Adrian Cochrane-Watson
South Antrim · Ulster Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“I thank the Member, my colleague on the Committee, for his intervention. You are quite right: strategically, we have failed, but the Ulster businessman has delivered, as you highlighted. The Ulster businessman has continued to deliver. <BR /> <BR />I will finish now. It has been an experience. I wish the renewables sector every success.”
“He has always been very friendly to me, and he has probably been let down by Amber Rudd moving the goalposts in Westminster and by the communication of different information. In June, the Minister made commitments based on the relevant information. However, what we have now is a renewables shambles.”
“Mr Speaker, in case I forget, I wish you every success. I believe that you will be back here on 9 May, but we will certainly miss you on the election trail in South Antrim. I wish you personally every success. <BR /> <BR />I came into the Chamber on 28 June.”
“I am sure that the officials will make it up as they go along, because they have been making it up since June. <BR /> <BR />I am sorry that I was an optimist. I am not an expert in renewables. Some people understand it, such as my colleague Paul.”
“A matter of weeks ago, we failed them on renewable heat incentives. We failed them when we gave commitments. In November, we failed them when we gave an understanding — I will not put it more strongly than that, although some might say that we "suggested" it — that the scheme would stay open to 31 March.”
“I also commend the Minister for her work since taking over the role. In discussions with representatives of Belfast International, they say to me that the biggest inhibitor to growth is not transport links but air passenger duty. Have there been any discussions between you and ministerial colleagues on APD?”
The complete record
Every one of 129 lines we hold for Adrian Cochrane-Watson, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 3.
“The issue of credit unions has been of interest to me over the months that I have watched the Bill progress through the House and Committee, and I have taken the time to talk to credit unions in my area. As my good colleague Mr Dunne outlined, they do not just offer financial support and guidance but play an integral part in everyday life in all our communities through sponsorship of local schools and so on. <BR /> <BR />I have no hesitation in supporting the amendments this evening. I wish the Bill swift progress through the House.”
“I am commenting on the Bill on behalf of the Ulster Unionist Party. We warmly welcome the amendments tabled and the Minister's acceptance of amendment No 1 from the Committee, which is on a very important issue. <BR /> <BR />This is the first piece of legislation on which I have had a role to play on a scrutiny Committee. I do not intend to say too much this evening, bar to pay my thanks to the Chair of the Committee and its staff and to the Minister and his departmental officials for bringing the legislation forward and answering any queries that I had. <BR /> <BR />The Bill is a very strong and important piece of legislation. A strong community needs a strong credit union.”
“I thank the Minister for her extensive answer on renewables. Does the Minister agree that the Enterprise Minister has created a policy vacuum leading to a financial crisis for local farmers and landowners who had invested and planned for single wind turbines?”
“Will the Minister be in a position today or in the near future to share with the House where these financial penalties have been incurred by Northern Ireland Water? I am particularly concerned with Sixmilewater in south Antrim. I fully appreciate that the Minister may want to come back to me on that.”
“Things have moved on, including technology, and we have to move on and be on a par. On that note, I will finish and take the opportunity to wish the Minister a merry Christmas. Hopefully, Minister, you and I will agree a New Year's resolution and we will come back in better humour with each other. I do thank you; and thank you, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker.”
“I rise to speak briefly on the Bill and to offer my party's support. We are content for the Bill as it now stands to pass into law and be put on the statute book. I welcome the comments from the Minister, the Chair of the Committee and other Members who, unlike me, have been here through all of the Bill's various stages. As a relative newcomer to the Committee, I will not delay the House by repeating many of the issues that have been raised, not least because of the lateness of the hour and also because I find this a highly technical piece of legislation that is not in any way party political in nature. As far as my party is concerned, the main issue and the most important aspect of the legislation is that it will bring us into parity with the rest of the United Kingdom.”
“I believe that all that has already been said on this tonight.”
