Emma Pengelly
South Belfast · Democratic Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“This week, I will travel to France to pay my respects to all those who fought and the many who fell at the Battle of the Somme as we mark its 110th anniversary. <BR /> <BR />From across Northern Ireland, generations have served their country.”
“One of the men who fought was James Sandford, my great-grandfather. He fought, he survived, he went on to fight again, and he was seriously injured in another battle. I am deeply proud of him, and I am proud of all those who stepped forward with such honour in the face of the horror of that war.”
“When I stand there this week, looking at the gravestones of so many who made the ultimate sacrifice to defend our freedom, I will also remember — we must always remember — the responsibility that we carry forward. Remembrance is not only about honouring the past; it is about shaping the future.”
“Last night, people in north Belfast witnessed horrific scenes that have absolutely sickened and appalled people across Northern Ireland. It was a shocking and barbaric act of violence that has left a victim fighting the consequences of a truly savage attack.”
“Every person has the right to walk their streets, live in their community and feel safe in their own neighbourhood. This type of brutality has no place in Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />This morning, I spoke with the Chief Constable and the Justice Minister.”
“<BR /> <BR />I have also been in contact with the Prime Minister, because the PSNI has confirmed that the 30-year-old male who has been arrested is believed to be of Somalian heritage.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,234 lines we hold for Emma Pengelly, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 34 of 45.
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I believe that the Member may want to make some point about the constitutional position, but the reality is that the UK sovereign Parliament can decide to make regulations for Northern Ireland if it so chooses. It has chosen the mechanism that we are operating under today. <BR /> <BR />The debated regulation relates to a small and defined area of trade and business. In the event of it not being adopted, we expect the impact to be negative from the perspective of both internal UK trade and NI-EU trade. It is, therefore, our jointly agreed view that the Assembly should agree to the addition of the regulation to the relevant annex of the Windsor framework. That is a demonstration of the democratic scrutiny mechanisms and the role that this place will have in ensuring that free flow of trade.”
“The debated regulation relates to a small, defined area of —”
“— the right thing to do is, of course, to make sure that Northern Ireland is not left behind. Today's decision will be hard for many people. We disagree with the approach taken by the UK sovereign Parliament to the provisions, but those are the provisions that we currently operate under. We are therefore prepared to make the hard decisions on behalf of everyone in Northern Ireland to ensure that there are no new regulatory barriers across the United Kingdom.”
“Politics is about hard decisions. I wanted to stand here today to explain why —”
“— Northern Ireland would be the only place across the United Kingdom that would be stuck with the old rule. It is important to clarify for people out there that the regulation is not new and additional but a replacement law and that, if it were not applied in Northern Ireland, the existing regulation would apply, putting us in a different position from that of the rest of the United Kingdom.”
“I have been clear on many occasions that it is not the way that I would choose to do these things, but, frankly, no pathway on the issue has been set out by any Member or by the UK Government. Therefore, we are exercising the mechanisms that we pushed for and secured so that the House now has a meaningful role in looking at regulations, primarily to ensure that what is done does not create a new regulatory barrier. If, indeed, we were to vote against —”
“One thing that I will absolutely always do is put Northern Ireland first. I will ensure that Northern Ireland will not be left behind when the rest of the UK moves to a different position. I will not allow Northern Ireland to be in a position in which there is internal regulatory divergence in relation to new or amended law. Is this the way that I would ideally like it to be done? Absolutely not.”
“That is why the new mechanisms — applicability motions and the Stormont brake — were brought in. They were brought in because we — I speak personally and of my party — highlighted the absolutely appalling democratic deficit in our sovereign UK Parliament agreeing a mechanism for rules and regulations to be made automatically in the case of amended law or, in the case of new law, by decision of the UK and EU sitting in the Joint Committee. <BR /> <BR />It was my party that pushed for the mechanisms to be put in place in order to allow this place to have debate, not because we embrace the concept of annex 2 or we agree with our UK sovereign Parliament on the matter — indeed, we did not; we voted and spoke against it — but because, unlike some Members in the Chamber, I accept the legal reality of where we are.”
