Jenny Palmer
Lagan Valley · Ulster Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“I thank the Member for giving way. Will the Member agree with me that, in trying to address the fuel poverty situation for our families in their homes, a project was put before the Department from the Housing Executive to fit photovoltaic panelling, which would have allowed our homes to have been heated at a lesser cost, and that would ha…”
“I thank the Member for giving way. I share your concerns around the issue of the motion that came before the House in the name of Jim Allister and the fact that Sinn Féin, at the time, did not support it.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Does she agree that competing priorities and the lack of funding to address the issue of cavity wall insulation are factors? The cost to the public purse would be around £140 million, which does not seem to be money that is readily available in the current circumstances.”
“Does the Member agree that civil servants have an obligation to act in a non-partisan, non-political fashion and that the public, because of all the scandals that SpAds have been involved in — Red Sky, NAMA and all the others — believes that the culture in the Civil Service is that officials are overruled by SpAds and that they do not tak…”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Does she agree with me that, on building the electorate's trust in the Assembly, issues like no risk registers being identified, due diligence and good governance were all failures of the Assembly and the Executive in terms of the RHI scheme?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Does he agree that in the interest of good governance it is important to ascertain who made the determinations not to open the risk registers in DETI and in DFP? Was it because Westminster was picking up the tab?”
The complete record
Every one of 132 lines we hold for Jenny Palmer, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 3.
“There is only one way in which to address the problem: we must build more homes. We must increase capacity for the many thousands in housing stress. At the moment, we are delivering too few new developments, and the slow pace of public land release, coupled with the inflexibility of needs assessment, means that we often build 10 homes when we need 100. <BR /> <BR />Northern Ireland's status as a low-wage economy complicates the issue. The recent scandal of the much-lauded government-supported help-to-buy ISA scheme, which provided very little help to buy owing to a fatal flaw with the bonus, only exasperates the situation. The increasing private rental costs and shortfalls in housing benefit combine in a perfect storm to maximise housing need.”
“At the outset, I welcome the Minister's intention to give an undertaking to build more new houses in this term. Although the causes of and the solutions to the issue that the motion grapples with are complex, the issue itself is simple. There is a desperate need to increase housing supply. There is not one person here who would disagree with that statement. <BR /> <BR />Every day, in every constituency office amongst us all, there are people who are in desperate need of housing and housing needs. We have families who have no homes and do not feel as though their children can be raised in a normal societal settlement. The lack of supply is having a dire impact on their health and education and is causing social problems. I thank Nichola Mallon for raising that issue.”
“Will the Minister outline what sanctions are in place where Ministers are found to be in breach of the ministerial code?”
“Will the Minister reassure the House that the York Street interchange, which will dramatically improve the flow of traffic in greater Belfast for commuters and commercial traffic from across Northern Ireland, will not be sacrificed to secure funding for other projects that are likely to have a smaller impact on traffic numbers?”
“I thank the Minister for his response thus far. The Minister indicated that the funding was over £15 million centrally to deliver the literacy and numeracy signature programme. Will he give a commitment that, in the interim, he will provide at least some of the budget to deliver it through the mainstream programme in schools?”
“I must, therefore, back the motion and ask that the UK Government demonstrate some compassion and look again at this matter. I commend the motion to the House.”
“Mark Durkan said that this was a money-saving exercise from the Westminster Government and that it was unfair to force women to seek other employment. He asked for all parties to support the motion. Emma Pengelly said that women contributed highly to society and that many thousands of women are seeking jobs through job centres because of the unfairness in the pensions system. <BR /> <BR />I recognise that the power of the Assembly is constrained because, sadly, the issue lies primarily with changes made by the Government at Westminster. However, we have a voice and we can apply pressure. We can say that we feel that these women deserve to be treated as people and not as unfortunate rounding errors. They should not be disadvantaged solely because they had the bad luck of being born a year too early or a year too late.”
