Gordon Lyons
East Antrim · Democratic Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“Implementing other recommendations will require further legislation that, I trust, will come in the next mandate, but I can confirm that 60 of the recommendations have already been separately addressed by either the Department or the commission. I hope that that answers his questions.”
“Yes, I do and am happy to share those. The issue has been raised in the Chamber and through Assembly questions. My position is that we want to make it simple and straightforward for people.”
“They also introduce greater flexibility in financial reporting, allowing requirements to be tailored more appropriately, reducing burdens on smaller organisations and ensuring that the system can adapt over time through secondary legislation.”
“If they want to constitute as a Northern Ireland-only charity, they are able to do that, if they believe that that will bring certain benefits.”
“That is similar to what we are trying to do with trustees. Even though you leave your position as a trustee or your position as someone who holds an office in a charity or who has employment in the office, the commissioner will still be able to make a determination that says, "Even though you have left, we are still making this order to t…”
“I do not believe that it was. That was maybe picked up wrong. We are happy to look at and explore that, but that is the information that I have on it. Again, we will have the Committee Stage of the legislation, so we can look into that then.”
The complete record
Every one of 5,903 lines we hold for Gordon Lyons, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 16 of 119.
“The new provisions in the Bill concern pre-97 indexation and the funding of the board of the Pension Protection Fund. They were introduced subsequent to the Assembly vote on the LCM on 18 November 2025, and thus need to be agreed. <BR /> <BR />I will give a brief overview of the two new provisions. Clause 109 relates to the pre-97 indexation of the Pension Protection Fund and the financial assistance scheme. It enables the payment of inflation increases, which is known as indexation, on pension benefits for compensation schemes accrued before April 1997.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Following the introduction of additional measures to the Pension Schemes Bill, I seek approval of a subsequent legislative consent motion (LCM) to include provision for two of those amendment measures. The timeline for progressing the Bill through Westminster presents several challenges for introducing corresponding measures through an Executive Bill. It would not be possible for an Executive Bill to be passed by the Assembly in time to align with the operational dates for certain provisions of the Westminster Bill. Given the fact that such a delay would result in the provisions not being in place in Northern Ireland at the same time as in the rest of the UK, I am bringing an LCM to extend two measures of the Westminster Bill to Northern Ireland, in addition to the five that have already been agreed on.”
“I thank the Member for North Belfast for so succinctly pointing out the hypocrisy of the position of the Members opposite. He is absolutely right, and one thing that has been very clear today is that the double standards of Sinn Féin have been on show for everybody to see.”
“I did not do that, but, even if I did, we should all have the right to criticise those who also hold public office and ensure that they can be held to account. I think that it is absolutely wrong that someone is trying to gag public representatives and impinge on their freedom to properly stand up and speak up for their constituents.”
“Do I accept that she has made the ruling? Yes, it is a fact that she has made a ruling. I disagree with it, yes, and I absolutely question it, because I believe that some of it is based on inaccurate information and some of it is based on a standard that has not previously been in place. I think that we should challenge something when it is wrong, and I will absolutely challenge it, as is my right, as someone who has been elected to this place to stand up and speak up for my constituents, regardless of whether that may go against the grain and regardless of whether, at times, that may offend the sensibilities of some. It is important that we feel that we can speak up in this place and stand up for our constituents. There were some quite frankly ridiculous comments about my supposedly criticising public bodies.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Member talks about empathy, and he is absolutely right on one point: we should all have empathy and compassion for others. What I dispute is that I have failed, in my public life, to show empathy. It is not up to a commissioner, on the basis of one post, to decide whether I am demonstrating empathy in the work that I do or to hold me to the moralistic standards of others. It is absolutely outrageous that the Member would take part in these questions, considering what he has been involved in.”
“This is maybe one Question Time that the Member should have sat out. It is outrageous that he has the cheek to ask questions about what I have done. Let us remember what Mr Carroll did. When hundreds of Jews were being massacred on 7 October, what was his response? "Up the Palestinian resistance". Empathy? Where was his empathy? He comes now with his double standards. He had empathy with Hamas, but he had no empathy with innocent people who were attending a music festival. So, no, I will not take any lessons from Gerry Carroll after the outrageous and disgraceful comments that he made online. I was trying to tell people to stay away from violence, whereas he was encouraging it. That is absolutely disgraceful.”
