assembly, with the Bill that we had in the Chamber, did its very best to protect —”
“I am coming to a conclusion, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker. <BR /> <BR />Given those three very important constraints — important constraints, it seems to me, that Sinn Féin was not prepared to be restricted by some five months ago — I challenge Sinn Féin to understand what it is that has changed to allow it to do a volte-face — to turn around today. That is the interesting question for it.”
“We should remember that it was the detail of the regulations that came to the Committee that finally persuaded Sinn Féin to renege on the agreement that everybody else thought that they had earlier this year. Therefore, it is important that we have a clear understanding of what the relationship is between the House and the Westminster Parliament that will now deal with the Bill and the legislation, and how the detailed regulations that flow from that will be determined locally in Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />I see that the Minister wishes me to give way.”
“The reality is that, unless we move forward with this today, we move back into the financial crisis that we have been in for some considerable time. Earlier today, we heard the Finance Minister tell us, with some exasperation, that she was at least able to rebalance her Budget today, and that is based on the figures that have been given in respect of the Bill. <BR /> <BR />I am incredibly concerned about the way in which the Bill is being handled and the fact that it has been passed to another place for scrutiny. I am looking to the Minister for assurances that appropriate scrutiny time will be given to the Committee, particularly in respect of the regulations, because, to use that well-known phrase, the devil is in the detail.”
“That is what I am trying to ascertain from the Minister now: whether the Evason group will bring forward recommendations — many of which were already in the Bill with regard to mitigation, although I accept that some of those will be with regard to tax credits — relating to welfare reform that will be implementable through the new computer system and that that will be at no additional cost. At the time, the cost that was quoted to the Committee was excessive.”
“Will the Minister also outline for us today exactly what will happen with regard to —”
“<BR /> <BR />I have questions for the Minister, and I will repeat some of them. Can the Minister assure us that the new computer system will be operational with regard to the Bill and that those items that the Evason group brings forward will have to operate consistently with it with no additional cost to the computer system? In the previous discussions, one of the fears that we had with the Bill was the cost of transfer from one computer system to the other and the assertion by the Department for Work and Pensions that the new computer system would require us, with very little wriggle room, to operate the welfare regulations as they are in the rest of the United Kingdom. I am looking for assurance that, when the Evason group brings forward recommendations, they will be implementable and financially consistent with the new system.”
“That allows us to foot the resource for welfare and to direct that resource where it should be: to support the most vulnerable in this community. <BR /> <BR />I have said that we will support the motion, as it represents the Bill that fell in May. We understand other parties' concerns, particularly in regard to the constitutional and institutional implications. I genuinely understand how other parties feel about that matter. However, it would be unrealistic of us, having stated in the past that we supported the Bill, not to support what is going on today. This is not an endorsement of a deal but a demonstration that the Alliance Party is committed to solving the welfare reform crisis, as it has been for many years, and to placing Northern Ireland's future on a sound economic base.”
“I agree with the Minister, but it is not my job to speak for other parties or, indeed, their ability to change their mind or, perhaps to put it more strongly, renege on agreements that were clearly made. <BR /> <BR />The Alliance Party believes that we must urgently fix the shambles that is our Budget, and some steps have certainly been taken to do that. However, doing so requires a great deal more than the mess that we have been in for the last number of months. We need clear financial management and a real strategy for growth, stability, skills and education. If we are truly to save on our welfare budget, we need to be able to implement those items in this community. These are the things that we need to do: strengthen this community for growth, provide for stability and deliver skills and education.”
“In sense, that is very simple. My party colleague Stephen Farry said earlier that we will support the legislative consent motion to allow through what has been debated in the House. However, I am trying to castigate the failure of the process that has taken us to this point. We should have made that decision when the Bill was in the House. I make no apology for saying that. The mitigation had been achieved. The bulk of my words here are to say that no one can understand what Sinn Féin Members were actually about in respect of those matters. They —”
“They are afraid to take difficult decisions and are walking away from those decisions. They are working hand in hand with the DUP, which has what might be described as a devil-may-care attitude to devolution — in one day and out the other. <BR /> <BR />We see no meaningful decisions being taken on spending, taxation and the legacy of the Troubles. There is a clear lack of leadership and, of course, we have seen that across other parties as well, with the opportunistic departure of the UUP and the DUP's crazy ministerial in-and-out strategy, which pandered to the extremes of unionism rather than doing what is best for Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />This country needs sound public finances and a well-resourced and fit-for-purpose public service. Two parties are certainly not serving that to us today.”