“In fact, this weekend, as mentioned by a Member who spoke previously, the Minister said that all pensioner benefits were under review, which sounds like we could see a further grab at pensions in the future. <BR /> <BR />In thanking all the contributors who spoke with passion, I pick out Andy Allen, who outlined the negative impact of this accelerated state pension timeline and focused on the human side of the changes. He called on the Government to introduce transitional payments to assist the disadvantaged. Carla Lockhart said that the implementation of the changes was clumsy and badly communicated, and she talked about people's mental health and well-being. Seán Lynch highlighted gender inequality and stated that some women were caught between certain age gaps.”
“Yet it is the women who the Government expect to bear the brunt of the cost-saving measures designed to save money on pensions in the long term. It is, therefore, no surprise that the women affected by the changes are frustrated by the implications for their post-retirement planning, financial and otherwise. <BR /> <BR />The Government have substantially moved the goalposts without effective communication. This is an unfairness that must be addressed. There is a need for transitional payments to come into play. Consecutive Work and Pensions Ministers, Iain Duncan Smith, Stephen Crabb and, currently, Damian Green, have said that they are not for moving on the issue.”
“Some women who had anticipated drawing their pension at the age of 60 will not now reach the state pension age until they are 66. <BR /> <BR />I will put this in perspective: men will see their state pension age rise by one year between 2010 and 2020; the state pension age for women will increase by six years in the same period. The unfairness is made worse when we consider that the pension system already unfairly targets women, who, traditionally, are more reliant on the state pension as they have had less chance to build up a private pension due to the breaks in their working life to bring up children and the fact that they have lower incomes than men. It should be noted that men of this age could join company schemes, but women working part-time were banned from them.”
“When Her Majesty's Government introduced the Pensions Act in 1995, women were supposedly given 15 years to prepare, as their pension age would not begin to equalise with that of men until 2010. However, no one aged 44 or over at that time was to be affected. It is, therefore, understandable that any discussion of pension changes was viewed as irrelevant. What was required from the Government at the time was a concerted effort to publicise the changes widely, spelling out the implications for the women affected, but this was glaringly absent. Compounding this, the Pensions Act 2011 increased the overall state pension age to 66 by 2020, accelerating the rate of increase for women. The previous lack of notification meant that it was only at this point that many women learned of the change.”
“While today's National Insurance contributions pay for today's pensions, many of those women believed that, when they started paying National Insurance contributions at the age of 16, they were entering into a social contract with the Government to retire at the age of 60. <BR /> <BR />Raising the retirement age is a necessary evil. With life expectancy climbing, it is unavoidable that we must work longer and retire later. Equally, because a far greater number of women today work on an equal footing with men, which we all support, the principle of equal state pension ages should be fair. The problem, however, is that while the principle may be sound, the reality is somewhat different.”
“<BR /> <BR />That said, there are few things so clearly deserved as the state pension: the quintessential promise that, if you work hard for your whole working life, the state will take care of you in your old age is an ideal that has underpinned our society for more than 70 years. That promise is precisely the reason why I am so deeply worried about the manner in which the Government have decided to deliver the equalisation of pension age, and it is why I am speaking in support of the motion today. <BR /> <BR />Women born in the 1950s were made a promise; that promise has been broken. Worse still, it is being done with little or no notice. Women who have rightly been considering and planning for retirement now face a level of uncertainty that threatens what should be the most relaxed period of their life.”
“This is an extraordinarily complex matter. I thank my colleague Andy Allen for bringing the motion to the House, and I will certainly support it. It is vital that we have had the opportunity to discuss the issue. The most recent changes to the women's state pension age will have a direct impact on around half a million women across the United Kingdom. Nobody would disagree that spending on pensions must be rationalised and must be sustainable for an ageing population. Pensions have the potential to be the millstone around the neck of future Governments if they are not properly funded and addressed. It is common sense that the Government must make sure that they are adequately resourced going forward.”
“Given the particular effects and coercive nature of domestic violence, can I confirm with the Minister that there are no instances of individuals convicted of domestic violence taking part in the enhanced combination order pilot that was started last October?”
“I support the motion and have no quarrel with the amendment. I hope that we can expect a more strategic and, consequently, efficient approach to road maintenance in the future.”
“Yes, I accept that that was a major issue in Northern Ireland during the Troubles, but I do not accept that the balance between capital and revenue is correct to deliver the infrastructure that we need to maintain.”
“The fundamental suggestion in the motion — to ring-fence an amount specifically for road maintenance — has real merit, although further analysis of the exact amount, as well as the mechanisms to ensure that it is regularly reviewed, would obviously be essential. The very nature of development means that, as Northern Ireland grows, those costs will grow. <BR /> <BR />The issue must be addressed sooner rather than later. The current approach of spreading the funding as wide and as shallow as possible is merely papering over the cracks. If a more intensive and systemic approach is not taken, the hidden stresses on Roads Service will continue to build until it simply cracks, like our poorly maintained roads.”
“An example of that is the TEN-T funding, of which we stand to lose £58 million. That money must be found if departmental plans are not revised. I am deeply concerned that the funding for basic road maintenance is seen as easy pickings for projects that extend beyond 2020 Treasury assurances. <BR /> <BR />The maintenance of our roads must be the number one priority of the Department for Infrastructure. Poorly maintained roads contribute to road accidents and deaths, and it is important that everything in the Department's power is done to ensure that every road is as safe as possible.”
“Only last week, the Ulster Unionist Party launched the document 'A Vision for Northern Ireland outside the EU', in which we identified 10 key asks, one of which was the trebling of investment in infrastructure, including hard infrastructure, such as our airports, roads and railways. As part of the document, we urged the Executive to treble their investment in infrastructure. That will require making the case to Her Majesty's Government that some of the funding currently being directed to Brussels should be used to increase Northern Ireland's competitiveness. <BR /> <BR />The issue is only set to become more acute in the future, given the imminent withdrawal of EU funding and our potential ineligibility to apply for future EU structural funding for large projects.”
“I will, maybe, when I have finished. <BR /> <BR />The patchwork approach to maintenance, where it seems that the squeakiest wheels get the oil, rather than going about it in a more measured and planned fashion, cannot continue. The haphazard approach whereby the bare minimum is spent on holding things together must end. <BR /> <BR />The crucial point is that it takes an estimated £137 million per year simply to maintain what we have. In terms of the motion, the Assembly should be concerned that the road structural maintenance deficit is estimated to be £1 billion.”
“That was a shameful game of politics, and the current Executive have now found themselves a victim of the unreasonable budget constraints that they created in a manner similar to their treatment of the Health Department, I can only hope that the Executive's response to the road maintenance crisis is better than their management of the health service in the last mandate. As a result, it is of the utmost importance that that toxic legacy be addressed. Having a £1 billion deficit hanging over the head of the Department puts future projects and the safety of every person using our roads in jeopardy.”
“I thank those who tabled the motion for bringing it to the Chamber. It is, without doubt, a vital issue that is in danger of being obscured by the Department's focus on large prestige projects. Simply put, maintaining the roads is not the most exciting or interesting aspect of governance. It gives precious few opportunities for press conferences or photo opportunities; indeed, the idea of well-maintained roads might worry some representatives here who routinely appear in their local paper frowning over a pothole in a high-vis jacket. <BR /> <BR />In the past, every effort seems to have been made to deprive the old DRD of essential funding for road maintenance for purely political purposes.”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. I am particularly interested in his comment that recreational amenities on the waterways continue to be developed. If that is the case, will he support the application by the Lagan Canal Trust to complete the full business case for the opening of the canal and the River Lagan from Lisburn to Belfast, as it is essential to the links with the Ulster canal and the Shannon?”
“I thank the Minister for his comprehensive report on delays with blue badges. Minister, I hope that you will agree with me that, if a current holder's badge has expired, although your interventions have allowed that they will not be punished, that does not apply across the border. Anyone travelling across the border cannot use that blue badge without being punished in another jurisdiction. Have we got the resource in place now to make sure that the delays will not be longer than 30 days?”