“I certainly believe that there are questions to be asked about that approach, and I have outlined some of those today. The comparison between the report on me and the report on the First Minister is telling. Changes need to be made. We have a new commissioner in post, and there is further work to be done, particularly on the ministerial code and when it applies. I understand that Cathy Mason sent a letter to the First Minister and the deputy First Minister because of uncertainty around that. <BR /> <BR />Is there work to be done? Absolutely. We need to be able to have confidence in the procedures that are in place. Having gone through the process, I find it hard to have that confidence.”
“It is up to them to decide what approach they will take.”
“I cannot speak to other people's views or on what steps others may or may not take. I will give this commitment, however: I will continue in the vein in which I have been working for the past two years. I will get on with delivering what I can; I will work with Executive colleagues to deliver where I can; and I will operate within the bounds of the Department. I am more than happy for my record as Minister to be scrutinised. I am more than happy for people to look at the actions that I have taken and at what I have been able to do within the context in which I have been operating. I will continue to do that. <BR /> <BR />I am willing to work with others. I have seen some of the outrageous comments that others have made on social media and elsewhere. That is OK; that is fine. I will continue to work with other people.”
“I would take the evidence that I had. I would listen to those, such as the PSNI, who gave their opinion and assessment of the security situation, and I would respond accordingly.”
“You might want to listen, Mr O'Toole. I know that you have a great interest in AI. <BR /> <BR />The analysis stated that the commissioner applied two materially different standards — a qualitative, impact-based standard in the Lyons case and a narrow, evidentiary standard in the O'Neill case — and that inconsistency raises legitimate questions about consistency, proportionality and application of the ministerial code.”
“The analysis stated that the commissioner applied two —”
“I have not done an analysis, but, helpfully, somebody sent me an analysis that was produced using AI. AI was asked to compare the two reports and how the commissioner approached each of them.”
“Who does not want to talk about the Bobby Storey funeral? That is key to the issue. We are talking about a new standard of empathy. In June and July 2020, there was no empathy on display at all for people who were not able to go about funerals in the normal way. The Member would do well to reflect on that if she agrees that it is a new standard to which Ministers should be held.”
“You talk about deflection, but who is deflecting now?”
“You say that it is about me today, but it is about equality of standards and equality of —”
“a connection between my post and the violence. The Member has been shaking her head throughout my contribution this afternoon, but those are the facts, and those facts are backed up by evidence that the commissioner found. <BR /> <BR />I will ask the question again: is she prepared to criticise on the same basis the Sinn Féin Ministers who attended Bobby Storey's funeral”
“No, I do not. In fact, I remind her of the commissioner's findings:”
“Yes, it was. The Member is now taking it on himself to decide what I was or was not intending to do. That is what I was intending to do. The fact is that I called for people to be peaceful. The fact is that I was establishing information to make sure that it was in the public domain so that it could have been of assistance. <BR /> <BR />I say clearly that I will always do what I think is in the best interests of my constituents. I felt that, at that time, I was doing what I could to defuse a situation and provide clarity. Unfortunately, those involved did not listen to me, but I will continue to do what I can.”
“He talks about de-escalation: that is exactly what I was trying to do. Read the post.”
“The response from the Alliance Party says it all. The Member makes his point in his unique way. I will say it again: a new bar has been set; a new standard has been established. Do they really want that same standard to apply to everyone?”
“The Member should not complain about the tone of debate and then cast about some of the assertions that she has made. I have set out why I took the actions that I took. She can pontificate all she wants, but I will come straight back to her: you are not prepared to hold your Ministers to the same standard as you would hold others. She should reflect on that. I encourage her — I am fairly sure that she has not done so — to read the whole report.”
“<BR /> <BR />My intentions that day were clear: to keep calm, stop any violence and make sure that we had a satisfactory outcome. That did not happen, and I am deeply angered that it was not the case. However, the idea being insinuated here that, in some way, I revealed the whereabouts of vulnerable people is absolutely incorrect.”
“There we go again: there is the insinuation and the mistruth from the Member. Let me be clear: I did not reveal anybody's location, because my post was published hours after those vulnerable people had been moved. It did not reveal the location. Did it reveal where they had been? Yes, after advice from the PSNI. The PSNI contacted a member of staff in my office, who is also a councillor, to highlight the fact that there was concern that people were going to use the leisure centre as a protest point. The PSNI wanted to get the information out that the people who were seeking refuge were no longer there. I was not the one who initially revealed the information: it had been publicised by Mid and East Antrim Borough Council, and it had been published online by a media outlet.”