“I am sure that the smoke and mirrors that that party is well used to living through and behind will be well seen through by their probably now former anti-austerity friends north and south on this island. What a ridiculous precedent to set. MLAs of the second largest party in the Assembly have shirked their responsibilities to take serious and perhaps unpopular decisions for the overall good of their constituents. <BR /> <BR />I really despair at this juncture. The road to a prosperous and united community in Northern Ireland is fraught with difficult decisions — difficult decisions that my party is prepared to take but, clearly, others in the House are not. Just like Sinn Féin's refusal to sit in Westminster, its MLAs appear to be placeholders rather than public representatives.”
“In the interim period, our Budget and, ultimately, the integrity of this institution were worn down to ridicule through a reluctance to move on matters that could destroy power sharing. Sinn Féin has sought to distance itself from any responsibility at all through the bizarre use of a legislative consent motion, despite the primacy of the Assembly in this area of competence and that party''s outrage at the use of that mechanism to, for example, permit the NCA to operate in Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />Martin McGuinness told us that it would be a mistake for Westminster to directly legislate on this matter: will he tell us what has changed? Essentially, a decision that can and should have been taken by the House is being outsourced to Westminster to reduce the collateral damage that Sinn Féin could incur from taking difficult decisions.”
“Perhaps the Minister will tell us that all has been denied to us. <BR /> <BR />We would have greatly appreciated the opportunity to respond to each aspect of the deal, particularly on welfare reform. Today, we have been issued with a document and have been told to sign it off virtually before we have even read it. There is a reason for that which others have alluded to: this all has to be concluded before a particular party's conference this weekend. <BR /> <BR />I turn now to what might be described as the Sinn Féin/DUP new Christmas parlour game. It is called "Pass-the-parcel legislation". Five months after the fall of the original Welfare Reform Bill, we have an acceptance of that Bill by Sinn Féin, just as it did in December 2014.”
“Earlier today, we debated the merits of delaying for a week, and, like others, we supported that in the interests of good governance and of what my party colleagues on the Executive said yesterday. That would have allowed us, at least, to have the opportunity to properly scrutinise the document, which many have found difficult to find. I have it in front of me in electronic form, and it is long and detailed. One of the questions I have for the Minister is whether he will bring the detail of the Bill to the Committee so that we can have an opportunity to discuss it. Will he bring the regulations that will flow from the Bill to the Committee for discussion? Even though we were prepared to support the Bill and supported it in its final form, we look forward to the opportunity to re-examine many of the issues.”
“What we have is a sticking plaster and another crutch for us to limp down the road to the next existential crisis that will leave Northern Ireland, our citizens and our businesses in limbo for months on end as we wait for two parties to show some sort of leadership or to tire of the current round of grandstanding. They certainly seem to have tired yesterday. <BR /> <BR />As others have said, we have not truly been given the chance to look at the agreement or, particularly for this debate, the elements of the welfare Bill. We are told that we know all its content because it has been debated in the House: that is true, but, in transposing the Bill to another place, the House has given up control of that debate. For me, that is a fundamental issue.”
“Thank you, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, for the opportunity to speak on the motion. The last time that I spoke on the matter, it was with a feeling of utter exasperation and déjà vu. I can report that those feelings have not gone away or changed. Nothing much has changed in the intervening five months. I do not feel any more optimistic today about welfare reform than I did five months ago. <BR /> <BR />This comprehensive agreement, plus the welfare reform proposals, are described as "a fresh start". They are about as fresh as a student's bag of rugby gear after a game.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. As regards the bedroom tax, the new agreement is over four years. We all had serious concerns, over six years, about what would happen when we fell off the edge of the cliff. Even though we had mitigated the bedroom tax in the previous Bill and there is more money for further mitigation, the reality is that the bedroom tax element will fall off the cliff in four years' time instead of six years' time. That seems to be an amazing achievement for the two parties.”
“I thank the Minister for her statement. Minister, previously you advised Departments to cease discretionary spending. No doubt, that contributed to the Budget allocations that you have been able to make today. Does that advice to Departments still stand?”
“Thank you, Minister. It has to be acknowledged that you have been here on a number of occasions, robustly dealing with these matters, and you are to be congratulated for that. Minister, do you agree that, if you were to compare the date of the report with today and visit the prison today, you would find a transformed regime, people working together, reduced absenteeism and more prisoners engaged in meaningful work?”
