Steven Agnew
North Down · Green Party · Northern Ireland
“We need an independent, open and transparent process for investigating Ministers. I have always failed to understand the opposition to that from some in the House. Given recent events, if the Assembly was to oppose it again today, there would be public anger.”
“This process would involve one commissioner and one independent investigation, rather than a political investigation that, I have no doubt, some at the time called a witch-hunt, as is often said when people are defending their Minister.”
“I am delighted to make a winding-up speech on this debate, which has been the first-ever sole Green Party private Member's motion. Thanks to the election of my colleague, Clare Bailey, we have two Green MLAs, which has increased our ability to use the Assembly privileges to put such suggestions forward.”
“I absolutely agree, Mr Beggs. <BR /> <BR />Another point I will make is about the idea of the distinction between the Minister and the Department. When I was drafting my private Member's Bill, I asked, "Should that say 'Minister' or 'Department'?". The legal advice that I was given was that they are one and the same.”
“If an MLA is alleged to have breached the code, a member of the public can write to the standards commissioner and have their complaint investigated in an independent manner. The result of any investigation is published and can, if required, lead to a debate in the Assembly so that all the issues can be aired.”
“I would argue that it serves neither the Minister nor the public well that we do not have such a process. An individual who seeks to complain will be left frustrated if they feel that their concerns are ignored by those in office, who are supposed to act on their behalf.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,353 lines we hold for Steven Agnew, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 26 of 28.
“The identification threshold to open a bank account was too high and the security checks were too high, and they could not get a bank account in which to, in many cases, have their benefits lodged. The post office again provided that service, which may not have been commercial. The banks did not see those people as important enough in terms of their number, but a vulnerable group in society was serviced by the post office, and it played a vital role in those people's life. <BR /> <BR />The report 'A "front office" for government services' has been mentioned, and I will echo some of what has been said. We need to use what is there. We were responding to budget difficulties by cutting staff, but how can we potentially make genuine efficiency savings?”
“Whilst banks and other profit-making organisations will make such decisions based on numbers, a post office is a public service, and public services should not be based on numbers coming through the door but on the need of those who come through those doors. <BR /> <BR />It is important that we sustain the post offices. As Danny Kinahan said, many of our post offices are not under threat — many are thriving — but those that are and that provide those important services, often in rural areas and areas that have no walk-in banking services, provide a vital resource to the community. <BR /> <BR />In my previous role working with the homeless, I witnessed the importance of the Post Office accounts. Many of the residents in the hostel where I worked could not get a bank account.”
“The post office has already done a great service today in bringing our politicians together, but, more importantly, on a regular basis, it brings our communities together. Post offices act as community hubs and, historically, have been a key part of our communities. Indeed, they continue to be so. <BR /> <BR />A number of Members have spoken about bank closures. Recently, Ulster Bank announced that it will close its branch in Donaghadee, leaving my constituents in that town with no local shopfront banking service within six miles. That is regrettable, but at least we have the post office, which will continue to provide banking services.”
“Given the furore that his party has made about the £87 million that we have had to cut to fund welfare, how does the First Minister propose that we pay for a potential cut of £400 million a year if corporation tax is reduced to the level that he has proposed?”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. I know that he has given way a lot. Is he saying that, when the Finance Minister described the position as "poor budget management", the Finance Minister got it wrong?”
“<BR /> <BR />As I said, we have a Bill that is better than nothing. As Mr Lunn put it, it leaves us in a better place than we were in yesterday. It is, however, an indictment of the system and the structures that we have here and, indeed, of the parties on the Executive, if this is the best that we can deliver for children in Northern Ireland.”
“Whilst I have not objected to that, I have to question the argument that the integrated and Irish-medium sectors have an advantage because of their legal position, given that the integrated sector has 62 schools out of 1,200, and the Irish-medium sector has even fewer schools. It is hard to argue that those are the big beasts punching above their weight in the education system. Positive action is still needed to promote and grow those sectors. That should not only be what is required by law but be the policy of the Executive. Unfortunately, the Programme for Government has shown, through its support and the continuing Executive drive for a shared education system, that true and genuine integration is still not at the heart of government policy. That is regrettable. I will continue to highlight and to press on that issue.”