“Those who know me will know the truth of the situation, and, for those of you who do not, there is certainly some political opportunism on show today.”
“I believe that, in her subsequent report, she continued to indulge in giving opinions rather than in providing evidence-based information. <BR /> <BR />I thank the Member for her kind words. The idea that it would have been my intention to use my ministerial platform for what I have been accused of is not only absurd but offensive and entirely untrue.”
“Yes, it does, and I highlighted those in my response to the Committee. Indeed, the commissioner has form in that area. She wrote to me with her findings of fact, and I responded to her to say that I believed that she was incorrect. In her response, she said:”
“They are not prepared for their own Ministers to be held to the same high standard. That is the point.”
“Absolutely. The people who were impacted on are the victims; I made that clear in my original answer, and I stand with those people and with those who continue to face the impacts. However, the report has consequences for all Ministers and MLAs. I ask the Member this: is she content for her Ministers to be held to the same standard? There she goes — she just shrugs it off.”
“I had not considered that. It is fascinating, but not all that surprising, that the commissioner did not seek to interview you. She made a number of presumptions about what people on the ground may have thought that night, but she did not speak to anybody. She said that my actions "may have" had a consequence but gave no evidence. My actions may, equally, have had no consequence or have had the opposite consequence. <BR /> <BR />No, I am not at all surprised, but it is wrong: she should have sought that. I certainly believe that there may have been a different outcome had she gone a little further and interviewed some more people. <BR /> <BR />I thank the Member for his support. It would be very easy for him to join the political pile on. Knowing what he does, however, he did what I believe to be the honourable thing.”
“The public do hold me to account. They have returned me to this place three times, and I leave it entirely up to their wisdom to decide whether I come back again. The commissioner has published her report. I agree with the evidence that she produced, but I disagree with her findings. I will not say that I agree with something if I believe that it is wrong.”
“No, I do not. That was an absolutely disgraceful comment for the commissioner to have made. It presumes what my constituents believe. In fact, I believe that it stereotypes them. It was highly inappropriate. For a standards commissioner to have credibility, they need to produce reports that are based on fact. The commissioner needs to make sure that all people are held to the same standards.”
“I will say to the Member the same thing that I said to Matthew O'Toole: it would be good for the Member to consider what is in the report. Yes, I will not say that I agree with something when I believe that it is wrong. That would demonstrate a complete lack of integrity on my part. It would be wrong for me say, "That is fine; I accept it" when I know that it is not true. That is not something that I will do. <BR /> <BR />I will point out the errors that I see in the report and defend the actions that I have taken. Again, I encourage people to read the report and make up their minds for themselves.”
“He was floundering on the radio this morning because he could not answer the questions that were put to him. <BR /> <BR />Among all the theatrics and dramatics from the Member, there is a serious lesson for us all: watch out, because a new standard has apparently been set. The bar has been raised in relation to what we can and cannot say. It is not just about me. Tomorrow, it could be about anybody else, if the same standard is applied to everybody else. Failing to display appropriate emotion or criticising public bodies should not lead to a finding of a breach of the ministerial code of conduct or the MLA code of conduct, because freedom of speech is the cornerstone of any democracy. <BR /> <BR />The idea that it would have been my intention to —.”
“Entirely predictably, Mr O'Toole has got it wrong again. Let me be clear: he states that today is the first time that I have shown any compassion for those who were caught up in the events of June last year. That is an absolutely outrageous thing to say. Before those events, I stood against previous race rioting and difficulties. When there were attacks in Antrim, I stood shoulder to shoulder with Grainia Long outside the Northern Ireland Housing Executive offices after showing support and condemning what had taken place. In the aftermath of what happened, I repeatedly condemned the events in the media. It is wrong for the Member to stand in the Chamber and say, "This is the first time that the Minister has condemned this", and he knows that it is wrong, but he says it because he is trying to pull the wool over people's eyes.”
“between my post and violence. <BR /> <BR />As Members will be aware, I disagree with the findings, because I believe that they are based on statements that are incorrect and that the commissioner has introduced a new standard for leadership, which includes what she considers to be an appropriate demonstration of emotion and a refusal to criticise public bodies. Therefore, I am in the position where I encourage everybody to read the report and my response. <BR /> <BR />What happened at Larne leisure centre that evening was nothing short of a disgrace. It had serious and continuing impacts for the swimmers and staff who were at the leisure centre at that time. Discrimination or violence against somebody because of their race is abhorrent and has no place in society. I will always work with others to ensure that we remove that scourge.”