“<BR /> <BR />I am delighted to support Mrs Dobson in the work that she has done and in the research that she has undertaken, which has been meticulous. She has consulted widely, and the consultation has, I think, delivered a very clear message to the Assembly. I have no doubt that the Welsh model, which is one that is proposed, carries a great deal of merit. I encourage the House to unite today in support of the motion.”
“I have given consent on my driving licence application form just in case anybody is not sure what the card in my wallet is for or it cannot be found, and I have told my family and friends that I wish to consent to donation after my death, if that is appropriate. As Mrs Dobson pointed out, there are many circumstances where, sadly, it is not appropriate. A small number of people can become donors. For those who actively do not wish to be donors, I believe that the soft opt-out is the right approach. No one will be forced into making a donation. Family members should not feel under pressure. It should be a decision made at a particular time and one that the donor should hopefully have given consideration to, but, nevertheless, families and close relatives will have a final say.”
“I have no doubt that, as their families look back on what they did at that time, they will realise that they made an immense contribution not only to their lives but to medical science and to the team that was working at Harefield Hospital. <BR /> <BR />I also want to refer to a friend who has now received the second kidney transplant of his lifetime and to attest to the life-giving powers that that has brought to someone who is in their working years; is fit and able to return to work and to make a contribution to this society and community, and is able be a taxpayer and not a burden on our health service as he is fully fit and able to make a contribution. <BR /> <BR />I encourage anyone who today wishes to be an organ donor to give serious consideration to that. I carry a donor card with me.”
“I will refer to a number of personal experiences that have taken me to the conclusion that this Bill is of benefit and should be encouraged. <BR /> <BR />Over 20 years ago, I remember two young men from my constituency who, coincidentally, knew each other through youth activities and the Boys' Brigade, one from Carrickfergus and one from Greenisland. They were two very early recipients of heart transplants at Harefield Hospital. Sadly, in time, both of them died, but both were brave in the operation that they faced and both had an extension to their lives that would not have been granted to them had their illnesses continued.”
“First, I thank Mrs Dobson for bringing the Bill to the House today and for the tremendous work that she has done in preparation for what is a very difficult and emotional subject for her personally, and which is also of great importance to many people who have had to face the trauma of a transplant or, indeed, make the decision with a loved one that donation is the appropriate thing that they wish to do when death occurs or, as is the situation now, where many people will make live donations for kidney transplants. <BR /> <BR />I want to be very brief and say a few things about this issue. The Alliance Party is supportive of the Bill. We will listen in detail to the work done in the Committee and follow its progress with interest, but, in broad principle terms, we are very supportive of the Bill as proposed.”
“I thank the deputy First Minister for his answer. There are many statutory agencies that, unfortunately, have to deal with paramilitaries as so-called or de facto gatekeepers: what action will you and OFMDFM take to remove that scourge from the community?”
“Notwithstanding the concerns that others have raised informally in Committee about data protection and the sharing of information, the principle is right and is taking us into the right area. We need to share appropriate information so that we have the most effective and efficient means of dealing with those who commit acts of antisocial behaviour, for which, perhaps, we need to look at a definition in the context of the Bill. It is not to penalise people; it is to identify where the problem is and to take appropriate remedial action. It may simply be that knowing that a future landlord could be warned about behaviour could be sufficient in dealing with a problem. <BR /> <BR />In general, I support what the Bill is trying to achieve with regard to the statutory charge. Overall, at this stage, I am content to support the Bill.”
“While the identification and, hopefully, re-incorporation of empty homes into the social or private sector is important, it is not a panacea for our housing needs problem, and I think that the Minister will readily recognise that. It is a small step to dealing with properties that are, perhaps, a nuisance in an area, and it provides a useful means of providing housing. It may be that those contacts will simply result in a piece of land or property being sold into the private sector, or it may allow social or other housing providers to open negotiations with the owners of land or derelict properties to see whether they can be brought back into business, all of which is good, but none of which will solve our housing crisis. <BR /> <BR />I move now to antisocial behaviour and information sharing.”
“<BR /> <BR />As has been mentioned, the Bill covers three areas: empty homes, antisocial behaviour information sharing and statutory charges. The Alliance Party is content to support all those areas in general, but we will want to scrutinise some areas of detail in Committee to ensure that we get the best out of the Bill and to ensure that it delivers for everyone whom it is intended to cover. <BR /> <BR />I also want to comment on empty homes, in particular. Mr Beggs made reference to properties in our constituency of East Antrim. I am sure that such references could be replicated for areas across the Province, but there is an important point in that regard.”