“I am pleased that the integrated sector in particular will have a seat at the table on an authority that has been described by the Minister as a strategic body; other Members mentioned that. It is important that the integrated sector has a say and gets it voice heard when strategic decisions are made. Unfortunately, we still have a power structure within which the largest sectors will have the largest say and will, therefore, continue to be the largest sectors, maintaining our segregated system for at least another generation. <BR /> <BR />I listened to the debates about the need for a controlled sectoral body.”
“We obviously know about the disagreement on academic selection, but if this was a paper submitted to a transfer test, I am not sure that the Executive would quite make the grade to get into a grammar school. <BR /> <BR />It was mentioned that the Bill has come through accelerated passage. Again, that is a symptom of the breakdown at Executive level and the inability to get agreement, particularly on this issue. Rather than characterising the Bill as having been agreed to, it would be better to say that there was little or no dissent and it was deemed best to get the Bill through as quickly as possible before somebody found a problem with it. <BR /> <BR />The Bill perhaps takes us a small step in the right direction, but it is little more than that.”
“I do not imagine, however, that too many parties will go into the next election cycle with that as their headline message: "We will deliver something that is better than nothing".”
“Education and health are usually the two big-ticket items in government policy, and, if we are to describe today as a good day for education, we have to accept that we have a Bill that is reflective of the level of ambition that we have come to expect from our Executive. It is fair to say that, after seven years of trying to produce an Education Bill, two attempts at ESA and now the single Education Authority, something is better than nothing.”
“I suspect, for that reason, that 'The Nolan Show' will not report on it, because progress does not make the news. However, we have seen progress made here today. I welcome that and will let the Assembly get on with its business.”
“I speak to a group of amendments on which, if not complete agreement, there does not seem to be any dissent. Little is left to say. I am glad that I was able to be part of the compromise solution. We each laid out our stall at Consideration Stage of what we sought to achieve. I welcome the fact that the integrated sector will be represented on the new authority. That is important, particularly because the Minister has stated all along that it is not an administrative body but a strategic body. Therefore, it is important that each sector's voice be heard. <BR /> <BR />Credit has to be paid to the DUP, because, despite some of its Members' representation of Irish, we have seen the party sign up to an amendment that gives the Irish-medium sector a place on the board. That is to be welcomed. It is progress.”
“I at no point claimed that any sector or school is teaching or effectively encouraging sectarianism. I never made that assertion.”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. I will give him the benefit of the doubt that he misunderstood my comments as opposed to misrepresented them. My point was that, when you send children effectively to the same campus but put them in different uniforms, give them a different principal and have a different ethos in the school, it emphasises their differences rather than promotes their similarities, which integrated education does. That was my point.”
“I thank Mr McCallister for giving way. I assure him that I have not lost my radical edge, and I am certainly not conservative with either a small or a large "c". <BR /> <BR />The Member said that "we are where we are", and the point has been made before that we would never have designed an education system like this. Does he accept that, with falling pupil numbers, we were moving away from those sectors, given that more and more schools were having to become integrated to sustain themselves? In doing this, we are stopping that move towards greater integration.”
“I look forward to speaking to the next group of amendments.”
“If, as much as possible, shared education is made to look like integrated education, I will welcome that. If my cynicism — as Mr Allister calls it — forces the hand of those who want to rebrand our segregated education system as a shared one to actually make it look like it is shared, so be it. I will take that as a victory. To me, that has not been the intention to date, but the Minister now being forced to define it is a good thing. We can see what the agenda is and shape it through the House holding it to account. We can get the best possible outcome from what, to me, is a shoddy Education Bill. <BR /> <BR />I think that I have addressed the more controversial amendments. As many have said, I will wait to hear from Mr McCallister on his amendments, but I am inclined to support them.”