“I welcome the Minister's overview on the further advice that her Department will be offering on the implementation of soft SuDs. <BR /> <BR />We will be voting against amendment No 7. We believe that there are already sufficient economic regulation and governance procedures. We do not wish to burden the Department further and commit considerable resources to biennial reporting. We believe that transparency and accountability are there already. We wish to reaffirm our manifesto commitment of 2011 not to implement water charging during this mandate. We believe that the Bill continues to make that a reality and should be welcomed. This is a very important Bill for households across Northern Ireland, offering reassurance to many who are already burdened with increasing financial hardship.”
“I welcome the Consideration Stage of the Water and Sewerage Services Bill. I thank the Minister for her overview of the amendments, and my party will be initially supportive of amendment Nos 1 to 5. We believe that they strengthen the Bill and offer clarity but with no real material change. We will not be supporting the opposition to clause 3. <BR /> <BR />Of particular interest to me is amendment No 6. Again, we will be supportive of that. As outlined, some members of the Regional Development Committee attended a best practice visit to Cardiff, and I was fortunate to attend. On soft SuDs, I found the activities in and around Cardiff to be impressive, and they could well make a significant contribution throughout Northern Ireland.”
“I remind him that we have seen well over 1,000 redundancies announced in the manufacturing sector.”
“I thank the Minister for his responses so far and welcome the research and analysis that is under way, particularly with DEL. Does the Minister expect us to attract new jobs in the manufacturing sector? Does he want to clarify comments he made recently, when he said:”
“Given the high volume of visitors to Parliament Buildings, will the Commission outline what advances have been made on the car parking situation in the past 12 months? What is proposed to ease that situation, particularly on Mondays and Tuesdays, when many people are parking down the mile in all forms of weather?”
“I also hope that you can maybe outline today how DCAL plans to celebrate the success of our national football team on reaching these championships. The silence from you to date has been quite deafening.”
“I am disappointed by your response, Minister. In view of the terrible events in Paris 10 days ago, DCAL should step up to the mark financially and operationally to give true assistance to the many thousands of British football tourists who will visit France.”
“Why not decommission the arms of the Provisional IRA? Why not deactivate the army council? That was supposed to happen 10 years ago, and it has been proven not to have taken place. That might be a more practical step to world peace and harmony than proposing motions such as this that cannot be implemented in any way and that are outside the remit of the Assembly. <BR /> <BR />I reject the motion. I call on everyone, no matter what they think of the ethics of nuclear weapons or of the retention of an independent nuclear deterrent for the UK, to vote this silly, time-wasting motion down.”
“That scenario has already been outlined by eminent military leaders such as Field Marshal Lord Bramall, General the Lord Ramsbotham and General Sir Hugh Beach. There is an argument against Trident, but they all want to make it to protect our army, our navy and our Royal Air Force. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the message of reinvestment that came from Westminster yesterday. That is vital, and the Ulster Unionist Party believes that we must rebuild our conventional armed forces and continue to commit 2% of our gross domestic product to enhancing the NATO alliance. I have not heard that argument being put forward by the proposers of the motion. The reason for that is simple: they do not care about and have no concern for the defence of the United Kingdom. As for decommissioning Trident, I suggest a tip to the proposers of the motion.”
“I remind those who tabled the motion that, at Westminster, the debate has taken place, and votes have been taken on whether we should replace Trident with a new nuclear deterrent. Votes were taken on 14 May 2007, 20 January 2015 and, lately, on 4 June 2015. How did Sinn Féin vote? How did Sinn Féin debate the motion in Westminster? We all know the answer: silence. There was silence representing their constituencies at Westminster. <BR /> <BR />I assume that the Members who tabled the motion now wish to follow the line of the SNP and comrade Jeremy Corbyn in wanting unilateral nuclear disarmament. Yet the Scottish nationalists want to remain a vital part of NATO, whose main principle is that of nuclear deterrent. There is a logical and defensible argument that should be heard, but this is not the place for that.”