“I am grateful to the Member for asking the question and giving me the opportunity to respond to the findings of the report. I welcome the fact that the report has confirmed what I said in the immediate aftermath of the events of that day. Her investigation has confirmed that, first, the PSNI asked me to put out a message clarifying that those who moved to the leisure centre were not there, and, secondly, that I did not reveal the location of anyone, despite the comments of some Members, nor was I the one who had initially revealed where they had been. Most of all, I welcome the fact that the commissioner has said that there is:”
“In 2024, my officials engaged with the council in the review of the Limavady master plan 2011, within which many of the derelict sites were highlighted as development opportunities. My officials also took part in a walkabout of Limavady town centre with council officials on 15 January 2026 to identify derelict and vacant sites and regeneration opportunities.”
“My Department is committed to town centre regeneration and has recently invested £150,000 in the Limavady revitalisation scheme. That investment has benefited 35 properties in Catherine Street and Irish Green Street, allowing businesses to repair and replace signage, repaint frontages and install new windows, doors, shutters and guttering.”
“No, I do not accept that I did not show any empathy. I believe that that is wrong. I hope that she will hold her Ministers to the same standards, because, during the Bobby Storey funeral — the disgrace that was that event — I did not hear her comment once about the actions of the Sinn Féin Ministers and MLAs who took part in that funeral. Where was the empathy for those who had to bury their loved ones alone? Where was her empathy for those who did not get a chance to say goodbye? Sinn Féin is quite happy to do what it wants without showing any empathy, but, in this instance, it is content to forget all about that.”
“Did you publish an LGBT strategy in your time? No, she did not. Now she is saying, "Process, process, process". That seems to be all that she was involved in.”
“She talks about, "Process, process, process". Maybe she is referring to what she did when she was in office, because she certainly —.”
“My first response is this: what did she do when she was Minister? She did not publicise that strategy. She wants to know what I am doing on the LGBT strategy. I recently met some of those who are involved in the working group, and I have asked officials to bring options to me in order to see whether such a strategy can be taken forward.”
“She will be aware of the cross-departmental working group that is in place and that the Departments involved are meant to each be bringing back their work on that. The last time that I was in the Chamber, I said that nothing had come back from the Department for the Economy, the Department of Finance or the Department for Infrastructure in that regard. Maybe she wants to encourage her ministerial colleagues to make sure that they get on with that work.”
“They can have confidence in me, because I brought forward an anti-poverty strategy that is realistic and deals with the core issues that contribute to poverty. I very much look forward to releasing the results of the consultation, because I think that some people will be surprised at the extent of the support for the measures that not just I but the Executive have put in place. Quite frankly, I am fed up with Members from the other side of the House calling for all the things that they want to see included in a strategy, given that, at the Executive table, I do not have a Finance Minister who will come forward to offer to fund them. <BR /> <BR />The Member also mentioned the Irish language strategy and the Ulster-Scots strategy.”
“Whom they should contact will depend on what the issue is. If the Member has any specific thoughts or is fielding queries as an elected representative and would like to know whom to contact, I am happy to answer on his behalf. As always, I encourage people, if they do not know where else to go, to contact their local elected representatives.”
“I am happy to do that. The Member will be aware that, because of the Department's significant breadth, I receive many, many invites. I am certainly happy to visit the area with him, and I hope that a visit can be pencilled in as soon as possible. I have no objection whatsoever to doing so, and I will get back to the Member on the matter as soon as I can.”
“It is absolutely a project that I want to progress. The Member will be aware of the considerable work that needs to be done. It is complex work, and there are interactions to be had with the council and with those responsible for the facility in which the library will be built and expanded. Issues need to be overcome. We have not overcome them yet, but I can give the Member my commitment that I will do everything that I can to make sure that the library is built. For a town the size of Newtownards, I could not believe how small its library is. It is not fit for purpose, and I believe that a town such as Newtownards deserves to have a new library.”
“Newtownards library is a priority for the Department. I was very pleased to have Michelle McIlveen invite me out there. I continue to have some questions about the library's redevelopment. I want to see progress made and to make sure the budget is allocated for it, but there are processes that need to be gone through. I hope to have fuller answers for the Member on the matter very soon.”