“<BR /> <BR />Yes, the integrated sector can be involved in sharing, but, to me, the conflict comes because, had we not come up with the solution of shared education, a natural outworking of area-based planning would have been that more schools within the controlled sector and the Catholic-maintained sector would have either had to become integrated or close. Now we are saying that we will maintain the two separate schools, but we will just do so in the same building, because that saves money, but what it does not do is change the nature of our segregated education system. <BR /> <BR />Those are my concerns over shared education. As I said, I will support amendment Nos 2 and 3, and I regret that others will not do the same. I will support amendment Nos 7 and 8, because, as I said, the definition of shared education is the crux here.”
“A lot is going to be played out in the definition of shared education. Since I am addressing that, I will say that I support amendment Nos 7 and 8. I think that we do need a definition of shared education. I have sought that definition previously from the Minister in questions and will scrutinise any definition that comes forward, because, for me, it is at the crux of the debate. As Mr Allister said, currently shared education is, to some extent, whatever you want it to be. My fear is, as I have laid out, that it is about propping up a failing segregated system, so we will see what the definition of sharing is.”
“When I finish this point. It is not mentioned in relation to the promotion of shared education in the Programme for Government or the T:BUC strategy. What we have is a political will supporting shared education, which, as I said, is a rebrand, from my point of view, maintaining division. What we do not have is the political will to encourage, facilitate and promote integrated education. I will give way to Mr McCausland.”
“Unfortunately, what it does not have, as recognised in its lack of mention —”
“Alas, given that it is myself alone, I did not have that power. So, I have gone with a compromise. <BR /> <BR />I was leading up to amendment Nos 2 and 3. I support the amendment brought forward by the Alliance Party and will answer those, including Mr Allister, who said that the legal duty already exists. As Mr Lunn pointed out, the addition of the word "promote" for shared education goes beyond "encourage and facilitate". It is not just an extra word but an extra word of force and importance. If we are to be told that shared education and integrated education are all moving in the one direction of educating our children together, surely we should not in any way seek to disadvantage integrated education. As I said in my intervention to Trevor Lunn, there is clearly a legal duty for integrated education.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. With the Deputy Speaker's indulgence, I will answer briefly and speak to it more in the debate on the next group of amendments. The amendment that we will discuss in the next group was a compromise amendment. It is not an amendment that I would draft, and I suspect that it is not an amendment that the DUP would have drafted were it not for the attempts to get cross-party support. So, there are elements that I think are positive. <BR /> <BR />I would like to see the integrated and Irish-medium sectors in particular have representation on the board and that to be facilitated by an increase in the numbers on the board. If I were drafting the amendment and had the party support to get such an amendment through, that is what I would have brought forward.”
“<BR /> <BR />We call the education system that we have "segregated", and so we rebrand it as "shared" but actually maintain the same problems and the same divisions that we have had for generations and, in effect, decide that yet another generation of children will be separated at the age of 4 into essentially Protestant and Catholic schools, taught from day one that they are different and should be taught in different schools and wear different uniforms. The emphasis remains on difference. <BR /> <BR />We have had enough division in our society. We had the opportunity, through the Bill, to tackle the division that we institutionalise in our education system, and, unfortunately, we have failed to do it. In my view, it is not good enough.”
“There is a challenge for Members, particularly in the DUP and Sinn Féin, as to whether they wish to lead on education or follow vested interest. The public are clearly saying one thing, and, as I say, the sectors with vested interests are saying another. Unfortunately, it is not the parents or the public who are being listened to; it is those in the different strands of the education sector. <BR /> <BR />I will not labour points that I have made in the past, but, for me, there is no doubt that shared education is nothing but an attempt to maintain the status quo in times of decreasing enrolments in schools and in times of financial hardship by providing a solution that works for the finances and allows us to maintain a segregated education system. It is essentially a rebrand.”