“On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. I ask the Member to withdraw his comments and apologise to me before I take up the opportunity to report it formally.”
“I remind the Member that, in my opening remarks, I started by welcoming the motion and saying that we fully supported it but have issues.”
“— no longer bears primary responsibility for funding —”
“I will finish. It would be cynical of me, of course, to suggest that now that the DUP —”
“Is there not an extra minute, Mr Deputy Speaker?”
“It is only fair — I did not hear you, Mr Deputy Speaker.”
“It is for you boys to have the negotiations in Europe. <BR /> <BR />Given that we are set to lose out on £58 million in TEN-T funding, I must ask where those who tabled the motion intend to find the money for this project.”
“That is especially true in the context of Brexit, which the party that tabled the motion so vociferously supported. Translink's rail service has already availed itself of a great deal of European funding, hence the EU flag on almost every train run by the service. Given that we are set to lose out on £58 million of TEN-T funding, I must ask where those who tabled the motion intend to find the money for this project.”
“I do not concur with my friend's opinion that another five million passengers could be found with that rail link. <BR /> <BR />With that context in mind, I wonder whether the motion is motivated more by the desire to be seen to be doing something than by genuine belief that this is the best use of departmental funds.”
“In April, the managing director of Belfast International, Mr Graham Keddie, stated that he believed that the airport would serve five million people this year, taking into account the additional passengers travelling for major events like the Euros and the Olympic Games. That number does, however, fall well short of the volume necessary to make a rail link financially viable.”
“It would be better to concentrate on the completion of the Belfast hub project, which has the potential to transform public transport in Northern Ireland and to improve and renew the Northern Ireland Railways fleet. <BR /> <BR />Evidence suggests that, until recently, the DUP did not feel that the project was a priority use of funding. Only five months ago, the former Minister for Regional Development, Michelle McIlveen, said:”
“Additionally, any modernisation and extension of the rail network in Northern Ireland has some intrinsic value as we seek to increase the use of public transport. In 2013, my colleague Danny Kennedy commissioned a consultation that estimated that the cost of reopening the Antrim/Knockmore line with a halt at the International Airport would cost in the region of £50·5 million. That cost would be substantial, and there would also be ongoing maintenance costs. <BR /> <BR />The key question from the motion is whether the benefit outweighs the cost to the taxpayer. If the new Minister should use his limited funds, bearing in mind the vast deficit being dealt with in the Department, to fund this, presumably that would be at the expense of other projects.”
“<BR /> <BR />There is no doubt that, in an ideal world, we would have a rail link to the International Airport. In Great Britain, there are direct rail links to all London airports as well as to Birmingham and Manchester airports, Newcastle airport is connected to the city centre by the Tyneside metro and Edinburgh is connected by a hugely expensive and recently completed tram system. However, Glasgow, Liverpool, Leeds Bradford, East Midlands and Bristol airports do not have train links to their city centres and all rely on shuttle buses, as is the case for the International Airport. <BR /> <BR />With regard to the International Airport, it is obvious that improving transportation links to our largest airport would yield benefits to tourism and the local economy.”
“I welcome the motion. I am pleased that the party that tabled it has finally decided that a rail link between Belfast city centre and Belfast International Airport is worth serious consideration. <BR /> <BR />The Ulster Unionist Party's document, 'A Vision for Northern Ireland outside the EU', which was launched only yesterday, identified 10 key asks, one of which was a trebling of the investment in infrastructure, including hard infrastructure such as airports, roads and railways. We have urged the Northern Ireland Executive to treble their investment in infrastructure. That will require making the case to HM Government that investing some of the funding currently being directed to Brussels should be used to increase Northern Ireland's competitiveness.”
“We cannot allow paramilitaries to pick and choose who lives in which area. While due concern and care must be given to genuine threats, if we continue to allow so-called community vetoes, we are increasing the stranglehold that paramilitaries have over communities. The role of community representation in housing allocation must be urgently reviewed.”