“I will be as brief as possible. We are at the Second Stage of the Bill. I welcome the Bill back to the House today. We do not have a lot of time between now and the end of the mandate to proceed with a lot of legislation, all of which requires careful and appropriate scrutiny. This is a short Bill, but it is, nevertheless, important, and there are important details in it that we, as a Committee, need to examine carefully. I am glad that the time-wasting by Ministers and others appears to be over and we can get on with the work in hand. <BR /> <BR />I thank the Chair and members of the Committee for the work that has been done in the background to get the Committee work done, at least at an informal stage and now at a well-advanced stage. It is a track that we have been going down with other legislation.”
“Thank you, Minister, for your statement. Mr Somerville from the Ulster Unionist Party and I recently visited the prison. We were the only two members of the Justice Committee who took up the invitation, and we met Mr Wragg, the new governor at the prison. I beg your pardon: Mr Sammy Douglas was there too. My apologies. We met Mr Wragg and noted the extensive changes that he had made in the prison, which, in my view, were starting to gain respect from staff and prisoners alike. <BR /> <BR />You referenced the reduction in sickness absence levels, and the drive to continue to do that is important, but can you point out other areas of significant change that will provide reassurance to the public?”
“Thank you, Minister, for the information that you have brought to us this afternoon. Minister, you are now back in office, and although I accept that this news came to you out of the blue today, maybe there were other opportunities that you missed by not being here. <BR /> <BR />Energy supply seems to be key to maintaining large manufacturing industry in Northern Ireland. What action will be taken to ensure that the North/South and Moyle interconnectors will be up and running and delivering electricity at competitive European rates? What actions will you take beyond that taken by the Minister for Employment and Learning and the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister to contact counterparts in Europe to ensure that the matter is resolved?”
“Thank you, Minister, for your statement. It is clearly part of your reforming Minister profile. Concern has been expressed about change to date and the potential changes in the future with regard to the number of people who may feel that they have to represent themselves in court — those known as litigants in person. Is there any evidence of that happening? How is the justice system going to cope with that, should it be a problem?”
“On a point of order, Mr Speaker. You will be aware that, in recent days, there have been media reports about the DUP Tippexing a standard petition of concern form to you on various matters. This follows a similar accusation with regard to Sinn Féin earlier this year. There is a clear inference that individual Members are not using their personal discretion when it comes to completing such forms. May I ask you to investigate the efficacy of doing that and whether it meets the appropriate Standing Orders?”
“Minister, do you agree with me that the most important aspect of the programme is ensuring that those entitled to receive the funds do so and that there is not some form of sectarian headcount, as has been produced in the question? In fact, do you not find the question offensive and counter to any Building a United Community strategy of the Executive?”
“However, residents on the other side of the lough on the Bangor line, a town two miles further from Belfast Central than Carrickfergus, can reach the centre of Belfast by 6.37 am. Larne harbour is in a similar situation and is served by a two-hourly service after 7.20 pm. We need a sensible approach to connections rather than salami-slicing services. Translink should be looking for areas of development, not dragging the timetable backwards. I hope that the petition presented to you today will enable us to move things forward. The Larne Line Passenger Group looks forward to meeting the Minister later today, and I trust that she will be listening in a constructive manner to us all.”
“Therefore, we have the ludicrous situation in which Translink is pushing more traffic on to the roads, clogging Belfast city centre in the mornings and in the evening rush hour, because, ultimately, travelling by car is faster, cheaper and more convenient than using Translink. <BR /> <BR />It is far from surprising that, in my survey, only 16% rated the service as good, but, further to that, a massive 75% believe that the service is getting worse. As may be expected, 82% identified frequency as an issue, 44% identified crowding and 41% cost, with others expressing concerns about punctuality, station amenities and park-and-ride facilities. <BR /> <BR />It is impossible to reach Belfast city centre from Larne or Carrickfergus before 7.00 am via public transport. That is simply unacceptable.”
“<BR /> <BR />Since the beginning of September, the people of east Antrim have been dealing with a downgraded railway service as the result of timetable changes. Trains run less frequently and service fewer stations, which, ultimately, makes it downright awkward to use the train in east Antrim. In recent weeks, in an attempt to assess the scale of the impact on my constituents, I have been running a survey on my website. The results make for sobering reading. Of those who responded, 75% said that the changes have impacted on them negatively, making their journeys less convenient. Of those, 62% have had to seek alternative means of transport. Unsurprisingly, the chief alternative means is that of a car.”