“I wish to refute Mr Allister's scurrilous remarks that completely misrepresented what I said. I said that the integrated sector would like some new schools or new buildings and would like to grow rather than simply being maintained at 62 schools. That is neither here nor there. I just wanted to put the record straight on that because I spoke from a sedentary position, which, of course, I should not have done. <BR /> <BR />The integrated sector clearly has widespread public support. Unfortunately, it does not have sufficient support in the House to pass amendment Nos 2 and 3, and it does not have the support of those in positions of power in the sectors that have, over time, been losing pupils to the integrated sector.”
“The Member made the comparison between shared housing and shared education. If you take that analogy to its conclusion, you could paint on each door whether the person walking through it is a Protestant or a Catholic, and you could stick them next to each other. In the case of schools, you put them in different uniforms to let people know what side they are from.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. What we have seen is that, whilst there is a legal obligation for integrated education, there is a Programme for Government commitment for shared education; so I think that the difference we are seeing is political will, and the lack thereof, when it comes to integrated education.”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. I just want to say that I appreciate that, in response to a question for oral answer, he made a commitment to furnish me with scores etc in relation to the schools chosen for new school build programmes. I thank him for doing that and for his transparency in that regard.”
“They stressed to me that time on these issues is key, and the Minister will be well aware that many parents will be making decisions on where to send their children to school next year. So, whilst we want the right decision, it is important to get it within the correct timeline. <BR /> <BR />I look forward to the Minister's response. He did not give an answer to the school today, so I doubt he will give an answer to us today, but I urge him, in his next capital funding announcement, to recognise the need of St Columbanus' College, reinstate its place at the head of the queue and give it the funding it so desperately needs.”
“Also, what consultation has taken place when he has changed the criteria, and what evidence base has he used to justify those changes? We need those answers, as politicians, to hold the Minister to account for his decision-making, to ensure that decisions taken are fair and to ensure that schools are selected for funding on the basis of objective criteria, rather than criteria that change to suit the Minister's priority areas in terms of which schools he would like to see progressed. <BR /> <BR />I welcome that the Minister met representatives of St Columbanus' College today. Having spoken to them earlier this evening, I know that they appreciated his time. They believe they had the opportunity to put their case, and they are hopeful — perhaps that is the best way to put it — of a future announcement.”
“That is acceptable, but he has also said that the criteria have changed to meet his priorities. That is where I find, having spoken to principals, that schools get concerned and ask why they have not met the criteria. <BR /> <BR />Schools plan for the future, and they know the criteria. We will all lobby for schools in our constituencies: every Member will do that, and I am happy to lobby on behalf of St Columbanus' College for the reasons that have been outlined. It needs a new build, because the building that it has is old and needs replaced. <BR /> <BR />What principals, boards of governors, parents and pupils need is some certainty. I ask the Minister whether the criteria set out in his most recent funding announcement will be the criteria used in the next funding announcement, or will they be changed again?”
“I understand why, in 2010, due to cutbacks, a number of planned school builds were not progressed. However, what we have seen since then bears some scrutiny. There have been three funding rounds for capital build programmes since the 2010 announcement, when the money was allocated to those schools that could move the quickest with their new builds. In 2012, 2013 and 2014, there have been funding announcements, but the criteria each time have changed. <BR /> <BR />The Minister knows that I have asked a number of questions about the criteria, and I have done my own research where I have not fully got the answers that I have been looking for. We have seen a picture of shifting sands. Indeed, in answer to one of my questions, the Minister said that the criteria have evolved based on learning from past experience.”
“At the outset, I declare an interest as a director of the Northern Ireland Council for Integrated Education (NICIE). However, as always in the Chamber, I speak as a representative of the Green Party in Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />My colleagues from North Down and South Down have outlined well the reasons why St Columbanus' needs a new school build. It is a successful school, and it is a growing school in terms of demand. We heard that, back in 2006, St Columbanus' College was sufficiently near the top of the list for new school builds that it was given a commitment that it would receive the finance to progress a new school build.”