“<BR /> <BR />Additionally, with the B-list for those with special considerations, there is an obvious need for anonymous consultation to protect proposed tenants. There should not be a community veto on proposed tenants, and more must be done to proactively protect people moving into or living in areas away from paramilitary threats.”
“All allocations and assessments ought to be handled by a central unit in the Department. Furthermore, community consultation is an important part of many of the housing allocations. However, its use ought to be reformed. We heard about the intimidation and the bullets in the post. We heard about all the resettlement payments — well, we have not, actually. There are resettlement payments for those deemed to have been intimidated. It is maybe £600 to resettle into a new area, and whoever wrote and sent the bullet in the post gets a percentage of that. That is the deal that is cut across Northern Ireland. That is the corruption of the system, and we need to address that system urgently.”
“Having two lists would be a step forward and allow for a better, joined-up approach in dealing with housing allocation. It would mean that those in the most urgent need would be automatically prioritised, but that those still in need but not in special categories would not simply be allowed to languish. <BR /> <BR />Finally, I would like to ask the Minister to consider how the Department deals with the issues of antisocial behaviour and intimidation. We have heard it all; we have heard all the Members talk about it. While charities do their best, I feel that it is unreasonable to rely so heavily on their assessments. I argue that, moving forward, that is a service that should rightfully be carried out by the Department; it should not be farmed out to charities.”
“Any new scheme must take that into account and seek to address the imbalance. <BR /> <BR />Secondly, I wonder why it is not possible to have two lists for housing need: an A-list for those without specific considerations, and a B-list for those in more urgent special circumstances. My fellow Members across the Chamber will know that the overwhelming majority of housing cases we deal with are emergencies: people dealing with disabilities, victims of intimidation or those with large families. What that means is that those falling outside those critical criteria are often left in the shuffle. We need a system that addresses the seriousness of those in grave need of housing but which does not leave all the others to languish in temporary accommodation because of the poor points system.”
“First, it is important to recognise that young men have been proactively discriminated against in the housing selection scheme. In cases of marriage breakdown, the assumption was that the woman, in particular a mother who had majority custody of the children, was given priority, but that was only partially due to the lack of housing, which is still an issue, and it is a problem that has yet to be addressed. It is also understandable that the well-being of children was central to decision-making. However, the outflow of that was the creation of a significant class of young, vulnerable men who often had nowhere to go; we heard in the Chamber about couch surfing. They have become victims of crime, become involved in crime or, even worse, suffered poor mental health as a consequence of the system that is failing them.”
“I thank the Member for proposing the motion. I am happy to speak on it, and I agree with the principle that any replacement of the housing selection scheme must be fair and more transparent than before. There are a number of grievous flaws with the current scheme. We all recognise that, and we listened to Members across the Chamber concurring with each other on the housing selection scheme. I will not use the main body of my speech to list all that is wrong, but it is important to highlight a few key areas, some of which have already been highlighted. That is how important it is to Members who deal with the issue daily. We have an exciting opportunity to improve on what has been a broken and, at times, deeply unfair system. I hope that the Minister intends to grasp his chance with both hands to amend that.”
“I thank the Minister for his determination to make sure that the Department gives schools more control over their budgets. When you are looking at this review, have you a timetabled plan in mind to execute it?”
“I am just questioning now. Is 7·5 kilometres across Northern Ireland the extent of what the budget refers to for potholes?”
“Minister, that covers some 7·5 — I am just finishing —”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. Whilst I welcome the announcement of the £10 million being spent on rural roads, it is only a drop in a pothole. That amount alone would need to be spent in my constituency to cover the rural roads. We need a coordinated approach to investment in our roads infrastructure and not the current piecemeal approach. Will the Minister outline his assessment of the impact of a lack of access to European regional infrastructure funds on his budget? Where does he expect to get money to supplement his budget if he cannot access European funding? What will be the impact on Northern Ireland's infrastructure as access to European regional infrastructure funds is curtailed? <BR /> <BR />In the statement, you say that £10 million on rural roads. Well, really that covers —”