“Now, they want to legislate for Trident. Let us make up our minds.”
“There is no issue more important than that of national security, yet I feel that today's motion is a travesty, for several reasons. Of course there is a debate to be had about the UK's independent nuclear deterrent and the replacement of Trident — it is a massively important and serious issue — but this is not the place to have the debate or pass motions. I remind the Members who tabled the motion that we are part of the United Kingdom: the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. National defence is a reserved matter, and Westminster will take this decision. It really is the height of hypocrisy to bring this take-note debating society motion to the Floor of the Assembly. It is a non-devolved issue, yet last week, Sinn Féin and the DUP could not wait to repatriate social security issues.”
“Does the Minister acknowledge that, under the current points system, there is a distinct group, namely our armed forces, who are not getting the necessary priority in housing and, indeed, the support that they deserve when they return to Civvy Street?”
“I also wish the First Minister every success in the future after he decides to stand down formally. <BR /> <BR />Does the junior Minister agree that, to ensure that there is no recurrence, not just the state but groups have to be honest about their actions and the consequences of those actions?”
“Although we give a guarded welcome to the motion, we hope that it is not at the expense of other significant projects. <BR /> <BR />I echo the comments that have been heard in here today: had welfare reform been resolved, over £200 million would be available for these projects. I urge a resolution of that and urge that we move forward on the much-needed projects that were brought here by the proposer of the motion.”
“The promise of funding, which may be coming back again, and the court actions and so on, have caused stoppages to the project. However, again, we in the Ulster Unionist Party welcome greater connectivity between all parts of our Province. For me, in my constituency, there would be significant benefit, as my colleague Trevor Clarke identified for the A6; and there would be the enhanced railway links, not just to Belfast but to Crumlin, Lisburn and further afield to Portadown and Dublin. <BR /> <BR />We will be supporting the motion, but we highlight concerns. Capital expenditure is under a huge strain. Although this is deemed a priority, we also highlight the other priorities that are out there in the form of our schools, hospitals and other major public realm works.”
“I will just remind the House that more than 50 years ago, in 1964, the Northern Ireland Government announced plans to build a motorway from Belfast to Londonderry. Half a century on, we are still waiting. While the route east of the "city" of Randalstown is of motorway standard, the rest of the A6, as many of you know, is very much a single carriageway. So, we are very committed to seeing that upgraded. There are plans to upgrade further stretches between Belfast and Londonderry, but the most recent addition was the Toome bypass, and that took place over 10 years ago in my constituency of South Antrim. <BR /> <BR />We appreciate the need for the A5 to be upgraded. We are very concerned that £72 million, I believe, has already been spent on the project. I know that it has been a stop-start scenario.”
“With that in mind, we are very supportive of a railway investment prioritisation strategy. I am pleased that, under the themes, the number one priority is the completion of the Coleraine to Londonderry line and to establish a modern, efficient railway service between Belfast and Londonderry and indeed Londonderry and Dublin. We very much welcome that. <BR /> <BR />Moving to the A6, I, like the Chair, my colleague from South Antrim, attended a Regional Development Committee meeting in Londonderry port. I am sure he would agree with me that driving conditions were horrendous on the evening we travelled along the A6. It really brought the issue of the A6 home to us, and we discussed the priority for the road at length that evening.”
“Like other Members, I welcome the Minister to the House today. I also welcome the opportunity to talk to the motion, which our party is broadly supportive of. <BR /> <BR />We need a modern and sustainable economic infrastructure to support economic growth and help realise the visions we all have for the economy. Investment in areas such as transport, energy and telecoms etc will make a difference to a more vibrant economy, moving forward. <BR /> <BR />The positive relationship between a modern, sustainable economic infrastructure and economic growth is well established. The quality of the business environment, including transport infrastructure, has been identified as a significant factor, alongside issues such as access to markets, labour supply etc.”