“Will we see more money directed into front line education services? <BR /> <BR />This is minimal legislation that, we have all been told, must be agreed, but it is clear that what the Executive have brought forward does not move much forward. As I have said before, we are told that our education sector will welcome the Bill, when, in reality, all it will welcome is the end of a long, tired old saga.”
“Chris Hazzard referred to educational excellence. That is an ambition that we all have. We may have different views on how we get there, but I do not think that the Bill moves us much in that direction. I do not think that it is harmful in that regard, but I do not think that this is the Bill or the vehicle. If we can see some efficiency savings going into front line education, that will be welcomed, but we have taken six or seven years to get here at an expense of £17 million. We were told that ESA would produce estimated savings of £180 million over 10 years. Whether or not those figures were accurate, it was, at least, something that we could look towards. I have yet to hear what, if any, savings will be made from this. Will we recoup the £17 million? Will we see efficiencies?”
“We hear a lot in the Assembly and in wider UK debate about making work pay. It is important that work pays for those on the lowest rung of our public bodies. In the legislation, we have an opportunity to set an example in that regard. Given that there is an issue around whether the Minister appoints the chief executive or the board does, the issue of the chief executive's pay will be raised. That should be set. There should be a maximum ratio between the lowest paid on the board and the highest paid, who, presumably, will be the chief executive. We can perhaps salvage something that will be transformative through the Bill in what is otherwise uninspiring legislation.”
“There is a legal duty to facilitate and encourage integrated education. I agree with Mr Lunn that perhaps it should be a duty to promote. To me, that is a strategic duty, and the Minister has stressed that the Education Authority is a strategic body. The integrated sector should have at least a say in it, because, to some extent, that duty runs contrary to the interests of some of the other proposed board members. <BR /> <BR />A point that has not been made is that the new body will be a significant employer in our public sector. I have seen a figure of 35,000 staff under the new body, and the Minister can confirm whether that is correct. We have an opportunity in the Bill to set an example of how the public sector takes forward employment. It should be written in the Bill that the new authority will be a living wage employer.”
“One of the few things in education that the DUP and Sinn Féin seem to agree on is the need to work towards a single education system. It will not happen overnight; I think that everyone would accept that. However, we are not even taking steps in that direction, either through the Bill or through area-based planning. We have a segregated system that is crumbling under its own inefficiency, and all that we have done is seek to prop it up. This legislation continues, as has been acknowledged by most, what is already in place. Area-based planning and so-called shared education has sought to find imaginative ways to keep an unviable system economically viable. <BR /> <BR />Members mentioned the membership of the new authority. I add to that that there is a need to have a voice from the integrated sector.”
“We heard Members from parties that are on the Executive — maybe that is who the Minister was referring to — criticise the Bill and say that they had very little to do with it. I am sure that Mr McCallister will echo my comment that, if you have a Minister in the Executive and you say that you have no say in the Government on something as important as the Education Bill, I have to query what role you play. So I do point the finger at the Executive and the Executive parties. They have failed to bring forward an imaginative and progressive Education Bill, something other than what the Minister himself describes as minimal legislation. <BR /> <BR />An opportunity has been missed, in the Bill and in area-based planning.”
“I am sure that both my former teachers in the DUP are very proud of what I have become. <BR /> <BR />The Education Minister has described the Bill as the path of least resistance. He said that no one loses and that it is the minimum legislation. We were told by a number of the Members who spoke that this is a good day for Northern Ireland's education system. If that is the case, we have set the bar pretty low. The Minister also referred to and to some extent criticised those who point the finger. I will point the finger. I point the finger at the Executive. This is a democracy, and you are the Government. If this is the best that you can bring forward, you have failed. There should be collective responsibility.”
