Claire Hanna
South Belfast · Social Democratic and Labour Party · Northern Ireland
“I thank the Minister for his answers so far and for the announcement of the inquiry. In common with other Opposition parties, we have been calling for a long number of weeks for an inquiry under the 2005 Act. I am glad of the acknowledgement of that.”
“My question was about a contingency or plan B, as the challenge was entirely foreseeable. Has the Minister given any thought to publishing an anonymised list? Such a list could contain some geographical detail, the date, the output and the payment, so that we can get a sense of the levels of applicants that are credible and not credible.”
“— it is so important we let the people who have put all those qualities into the public discourse know they have been validated and that the redress they are entitled to is delivered to them.”
“I thank all those who have spoken. Like others, I attended the launch of the report on Friday and have spent some time since reading it. I think that, for everybody there, it was a very difficult few hours — even for those of us who did not live through those experiences.”
“<BR /> <BR />Colin McGrath, when moving the motion, referred to the appalling shooting last night of a public servant and member of the PSNI as an illustration of what we have failed to eliminate and what we are definitely not returning to, but, as we said, that opportunity has been squandered.”
“<BR /> <BR />Colin McGrath made the point that, despite the disappointment and the stop and start of progress, if we found ourselves 20 years back, we would still push to try and deliver the Good Friday Agreement, because the fact is the that core analysis of John Hume's three strands still stands.”
The complete record
Every one of 479 lines we hold for Claire Hanna, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 10.
“Can the Minister advise what he sees as the next steps for the lower Malone and College Park/Rugby Road schemes, and are there any plans to review the consultation process, which currently can be derailed by one objection from people who do not even live, or have an interest, in the area?”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. She will be aware of the proposals for a major private healthcare park in south Belfast. Could she confirm that her Department has not had contact with the developer, and does she agree that a population plan will be required to make any reasonable decision on the proposal?”
“I thank the Minister for her answers so far. I noticed that one of your colleagues asked about the SDLP's responses. We put in 50 suggested legislative initiatives that the Government could take. I do not blame the Ulster Unionists; they are not there to be a think tank for you. As with the Bengoa report, I did not see any financial allocations. Will you outline what financial provision will be made over and above recurrent spending to address specific Programme for Government priorities?”
“I thank the Member for giving way. Does he agree that there are no activated residents' parking schemes in Northern Ireland and that it is time for the Department to formalise one? We appreciate that there are some problems, but those could act as a model for others.”
“I thank the Minister for his answers. Will he outline what mitigation plans his Department has in place to address the potential shortfall in funding if we lose the Horizon 2020 fund? We may be a less attractive destination to students, who, potentially, would not be able to get visas because of the uncertainty around Brexit. Might that shortfall and burden be placed on students?”
“I share the concerns of other Members about the bypassing of Committees. My question refers to the £5 million community regeneration fund, which is referred to in writing as "improving" key assets but which the Minister just described as "buying" key properties. Can he outline the process for applying to the fund, what the maximum capital will be for projects and whether he can guarantee that this will be transparent and not an invite-only fund like the previous social investment fund?”
“I thank the Minister for his answers. Will he confirm that, when the real stage rather than the preparatory stage of Fresh Start funding is advanced, that will give expression to the Fresh Start strand that is about empowering women and not just rolling it up with the wider aim of tackling paramilitarism? Does he agree that part of tackling paramilitarism will be about empowering women to stand up to paramilitaries in their communities and that therefore emboldening groups related to paramilitaries will be counterproductive?”
“I thank the Minister for his answers. He and a previous Member to speak acknowledged the impact that a Brexit would have on our corporation tax strategy: it would leave it in tatters. Will he consider incorporating a sunset clause in any corporation tax proposals, so that if the prevailing context does not mean that we get these promised new jobs, at least we will not have to continue taking a hit from the public purse?”
“I thank the deputy First Minister for his answers. He referred to media investigations around SIF and concerns about a recipient organisation. He will also be aware of the three-person panel report on paramilitarism and the need not to bolster and empower paramilitary organisations. Can he outline whether he thinks the UDA is a current or former paramilitary organisation?”