“On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. It is a matter of accuracy. Reference was made to Schrader Electronics, which is a flagship company in my constituency and a huge success story for Northern Ireland. I do not want the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment to be travelling the world and be ignorant of the fact that it is now called Sensata following the $1 billion purchase in August 2014 and that it has been rebranded. As he comes to Antrim, he will see the sign. I do not want him to be ignorant of that.”
“I remind the Minister of what is happening in Ballymena in North Antrim that is having a massive effect on my constituency. I estimate that there could be upwards of around 500 job losses from JTI and Michelin, as well as the impact that there has already been from Patton. I want to remind the Minister of that while he is wanting to remind me of what is happening in South Antrim.”
“— in Northern Ireland. Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.”
“I was reflecting only on what I thought was a very positive message coming through at Question Time earlier on the manufacturing sector in Northern Ireland. I do not share that positive message. I do not think that the 860 people from Michelin would share that positive message. I do not think that those from JTI or Patton, or many hundreds of my constituents in South Antrim, would share that positive message. I am only asking whether the Minister will reflect on that. I have grave concerns for manufacturing —”
“I am sorry, Mr Deputy Speaker, but without the Hansard report in front of me, I cannot qualify that, but a very positive picture —”
“Today, our unemployment rate is 6% while the UK average has returned to 5·4%, as it was before the financial crash. Even more worrying is the fact that 27·6% of our population is deemed to be economically inactive. It was 27% in 2007. At the same time, we know that, overall, one in nine of our population is in receipt of disability living allowance. That compares to one in 20 in England. We also have black spots: I believe that it is one in five in west Belfast. <BR /> <BR />That is not a record that the Executive or the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment should be proud of. I hope that he thinks about the statements that he made earlier and that he thinks about himself having no concern about manufacturing so that I can pass on his real concerns to the many in South Antrim —”
“That high number of job losses will only kick in next year, but they are indicators of what I believe to be a crisis in local manufacturing. There is concern about manufacturing as the sector is exposed to wider global economic slowdown. Last month, manufacturing output growth was flat, and manufacturing employment fell for the second consecutive month in October, which is the fastest rate of decline since June 2013. It is not a positive situation. <BR /> <BR />Northern Ireland is a small place, and we need to think of the overall economic picture. In May 2007, Northern Ireland had an unemployment rate of 3·7%, which was lower than the UK average of 5·4% and of the Republic's 4·1%. In that month, the Executive were re-established under the leadership of DUP/Sinn Féin.”
“<BR /> <BR />As a representative of South Antrim, I want to praise my constituents for their relatively low levels of economic inactivity, but should those people now be penalised because of their work ethic? It must also be pointed out that many people in the east of the Province commute daily to our capital city of Belfast for their work. Those of us who live east of the Bann could easily complain about the lack of foreign direct investment and the lack of Invest NI-sponsored job creation. <BR /> <BR />One constituency not mentioned in the motion has just received a third hammer blow to its employment base: Ballymena in North Antrim is to lose 860 jobs with the closure of Michelin, which comes hot on the heels of the closures of JTI and Pattons. Many in my constituency will suffer because of those job losses.”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak in a debate on the economy, even though, to be honest, a motion on the economy from Sinn Féin is like a motion on childcare from King Herod. However, there is nothing in the motion that I take great issue with, although I cannot avoid the fact that all the constituencies highlighted are areas where Sinn Féin is electorally strong. That is disappointing. <BR /> <BR />It seems somewhat late in the day to welcome a Programme for Government commitment at this stage of the mandate. A better question would be to ask whether the ministerial subgroup on regional opportunities has had any impact. The inclusion of a subregional job creation target is a reasonable ask, but, again, would it make a difference to the outcome?”
“In view of the Minister's comments on FE, can he elaborate on the capacity, ability and indeed the available funding in the FE sector to take up the challenge of modern languages delivery, because the drastic cuts have made significant cutbacks in the criteria for students already?”
“NGOs have identified to the OFMDFM Committee a tension between what the Executive do for current refugees and asylum seekers and what is, potentially, enhanced support later this year for the Syrian refugees. What actions are being taken to try to address that tension?”
“— the Credit Unions and Co-operative and Community Benefit Societies Bill, and, last week, the Civil Service —”
“Over the past six weeks, we have watched as the DUP Ministers have been absent from responding to debates and questions in the Assembly. Yet we all witnessed in disbelief the Minister coming back to talk about the very urgent and important matters of the Renewables Obligation Closure Order —”
“I thank the Member, but I remind him, as a member of the Committee for Regional Development like me, that the Committee unanimously agreed to ask the permanent secretary to go back to the Minister to do a ministerial directive to spend an additional £20 million, so the concerns felt by the Member were not shared by him in the Committee meetings. I remind the Member, who declared on Radio Ulster this morning that the in-out policy was the hokey-cokey policy, that my party is out of the Executive. We made that clear in August.”
“The DUP can shout and yell at fellow unionists, but the truth is that the guiding principle through the past weeks was to protect the DUP at all costs. Their so-called clever tactic is all about self-preservation, and that is always their motivation. The mantra is this: the party comes first. The fact is that, despite their occasional hard line rhetoric, through it all the DUP have been joined at the hip with Sinn Féin for the past eight years in a carve-up of this dysfunctional Executive.”
“The next morning, on 9 September, she berated the leader of the Ulster Unionist Party on Radio Ulster, unfortunately for her just minutes before news broke of a certain Mr Copeland being arrested and Mr Storey joining him. On 9 September, we were told that, if the adjournment of the Assembly did not happen or the Secretary of State did not suspend the Assembly, DUP ministerial resignations would follow. Next day, we were told by Peter Robinson that he was, therefore, standing aside as First Minister and that other DUP Ministers would resign with immediate effect, with the exception of Arlene Foster. <BR /> <BR />There is no record from the DUP on its website or by any other means of the tactic to resign and then take up their ministerial positions.”
“The day after, Mrs Foster attacked my party leader, stating:”
“How Sammy must regret those comments. On 7 September, Peter Robinson stated:”
“I remind Members that, when we withdrew from the Executive, we did so cleanly and clearly on a point of principle — the point of principle being the complete undermining of trust in the serial denial of Sinn Féin in the wake of the implication of a still-operational Provisional IRA in the McGuigan murder. <BR /> <BR />From the public statements of various DUP spokesmen in late August/early September it is abundantly clear that they had no intention of withdrawing from the Executive, which would have triggered Assembly elections — no intention whatsoever. Sammy Wilson stated on 28 August:”
“I thank the Members for bringing the motion to the Assembly today. <BR /> <BR />We need to remind ourselves of the timeline of the DUP's hokey-cokey strategy, if you want to call it a strategy, of resigning and reappointing Ministers. When the Ulster Unionist Party decided to withdraw from the Executive and my colleague Minister Danny Kennedy resigned, the DUP had no intention — repeat: no intention — of following suit. They made noises about excluding Sinn Féin from the Executive, yet they knew fine well that, under the St Andrews Agreement, the possibility of excluding Sinn Féin from the Executive through an Assembly motion simply did not exist.”
“Of course I want to move forward. In public statements, the DUP focused on what the IRA is doing rather than on whether it exists. Will the Acting First Minister confirm that the existence of the IRA is not a problem for the DUP?”
“Minister, what, if any, points of difference exist between the First Minister and deputy First Minister on this issue?”
“I thank the Minister for her answers. Bearing in mind that the June and October monitoring rounds are now not likely to be carried out until December, how can our Departments be expected to balance their books, particularly on capital expenditure?”
“I welcome the Minister's praise for Greenmount and the other campuses. Unfortunately, however, the experience of the past 12 months shows that the Minister is not following up her support with actions. For instance, the reduction of the veterinary nursing course earlier this year was disappointing. Can the Minister give a commitment that she will try to avoid such instances of courses being reduced in the future?”