“I declare an interest as a director of NICIE. I suppose that, in the context of the Education Bill, it is a good opportunity for me to pay respect and indeed congratulations to my former teacher Michelle McIlveen, Chair of the Committee for Education. The House will already know that I had another illustrious teacher, Mr Sammy Wilson. He still gives me lectures, but I do not have to listen now, at least.”
“I do not necessarily disagree with him, but does the Member not accept that there is a difference in the responsibilities that the new board will have in respect of voluntary grammars? They have opted out of coming under its full remit, so there is an argument to be made about why they would have a say on responsibilities on other schools when they are not included, if the Member understands my point.”
“Whilst I am as keen as anyone else in the House for a long-term solution, whatever it might look like, to give certainty to the education sector, a rushed Bill will only ever be a stopgap and will not provide that certainty. I am not sure whether the Bill, or granting it accelerated passage, would serve the purpose that it purports to serve. <BR /> <BR />It very much appears that the slimmed-down Bill is what can be and has been agreed between the DUP and Sinn Féin. However, it is not what has been agreed in negotiation with the Assembly. It is right that such an important Bill should go through the full processes. The Chair of the Committee referred to it as an eleventh-hour solution. It is too important an issue to be taken forward in this manner, so for that reason, I oppose accelerated passage.”
“At the outset, I declare an interest as a director of the Northern Ireland Council for Integrated Education, but I am speaking as a Green Party Member. <BR /> <BR />The failure to agree the ESA Bill was very much a failure of the Executive. Now the Assembly is being asked to consent to that failure by granting accelerated passage for this Bill, and I cannot support that. It is important that we get the Bill right rather than getting it quickly. It is important that Members have time to consider potential amendments, what has been lost from the ESA Bill and what further could perhaps be salvaged. <BR /> <BR />I understand that there is concern about the footing of the education and library boards.”
“The Minister referred to the last Budget and said that, if we thought that that was painful, we ain't seen nothing yet. In the same statement, he says that he is still hopeful that discussions on corporation tax will bear fruit. Given that the estimated costs of reducing corporation tax to the level proposed are up to £400 million a year, is this proposal still credible? Is it desirable? Is it sane? How are we supposed to find that extra £400 million, given that we are struggling to balance the books in the current situation?”
“In the negotiations that are taking place, we need to learn the lessons, and the lesson here is clearly that deals done behind closed doors are dodgy deals that cannot be enforced and cannot be open to public scrutiny. My call for transparent dialogue and public engagement to decide the future of these institutions, building on what we did in the Good Friday Agreement, has fallen on deaf ears. Again, we enter a process of negotiations behind closed doors exclusive to parties in the Assembly but, more importantly, excluding members of the public. That is a mistake, and I think that today is regrettable. We should be agreeing a Speaker without this level of debate. It should be a non-political post. Nobody has anything to win —”
“For as long as we continue to insist on putting so much weight on symbols in this society, we will be forever dogged by squabbles over which symbols and whose symbols take precedence. We need to move on from those petty squabbles; we need to give a dignity to the House and to the Speaker's office. It is right that positions such as that of Speaker are rotated among parties, and perhaps we need to formalise it. There has been talk of the negotiations that are to take place on the future of these institutions, but we cannot put a hold on the responsibilities that we have here until those negotiations take place. <BR /> <BR />We must ensure that we make these institutions work as best we can in the meantime, because we have a responsibility to the people who elected us to do so.”
“Sadly, it appears that today will be another marker in the disintegration of these institutions that we have witnessed over recent weeks and months. This should be a formality. When I was first elected and we elected Mr William Hay, it was a formality; instead, we have seen it being thrown in as another negotiating point between two parties in disagreement. It is making the office of Speaker political and does, in my view, bring it into disrepute to do so. <BR /> <BR />Further, we have heard the idea that this would be the first nationalist Speaker, and I think that the point was made that William Hay was not a unionist Speaker but an independent Speaker from a unionist background.”