“Some of the thinkers in the DUP, such as Jeffrey Donaldson, clearly understand some of the nuances, but we are disappointed that some of his colleagues are more bullish and do not seem to acknowledge the issues. The Brexiters told us for months that this was about taking back control. How does sitting on the Benches, rebutting every sensible argument, fall into that definition of taking back control? If this is about getting the best result for Northern Ireland, you cannot just sit back and wait for London to tell you how we will get out of this mess.”
“I think that it is very clear that the divisive nationalism in this case is the English nationalists who forced this on us. I will also say that, when they talk about having cake and eating it and about the best deal on the islands, they sound more and more like Donald Trump and this wall that the Mexicans are apparently going to pay for. For all of Theresa May and the other Brexiters' rhetoric, Brexit will mean what the EU says it means. We believe that the EU understands this region far better than London has; perhaps better than some people in the Chamber do. <BR /> <BR />We are somewhat encouraged by some of the change in direction and thinking.”
“<BR /> <BR />The SDLP has always stood by the principle of consent, even when it supported a constitutional status that was not of our choosing or our liking. This is not just a technical issue. Please do not underestimate the importance, to nationalism in particular, of unimpeded access to the rest of this island and of the European Union, which was so pivotal in allowing sovereign Ireland and sovereign UK to work together as equals and as partners, underpinned a supernational link between the contracting parties to the agreement and provided validation to Northern nationalists that the two Governments were cooperating with equal status.”
“Northern Ireland voted for a very different future to that being set out by Theresa May, and we must have one. <BR /> <BR />The Good Friday Agreement gave Northern Ireland supremacy in deciding our constitutional future. It recognised the dual identity — that people here can be British or Irish or both, as they so choose — and it gave equal status to those identities. Those who shout and roar about supporting this referendum can maybe update their response to the Good Friday Agreement, given that they believe that 52% is an overwhelming majority in this case. Under that interpretation of the Good Friday Agreement and recognising the 56% vote, only Northern Ireland can determine its constitutional status, and it is clear that a clear majority voted to remain.”
“<BR /> <BR />It was a dollar short and a day late, but the letter that the joint First Ministers sent to Theresa May — we still do not know whether there has been a response — set out some very key issues. Heaven forbid, we could have campaigned on those jointly before 23 June and we might be in a different situation. It outlined issues around the need not to have a hard border, continued tariff-free access to the single market, free movement of labour, energy supplies — God help energy bills if sterling keeps going in the direction that it is going — and EU funding. However, it is impossible to see how any of those conditions would be met if we Brexit in the hard fashion that London is outlining without some special provision or status for this region.”
“It is ironic, given that this is an Assembly known for crises, drama and conflabs — once a year, we will be down in Stormont House or over in some stately home in England, and there will be late night press conferences and presidential hand-holding — that now, when an actual crisis has hit us, there is almost not a word, apart from one unrequited letter three months on. It is ridiculous. Whatever the very major issues in Stormont House, they never prompted a run on passport forms. The Executive remind me of a driver, possibly male, who is hopelessly lost but will not roll down the window and ask for directions. I am not given to quoting Martin McGuinness, but the article yesterday in which he set out his support for special status also said that he believes that the Executive need to get their "act together", and I concur.”
“I will in a moment, but I have some progress to make. <BR /> <BR />Even those who did not campaign for or vote "Remain "should be clear-headed enough to know that any impacts, even if there are some good ones, would be felt disproportionately here. As custodians of the public interest, it is our job to set out a mitigation strategy, and special status is very worth pursuing. <BR /> <BR />The silence from the Executive on this is very worrying, particularly when those in London have made clear time and again that they never gave our situation much thought before the referendum, and they certainly are not wasting a lot of time on it now.”
“The SDLP has been very clear and consistent on this: people here voted decisively for the opportunity, stability and diversity of the EU, and it is our job to deliver that for them. Even those who do not share that view —”
“This motion should be uncontroversial. In the last weeks and months, we have heard Members of all parties, regardless of their pre-referendum stance, talk about getting the best possible outcome for Northern Ireland. The constitutional, legal and political necessities of our situation, geographic and otherwise, will require specific provisions in the event of any Brexit. Every Member who has spoken acknowledged those, so we might as well seek to maximise and firmly embed them. <BR /> <BR />We are in uncharted waters here, but the EU is a creative problem-solver. The continent abounds with specific solutions to specific problems, but we need to meet the European Union halfway and set out a case.”
“— for the UK is appalling language, and the Executive should have been first out the door to condemn that language. We support the motion.”
“They do not know whether they can sign that lease or whether, if their kids started school, they will be here in a couple of years. To say that those people are "bargaining chips" —”
“There are a number of recommendations that I will not have time to go into on using public procurement to incentivise racial diversity and for businesses to demonstrate real leadership. <BR /> <BR />Related to that is the need for better regulation of precarious and low-paid work. That is obviously not just a minority ethnic issue, but the horrific stories in the media last week of a gangmaster keeping workers almost as slaves highlight the need for increased protections and vigilance across society. <BR /> <BR />The context of the debate is, of course, Brexit and the fact that tens of thousands of people, who are contributing here, are propping up our public services and are making a net benefit, have a cloud hanging over their head and have had all year.”
“I will be very clear: anybody who attacks, does graffiti or intimidates on the basis of racial difference needs to be very forcefully targeted by the police, but we cannot let off the hook higher-level and institutional xenophobia that feeds exactly that information. <BR /> <BR />A Business in the Community report published yesterday collected the experience of 25,000 workers around the UK from ethnic minority backgrounds, including those in Northern Ireland, and showed that black and minority ethnic backgrounds are under-represented at every management level. One in eight workers is from an ethnic minority background, but only one in 16 occupies a management position. Thirty per cent of those surveyed had experienced racial harassment or bullying in the workplace.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is all too easy to pin racism on specific communities. I think that that is an issue; we are labelling communities where race hate attacks take place as "racist communities".”
“A casual "N" word in a tweet or a "not trusting people to go down to the shop" remark sends the message that such language is acceptable and legitimises the demonising of new arrivals and people who are different. <BR /> <BR />Failure to tackle myths was a feature of the Brexit debate. It laid the blame for many societal problems at the feet of new arrivals, and that was very stark. I took part in a debate recently in which a senior politician was asked about net migration figures and did not know the statistics. When he was advised of the very small figure — we are almost a net exporter of people — he said that the quantum did not matter and that it was the perception that there were too many migrants. When did it stop being the responsibility of politicians to base our policy on fact and to challenge myths?”
“Certainly, they are related cancers for this society, but there is a danger that sectarianism, which I accept is our biggest challenge, will crowd out the growing issue of racism, in terms of resources, funding and police time. The same black and minority ethnic funding has to be shared out from projects as diverse as great projects like the Mela festival in Belfast and those tackling the destitution of refugees and asylum seekers. In no other funding stream would those two needs sit side by side, but we justify it because both address the needs of minority ethnic communities. <BR /> <BR />We also need to be very aware of the language of politicians.”
“<BR /> <BR />We welcome the publication, a number of months ago now, of the racial equality strategy, but we share the deep frustration at the years that it took to bring it forward and the lack of demonstrable progress on it. We regret the failure to address a number of gaps and imbalances that have led to this region trailing behind in legal protection for black and minority ethnic people. The UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has, for almost a decade, repeatedly highlighted the faults in the race relations orders and amendments to that legislation. I want to ask the Government when they will make those legislative fixes. If ever anything deserved a quick royal prerogative change, it is that. <BR /> <BR />As Mr Dickson said, we need to differentiate between sectarianism and racism.”
“That is a good reason not to take interventions. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the debate on the motion. It is right and timely for the Assembly to send out a clear and unambiguous message to people of ethnic minorities and those who have come here to live and work that their contribution is valued and needed and that denigration of them will not be tolerated any more. <BR /> <BR />I hope that the Executive deliver on this, and, as such, we support the constructive Ulster Unionist Party amendment. The racial equality strategy has taken too long; it cannot just be about photo opportunities or a talking shop. It has to have meaningful actions, targets and accountability.”
“— simple categories, but I would say that this Executive would make members of the pre-1972 Stormont Executive blush.”
“Mr Lyons said that they are open to transparency if we would just bring forward proposals. That is what we are doing; we are bringing forward proposals. Let us have the NAMA inquiry, give us the in-year monitoring round and support our reasonable proposal to enforce the ministerial code. <BR /> <BR />I do not have time to go over all the arguments from the Back Benches that are usually one of three or four —”
“No, I have a few things to get through. Members who want to critique the UUP/SDLP Executive in the early years of government neglect to mention that their parties were outside using every tool, parliamentary and otherwise, to tear down that Executive. <BR />Sinn Féin has not tired of telling us how, now that we have lost the election, we should just go home and not make any political points for four years because that is exactly how the Opposition conducts itself in the Dáil. If that is not partitionist, I do not know what is.”
“Members of the parties that were in the Executive were lectured that we would not get that information because we are no longer in the Executive. We did not get that information when we were in the Executive. We were given key documents minutes before those meetings. For those Members who want to tell us that we have never had it so good governmentally and critique the UUP/SDLP Executive —”
“Mr Swann referred to the empty glass; I see that even it has scarpered. It was at least as empty as the contributors, but at least it was transparent.”
“I will in a moment. An honourable mention has to go to the walking exercise in bad governance that is the social investment fund. Again, the rebuttals deliberately miss the point. Nobody in the Chamber denies the need that exists in our communities, but nobody in the Government will explain why that money is not subject to open tenders, why it is an invite-only fund, why there are no transparent criteria and how the multilayered conflicts of interest are being managed, let alone how people who are affected by paramilitarism are supposed to have confidence when people who are inextricably linked to live paramilitarism are being funded to address their social problems. <BR /> <BR />Members have correctly pointed out the arrogance of this Government in not sending one single Minister to mind the shop — we have a few more Members in.”
“In his contribution, Mr Poots at least had the honesty to tell us that information inhibits delivery and that it is the Opposition's job to force the information out of Government. <BR /> <BR />An honourable mention has to go to —”
“We discussed the fact that they have not even got their stories straight. In answers to questions from the SDLP, the Communities and Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs Ministers explicitly told us that we are now in a different environment with the introduction of an official Opposition; therefore, processes have changed. When the deputy First Minister was asked the same question, he said that there was obviously a problem with the June monitoring round. He said:”
“<BR /> <BR />We discussed the secret Brexit report and the two stories we are getting on that. The First Minister is telling us that she knew nothing about it. The deputy First Minister is telling us that he was not allowed to release it because of that. We have discussed government by press release and the rush always to the click of cameras instead of to the scrutiny afforded by the Chamber. That happened with the paramilitary report; it happened with the filleting of the NAMA motion, and it happens in the week-after-week refusal to meaningfully answer questions that are not just softballs from the Back Benches during Question Time. <BR /> <BR />We discussed the failures of a bad budgeting process, which is getting worse with the withholding of even the in-year bid information, which is a key tool for Government scrutiny.”
“We have discussed delay after delay and excuse after excuse on the NAMA inquiry, including the Government parties joining forces to water down an Assembly motion. We have discussed the use of royal prerogative to appoint more advisers despite the provision being available to appoint them and the failure to acknowledge the substance of concerns. It is not about the inequality of arms; yet more spin doctors. It is not about the headhunting of somebody who we all acknowledge is talented. It is about the fact that many issues, policies and strategies have not come out of the Executive because of inertia and dysfunction but that it was on this issue that you chose to jump the legislative queue. Perhaps, if it had been about something that affected real people rather than feathering this Government's nest, people would not be so annoyed.”
“This has been a timely discussion. Everybody is getting used to the new dispensation of Government and Opposition, and it is useful to shed light on some of the less constructive practices of the Government. <BR /> <BR />The need for transparency is not unique to Northern Ireland. Everywhere, people have a right to know the processes behind the decisions that are made and what their money is being spent on; and, no matter how cranky the Executive are about being left in government on their own, they have to play by those rules. <BR /> <BR />During the debate, Members outlined some of the gaps and failings of the Executive. Something of a greatest hits of poor governance was introduced by various speakers.”
“As the Minister indicated, the need for the joint body has been established for some time, and I believe that it has been green-lit for some time. Can you outline the reasons why it has not happened to date? Is there anything that we should know?”
“If, as indicated by Theresa May's conference speech yesterday — albeit that she is less squeamish than this Government about revealing her plan, to the extent that she has one — it does look as though we are going towards a hard Brexit, will the Executive advocate on behalf of those citizens from other EU countries who are currently working here to protect their freedom of movement and the interests of the Northern Irish businesses that rely so heavily on migrant labour?”
“Will the Member acknowledge that, for a start, this is an attempt to regulate not to ban? I made that very clear through specific examples. Will the Member agree that attempts to regulate should not be dismissed as a "hissy fit"? Will she accept that the independent research puts the ratio of a certain dimension of identity at 13:1? Will the Member further acknowledge that the Mela and Culture Night do not seek to dominate the public space for months — sometimes 12 months at a time? Will the Member further acknowledge that I specifically said it should be allowed, just not year round? —”
“I am very glad to say that we had a number of very courteous and pleasant phone calls, when I expressed my sympathy at the traumatisation that he has been put through. I will not accept that I take a differential view. I have stood at all times, in my elected and unelected life, against all forms of paramilitarism, and it is an outrage to suggest otherwise.”
“I do not get to wind on the debate, but I think that it is appropriate to correct the record, because I have been unfairly tarnished in this debate. I appreciate your giving way. I made a comment in June about the hunger striker banners: I raised them proactively without being asked in a BBC interview. The day after the decision was made on the Raymond McCreesh park, I issued a statement condemning it, and I made efforts in my party to the same end. I have restated that position at least six times, in broadcast interviews, because many people, like Christopher, are keen to throw out the hypocrite line but very few are keen for the record to be corrected. I was not elected at the time of the Gerry McGeough issue, but I wrote to DUP councillor Sammy Brush after his local council passed a motion calling for the release of that person.”
“Will you make it clear that you are not attributing it to me either?”
“I just want to put on record that I did apply the same considerations —”
“Yes, I will. I have reflected the aims of that flags protocol, which was about improving the environment, a partnership approach to community relations and a legal and enforcement framework if necessary. It is an important issue, and I hope that Members will engage with it rationally.”
“They also stress the importance of communication, recommending courtesy to people who might feel uncomfortable and that, to reassure people, people should know who is putting the flags up and how long they will be displayed. It is suggested that this information is communicated to the police. <BR /> <BR />In conclusion —”
“If it is good enough for every other aspect of society, it should be good enough for what are, in some cases, divisive symbols in this society. <BR /> <BR />There is a large body of high-quality academic research and data on this, not least from Dominic Bryan and Paul Nolan who published a very useful snapshot of views earlier this year. They consulted very widely, including all the parties in the Assembly. Their top-line recommendation was a two-week window for flag-flying, but they brought forward a number of recommendations that bear repeating, namely: in residential areas, the views of all people, including minorities, should be given consideration; flags should not be placed outside homes; and flags should not be placed outside places that deliver public services.”
“<BR /> <BR />The devil will be in the detail, of course, but a licensing scheme could regulate the duration of flying and be linked to a specific time or event; a specific parade, the Queen's jubilee, a sporting event or whatever. Crucially, a named individual will be responsible for removal by a specified date and, if not, the authorities can act to remove it. Having a fair and open set of criteria will empower those public bodies. If anybody wants to dismiss this theory as unworkable or unenforceable, just take a wee minute to ask yourself what you are saying about who is calling the shots here and how acceptable that is to you. <BR /> <BR />Fair regulations for election posters, advertising, fly-postering and graffiti mostly work. The solutions on removal are not 100% perfect, but the problems are largely addressed and the law upheld.”
“Last year, my colleague Mark H Durkan, the then Environment Minister, brought forward rational proposals to regulate the most extreme end of summer bonfires. There is a direct parallel here. It is fair to say that I would rather that that practice dies out, as we think that there are environmental burdens and community relations burdens. However, the fact is that we accept that it is important to people so we did not seek to ban it. We sought to regulate the more extreme end of it. Like with many SDLP Members, various references to me and my posters have been burnt on numerous bonfires, but I still voted for a bonfire management scheme that incentivises good behaviour. It is not about projecting a view onto everybody.”