“It gives me pleasure to present this petition to you today, Mr Speaker. Before I begin, I place on record my thanks to the Larne Line Passenger Group for its hard work in collecting signatures and in holding Translink to account. I also thank Members from the East Antrim constituency, who have supported the petition. <BR /> <BR />As you will be aware, we had a debate on the matter in the Chamber last month, albeit a brief and rather poorly attended one. I thank the Members who attended that debate. It is perhaps a sign of slow progress in the area that we now have a Regional Development Minister in place, and hopefully a permanent one. I trust that she will work with us and the Larne Line Passenger Group to resolve the issues.”
“By way of information, I happened to travel on the train from Greenisland to Great Victoria Street on Friday, and I assure Mr Beggs that, sadly, the Wi-Fi was not working. That is one of the many complaints that people bring to me. I accept that it is a benefit, but only when it works.”
“The timetables that sparked this debate have been a farce from the beginning, and it is time for Translink to put that right. Instead of slicing the service ever thinner, I call on Translink and DRD to restore the previous timetable. The people of East Antrim do not deserve a second-class rail system. We should be developing and investing, not trying to push passengers out. Thank you very much.”
“European initiatives provide financial support to such schemes, but there is no evidence from DRD or Translink of even starting to seek to access such funding. Again and again, we hear that it is just too difficult and too expensive for us to have an integrated ticket or live bus route information system. Our buses in Belfast got that only last year, years behind the rest of Europe. <BR /> <BR />We need a bold strategy to develop the Larne line and Northern Ireland's rail network. DRD needs to fund this accordingly. We know how difficult are the financial times that we are in. Much of the massive rail infrastructure is sourced in Europe. I think that we will all agree that the current use of the car is neither sustainable nor desirable.”
“With the new trains, that should no longer be a problem. The opening of a halt at Whitehouse Abbeycentre would help to reduce congestion on surrounding roads, particularly at peak times such as the busy Christmas shopping period. <BR /> <BR />I recently had contact with the Regional Development Minister, when we actually had one, about the possibility of electrification of the line and utilising it for freight to and from Larne. Many may say, "Why on earth would we electrify the line?", but, actually, there is a major project in Europe called TEN-T that is delivering exactly that, right across Europe, from very many small countries to some of the largest. Such proposals may be far in the future and may not even be economically viable today, but Translink needs to have ambition.”
“A park-and-ride would open up an entirely new region for train travel. Furthermore, with the opening of the Gobbins path as a tourist opportunity, it would provide a more efficient way to move tourists to the new attraction. I appeal to Translink and the DRD to look at this with genuine urgency, as they are clearly missing an opportunity at Ballycarry. <BR /> <BR />I also think that consideration should be given to the reopening of certain halts along the railway line, particularly that at Whitehouse in Newtownabbey. The halt there closed in the 1960s, but, with the construction and expansion of the Abbeycentre from the 1980s onwards and the general up-use in rail usage, a stop here is clearly in demand. Previous reasons given for not reopening the halt included the poor quality of rolling stock that found it difficult to start or stop.”
“I am informed that, if only the roadworks proceed, the railway line will never be able to proceed. The engineering works must proceed hand in hand. <BR /> <BR />There is a major opportunity for expanding rail use in the provision of park-and-ride facilities at commuter stations. Such amenities have produced major benefits at stations such as Greenisland, Whitehead, Larne and Carrickfergus, but many more could benefit from park-and-ride, most notably at rural halts where the only practical means to reach the station is your car. Ballycarry is a case in point. This is the most accessible station to practically all of the Islandmagee peninsula and Ballycarry village. However, it is, by and large, accessible only by car, although it is practically impossible to park anywhere near the station.”
“Translink's policy is to cut services to the bone, cram passengers in and push them back into their cars. <BR /> <BR />I turn to what I believe should be done instead and what I envisage Translink and DRD need to do to develop the Larne line for the future to increase passenger numbers, get people out of their cars and stop the line becoming an afterthought. As we will be aware, the York Street road junction is due to be upgraded to a free-flowing junction in the coming years. This development in road infrastructure will be a one-off-in-a-generation chance to dual track the Dargan viaduct, which travels from Yorkgate to Central station on the Larne line. Translink and DRD must act now to ensure the future development of the Larne line for the people of East Antrim.”