“I will finish the point. The matter that we are considering relates to an existing provision in annex 2. Annex 2 applies in Northern Ireland through the Windsor framework and did so before that through the protocol arrangements, not because it was imposed by the EU but — sadly, in my view — because the UK Government and our UK sovereign Parliament agreed that the laws and regulations set out in annex 2 apply to Northern Ireland. Our UK sovereign Parliament sets out the fact that the mechanism for changing that relates to the amendment of EU proposals or replacement of the law. As the Member is fully aware, under the Windsor framework, there was no democratic accountability for this place in relation to that decision by the UK sovereign Parliament on the laws that apply here.”
“<BR /> <BR />Some Members have referred to the constitutional position in relation to that matter. I firmly believe in the principle of UK parliamentary sovereignty; indeed, I understand that the Member who has just spoken on that does so, too, and agrees with my position that the UK Parliament can legislate if it so wishes. However, today's debate and the position that I have taken on the matter —”
“No. Apologies. <BR /> <BR />In particular, those mechanisms were designed to ensure that Members here would have a significant role in stopping potential future divergence. Indeed, the explanatory memorandum on the regulation before us, which was published on 4 April, makes it clear that adopting the regulation would lead to a common production standard across the UK; would avoid NI producers having to abide by a more stringent and costly requirement than firms in GB; would not impede unfettered access in marketing of NI produce in GB; would reduce burdens on local producers in the development of their product ranges, especially in sourcing ingredients; and would not affect organic pet food that is made to UK standards being sold and circulated in Northern Ireland.”
“Personally speaking and with regard to my party's position, that is exactly why we fought for and secured new mechanisms to give this place a meaningful say on matters that impact the people of Northern Ireland.”
“In proposing to add a new rule to the Windsor framework on that basis — that it would not create a regulatory border or because there are exceptional circumstances — a UK Government Minister must make a statement to Parliament before doing so, explaining why they are of the opinion that either of those conditions have been met. The UK Government must also have indicated that, in this scenario, they intend to notify the Assembly of that decision. <BR /> <BR />I will respond to some Members who have made comments during the debate. In my view, the cop-out thing to do on the issue would be to vote against the motion, to leave it to others to make those decisions with the Assembly having no say and no role.”
“If the threshold is met, the Assembly will have been seen to agree to the addition of the regulation to the relevant annex of the Windsor framework, and that will be adopted at the meeting of the UK-EU Joint Committee. If the applicability motion does not pass, the UK Government will veto the addition of the act to the Windsor framework of the Joint Committee. I believe that that section is still misunderstood by some. If the applicability motion does not pass, the UK Government will veto it. However, they can agree but only if the Minister considers that there are exceptional circumstances or that adoption would not create a new regulatory barrier between Northern Ireland and Great Britain. Those were the new arrangements under the 'Safeguarding the Union' paper.”
“I thank you, Mr Speaker, for sending the First Minister and me the formal notification, and I thank Members for their comments and input to the debate on the applicability motion. The case setting out the arguments for the measures contained in Regulation (EU) 2023/2419 being added to the Windsor framework are set out clearly in the UK Government's assessment in its explanatory memorandum accompanying the notification. <BR /> <BR />Members will be aware now, in some way, of the procedure, having debated the previous regulation. For an applicability motion to pass, it must receive cross-community support, as outlined in section 4(5) of the Northern Ireland Act 1998.”
“On European Heritage Day, 3,000 visitors attended. There are some really good examples, but the challenge for us is to move forward positively, to ensure that we maximise the site's potential and to do so by working with people and not imposing something on them.”
“The Balmoral show attracts a million visitors a year. It is a huge success. Great progress has been made with many of the buildings there. It has really become a source of celebration, I know, for all of Northern Ireland, but I am particularly proud to have it right in the heart of Lagan Valley. It attracts visitors from across Northern Ireland. I always encourage city folk and town folk to get there to see some of the wonderful agricultural and rural aspects that are on display. That has been really positive, and we look forward to working closely with the Royal Ulster Agricultural Society (RUAS). <BR /> <BR />I will also refer to the fantastic Ulster Aviation Society. If anyone who is listening to the debate has not been down to see the hangars and the incredible things that the society has there, please get down to see them.”
“The most important thing for us in politics is not to step forward to do something that will create further division, hurt and harm. The previous proposals could not go ahead not because of a lack of political agreement at the time but because there was no consensus among the key stakeholders — the people who were most invested in the way forward for the site. However, that does not mean that we should not take on the challenge of navigating those issues and finding a way through. