Fearghal McKinney
South Belfast · Social Democratic and Labour Party · Northern Ireland
“We need to do everything we can to bring investment and job opportunities. A prosperity strategy should also include a massive programme of workforce training and skills enhancement.”
“In particular, we want the Programme for Government to adopt a much more joined-up style of government that delivers much greater accountability and transparency and will itself say that it wants Northern Ireland to work.”
“<BR /> <BR />We can point to collective achievements — local government reform among them — but just months ago the echoes of our past threatened our political future, reinforcing the challenges to our delicate political system that the Good Friday Agreement could never have foreseen.”
“Creating much better social cohesion and integration must be another Programme for Government requirement. <BR /> <BR />Health reform, job creation, better infrastructure, creating world-class education and tackling social deprivation are issues on which the SDLP is not prepared to compromise.”
“There are many big challenges facing Northern Ireland, perhaps the biggest of which is to get people into work. It is our job to create the infrastructural and educational opportunities and to maximise those opportunities.”
“It is our job to ensure that our people can and should dare to dream that life can be better; that our children will not be forced to leave these shores for the promise of work in Australia or America because of a failing economy — I referenced the Joseph Rowntree Foundation's latest research; that our health service provides a service th…”
The complete record
Every one of 708 lines we hold for Fearghal McKinney, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 of 15.
“I wonder now whether he was thinking ahead in how he viewed those vulnerable. He went on to emphasise:”
“I am not quite sure whether the Member is now agreeing with me and asking for a greater amount of time to do the talks. If he would like to contribute at a later stage and reflect on that, or maybe even suggest at the end of this process that he will vote against it so that we will have more time to discuss it, I will welcome that, but I see from the look on his face that he will do no such thing. He will put his hand up today, as the rest of Sinn Féin will, for Tory austerity. Forget devolution, forget the people of Northern Ireland, forget the vulnerable and let us hand it all over to the Tories.”
“I think that there was, and I think that the SDLP demonstrated that there was. It was not us who sidelined us towards the end of these discussions. It was the two bigger parties. They did that so that they could shove this stuff off their desk. They did not like it, for electoral reasons and, potentially — I heard this mentioned earlier by my colleague Mr Durkan — for weekend reasons.”
“I am glad to see that Mr O'Dowd is in the Chamber because he, too, spoke during that Final Stage. He said:”
“Yet today she and her colleagues are asking for devolution and powers around welfare to be handed back to the Tories to do what they want. I refer again to clause 5 of the Bill. She went on to say:”
“It is important to remember that she said:”
“Thank you, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker. <BR /> <BR />Michelle O'Neill continued:”
“That is the same Tory policy that Sinn Féin will now introduce to Northern Ireland from today, without the big debate that —”
“Of course, we will be looking closely for any further budget cuts that will come from the Tory Government in the next while. <BR /> <BR />I will continue, painful as it is for Sinn Féin to listen to this. Michelle O'Neill said:”
“Well, you tell that to the people of west Belfast and to the people of Northern Ireland. Mr Maskey continued:”
“I ask you, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker: is that what is happening today? Is that what we are being asked to do today?”
“Sorry, I will just finish. We did not propose what you are talking about. I heard mention earlier of Mickey Brady. He will be at Westminster all right, but Mickey Brady is going to do nothing. Why should he have to do anything now, when you are handing the authority to the Tory Government to do what they want? <BR /> <BR />I will continue. Mr Maskey said:”
“I have no difficulty dealing with both comments. I see my colleague Alex Attwood, who is a former Social Development Minister, shaking his head negatively. He was close, in those talks —”
“And what are they asking us to do today? To hand over that power to the Tories. Alex Maskey said:”
“In that context, I mention the benefits cap, freezing benefits and completely eradicating targets for child poverty. That is what Sinn Féin is asking us to do today. <BR /> <BR />Alex Maskey, in the same debate, said:”
“He went on to reflect on how Sinn Féin had stood against Tory austerity in vast numbers and he reflected on how there were no Tories in Northern Ireland. He said:”
“I touched earlier on the negotiations that led to the debate earlier in the year around all these issues and how other parties sought to reject the SDLP's honest amendments, which were tabled with the real intent of protecting those that we believed would be adversely affected by Tory austerity. We witnessed, against that backdrop, a Sinn Féin U-turn at its conference in the spring. We then had a subsequent debate around some of these issues. <BR /> <BR />Conor Murphy used the term "topsy-turvy". I do not know the extent to which Sinn Féin is going to engage in the debate, but I will refer to some of the remarks that Sinn Féin Members made at the time of the debate on the Final Stage of the Welfare Reform Bill. Martin McGuinness said:”
“Only a matter of weeks ago, Sinn Féin would have described this as a huge, serious mistake but, now, Sinn Féin is doing Tory austerity, and in spades. By allowing the British Government to implement welfare reform, it is introducing the benefits cap, freezing the benefits for four years and completely eradicating those targets. <BR /> <BR />I too would like to praise Eileen Evason. She has been a stalwart in defending the rights of the most underprivileged and vulnerable here. I welcome her involvement, but I express a concern that any involvement that her and her team will have will only be consistent with the legislation that comes back to us. For me, that is a concern because it removes the scrutiny that the Northern Ireland Assembly would have over many of these issues.”
“It is important to get to the point of exactly what we are being asked to do. We are being asked to diminish aspects of devolution that the SDLP, for one, fought hard to achieve. We reject that. We are being asked to hand over to the Tories, or Thatcher's children, as Martin McGuinness likes to call them, decisions on legislating on welfare.”
“So, I am delighted to see Sinn Féin's new-found confidence in the Tory Government in respect of that. I reflect Conor Murphy's remarks in that I think that we might see some more topsy-turvy to come. <BR /> <BR />As I say, the SDLP wanted to see things done differently. We are concerned about how some of this will be funded. We do not know where the money will come from. It is supposed to be coming from investigations into fraud. We note that just over £51 million of fraud was detected last year, yet there is an expectation to increase that by more than 100%.”
“Mr Speaker, I was touching, in the context of my remarks, on the issues of the benefits freeze, the benefits cap and the elimination of, or the attempt to eliminate, child poverty, which we should have as a core ambition here. West Belfast, for example, is an area that singularly tops the agenda there. <BR /> <BR />As for the SDLP's contribution to all these welfare reform issues, our bona fides are clear. We wanted to see this rooted in devolution. We wanted the clauses to appear in the legislation that applies here. I just turn to the Northern Ireland (Welfare Reform) Bill, which will be based on the principle of an Order in Council. I reflect that, rather than "will" or "shall":”
“I did ask for a bit of indulgence, Mr Speaker.”
“We have regions and government districts in Northern Ireland that, 17 or 18 years after the Good Friday Agreement, continue to top league tables for long-term deprivation and unemployment. It was our expectation and hope that we would not attack those communities further and lead to the potential for a benefits cap or benefits freeze for four years and completely eliminate targets on child poverty. We wanted to see an ambition at the heart of this project that would have seen university places, training, apprenticeships, consistent actually —”
“Mr Speaker, at the outset, I ask for a bit of indulgence in the context of this debate. It obviously comes as a result of the negotiations that have been going on over the last while. I would like to put it on the record that we were, of course, disappointed that parties went off to deal with issues such as welfare and others without fully consulting all the parties. We saw — this is recognised — a major hole in the overall deal in its failure to deal with legacy issues. <BR /> <BR />For us, there is another major hole in the deal, in that it failed to include major work on the economy. Like other parties, the SDLP recognises that we have the lowest paid economy in the UK.”
“Does the Minister agree that, whilst the £40 million for elective care is welcome, it is over-welcome, given the Executive's failure to meet over many months. This money will only narrowly go to alleviating the extensive pressures within the health system, and those pressures are down to a failure to properly finance, married to systemic failure.”
“I apologise to the Member for not being in for all of his contribution, but I had to be at a number of meetings elsewhere. <BR /> <BR />During Mrs Dobson's presentation to the House and to the Committee, she reflected on the public awareness campaigns and the fact that significant resources would be directed towards that type of campaign. Surely that would limit the issues that the Member is raising about those who may not find themselves able to give consent. Would public awareness campaigns not be able to target the vulnerable or those less able to understand some of the issues as well?”
“The Transforming Your Care (TYC) plan had consensus but not enough money. He is seeking further consensus and is pointing to the potential for money, but there is no guarantee that he can get it. Is that not a fatal flaw in his plan?”
“I repeat that I think that we should welcome the debate. Moving forward, let us interrogate the issues at Committee in a respectful and mature way so that the people of Northern Ireland know that when it comes to looking at saving people's lives, the Assembly has arrived at the most mature point that it can in a positive way, with full public awareness and the right resources being directed towards these new proposals, and so that the people of Northern Ireland know that we have done it for their benefit and for the very vulnerable people who, as I said at the outset, are still waiting on that phone call. Let us see whether we can arrive at a point where more phone calls can be made and more lives can be saved.”
“The Welsh Health Minister has advised that all the evidence that is available suggests that if Wales were able to secure just two more kidney donations, the system would pay for itself, given the cost of kidney dialysis. While I would not want anybody to set aside their concerns and worries about some of the proposals, I think that there is weight in the Bill's proposers taking that money-saving aspect of it very much into consideration. If two people could be taken off dialysis, the cost savings would cover the cost of the law change. It is extremely significant. In fact, it seems almost incredible that such a small change in the number of donations could cover the cost of that legislation. In fairness, that did indeed grab the Committee's attention. <BR /> <BR />There is much to do from this point to ensure that the Bill is right.”
“<BR /> <BR />During the past two years, between passing the Act and its coming into force, the Welsh Government and health authorities have engaged in that process of awareness raising and education to ensure that people in Wales are aware of the changes to the law and the new choices that they will have. <BR /> <BR />As I said, I would just like to touch on the finances. We know that the costs involved with the introduction of the new system in Wales, estimated to be £7·5 million, are being set aside to support a range of activities around the change there. I know that the Member has touched on this. We would have to have meaningful funding for awareness campaigns as well.”
“Fundamentally, I understand — I will get to some of the finances in a moment — that it is very important that we treat this debate in the most respectful way possible. I re-emphasise that the depth and breadth of the work here, and the outreach that is being done by the proposer of the Bill — the scale of that work and interrogation of the issues — will allow us, particularly me and lots of people in the community who will have concerns about this, to move forward in the most comfortable way possible, so that we do not allow fears to be raised where potentially they could be allayed. That is an important and mature way to approach this debate. I know that the Member will also want to approach the debate in that way.”
“I do not share the concern. I am interested in the way that the Member phrases it. He asks if I have a concern. I do not have a concern. Clearly, he does have a concern, and he has the right to reflect it. I think that that is the importance of this discussion; we must have the debate and put in as many safeguards as we can around this. As I said at the outset of my remarks, we are talking here about lost lives and the ability to do something about that; trying to reach out to the community in a way that allows people to make decisions about potential organ donation and raising public awareness of it.”
“At the time of death, the family is asked whether they know whether the person wished to opt out. They are not asked to make a choice, but simply to confirm, if they can, their loved one's wishes. If they do not know their loved one's wishes, donation is presumed. However, I welcome the concept around the proposer of the Bill's ideas on advocates. <BR /> <BR />During the past two years between —”
“The important balance to be struck is between respecting the views and rights of a potential donor and their respective families, and obtaining organs in an efficient manner. As I said, the weight of the contribution by Mrs Dobson and her team, at Committee and the Assembly, reflects real depth and a consideration of those issues. <BR /> <BR />In considering the change to an opt-out system, the Welsh system, which comes into effect next month, provides key guidance. Welsh authorities have stated that the process for opting out would be very straightforward, with people being able to opt out at general practitioner surgeries, online or by phone. The Welsh system presumes consent, but allows people to opt out. They can also confirm their wish to opt in. If no preference is registered, the assumption is that they wish to donate.”
“The key difference is that an opt-in system involves people expressly stating a wish that their organs and tissues be used for transplant on their death, while an opt-out system assumes that organs and tissues are available for transplant, unless there is a specific instruction to the contrary. At the moment, the fundamental principle is that organs are donated actively, freely, voluntarily and unconditionally using a soft opt-in system. <BR /> <BR />The proposed change is to promote organ donation more widely and raise levels of consent, improve public awareness and ensure best practice at all stages of the donation process, but the decision that we in Northern Ireland need to make around a change in the law involving organ donation involves ethical, legal, medical, organisational and societal components.”
“<BR /> <BR />As we have heard, about 200 people in Northern Ireland are waiting for an organ transplant. Sadly, 17 died last year, as we have heard, long before being offered one. So, it is important that the Chamber does everything it can to ensure that people on waiting lists have the best chance of receiving a life-changing organ. As I said, I urge Members to consider those lost lives and the, potentially, increasing number of lost lives, when they reflect on all these issues. <BR /> <BR />I welcome today's debate. Perhaps, the most important aspect of it is whether we move from an opt-in to an opt-out system. An opt-out system, as we have heard, requires an individual to explicitly make it known while they are alive that they are not in favour of their organs being used for transplant when they die.”
“I welcome the opportunity to contribute to today's extremely important debate, and I am grateful to Mrs Dobson for bringing it to the Chamber. I know that she has worked extremely hard over the last few years in pushing for a legislative change to organ donation law to ensure that the many people on waiting lists have the best possible prospects for receiving a life-changing transplant. I encourage Members to think about that as we continue our discourse around the subject. Mrs Dobson and her staff deserve the highest recognition in the Chamber for their sustained hard work in bringing forward the Bill. Indeed, their contribution to the Committee reflected the depth and breadth of that hard work, and that has been reflected again, today, with the weight of her contribution.”
“The Minister was clearly stung by criticism of his in-out approach. I think that he made that point at the outset of his speech, but he did not bring this to the House so soon after coming back. Given the importance of gaining consensus around changes in health, has he not done his project a great disservice and risked criticism that he is more interested in deflecting further criticism from his in-out approach and long-term DUP failures over health than in gaining important consensus if change is to be achieved?”
“I am sure that the House joins the Minister in recognising the deep pain felt in families and communities as a result of such tragedies. Will the Minister further outline what action will be taken to target vulnerable road users, such as younger people and older people?”
“I thank the Minister. While the Oxford Economics approach is welcome, given the scale of EU assistance to Northern Ireland in agriculture, infrastructure, Peace and innovation, does the Minister agree that the Northern Irish economy would continue to experience a net benefit from remaining in the EU?”
“Her compassion, desire and commitment to help families who are struggling to cope deserves the highest level of recognition. Her work in compiling today's petition is testimony to that. <BR /> <BR />The petition calls on the Northern Ireland Assembly to start delivering for some of the most vulnerable children. I hope that the Minister takes heed of the petition and that it goes some way to alleviating the struggles of families not only in South Belfast but all across Northern Ireland.”
“Many of these families are being forced to send their children to mainstream schools that do not have specialised staff or facilities to cater for their educational and developmental needs. That is why, when this petition was launched, so many people signed it. <BR /> <BR />In that context, I would like to praise all those from the Belvoir Autism Group who are present here today in the public gallery for the amazing work that they do in helping parents and children to get the best possible support and care that they need. If I could single out one individual, it would be Alison Breaden, who runs the group along with her colleagues. She is one of our community champions and deserves recognition for all the hard work that she and others do daily.”
“Those are children who will have been found to have ASD and who will not have got the support that they required, inside and outside school. <BR /> <BR />The delays in the statementing process are wreaking havoc among families.”
“It is, therefore, very clear that autism prevalence is increasing in society, but, unfortunately, it is not being accompanied by the necessary funding increase to bolster services to be better able to deal with waiting times for diagnosis. There is no doubt that, without earlier and speedier diagnosis, children with ASD and special educational needs will not get the support they require in school or through the health service. <BR /> <BR />The current target for assessment is 13 weeks. At the end of April, nearly 1,500 children were waiting for assessment; more than 900 had been waiting longer than the recommended time. Of those, 476 had been waiting for more than 26 weeks, and more than 78 children had been waiting for over a year.”
“It gives me great pleasure to bring today's petition on autism services to the Assembly. Autism services for children have been a major area of concern for me, my party and the constituents I represent. Indeed, the prevalence of autism, including Asperger's syndrome, in school-age children in Northern Ireland in 2015, tells us that the rate of autism has increased by 67%, with one in 54 pupils attending school being diagnosed with autistic spectrum disorder (ASD). The prevalence of autism increased by nearly 1% between 2009-2010 to 2014-15 — from 1·3% to 2·2%. In 2009-2010, there were nearly 3,700 children with ASD out of a school-age population of 270,000. In 2014-15, that figure rose to just over 6,000 out of a school population that had not increased very much.”
“The Minister will be aware of the spirited protest outside the Assembly today. That spirit perhaps belies the deep anger that is felt by those protesters, many of whom are in the Chamber this afternoon. They have expressed themselves and are alarmed and disturbed at the in-year cuts, resulting as they have in loss of employment, insecurity and the taking away from vital programmes that are instrumental in the community. Will the Minister now reaffirm her commitment to the arts and reaffirm that she will restore those moneys to the Arts Council?”
“I have met the deadline, Mr Speaker. I am thankful that there were no interventions, and I look forward to the rest of the debate.”
“It should be a genuine, cross-governmental, mental health and well-being strategy that embraces issues such as employment, welfare, policing, criminal justice, housing and education, and the Public Health Agency should lead the way in championing preventive action and early intervention.”
“In all of this, it is important to remember that a strategic approach and properly investing in mental health provision, especially earlier intervention and preventative services, is paramount in not only dramatically improving the quality of life for an individual and families but in reducing the economic costs associated with mental ill health. In that context, today's motion argues that the next Executive need to take mental health seriously and they need to set out an ambitious agenda; not a tokenistic one, as seen in the current Programme for Government.”
“It is important to mention the impact that suicides are having on families here. In the past 10 years, we have seen them increase by a staggering 84% despite the Protect Life strategy being introduced back in 2006. I understand that the Department is consulting on a new mental health and suicide prevention strategy, but it is paramount that vulnerable groups such as those in rural communities, young men, the LGBT community and those from areas of multiple social deprivation are targeted and given the appropriate level of support and service provision that they need. <BR /> <BR />There is now a massive risk that the current direction of travel in policy and in budgetary cuts will severely hamper services.”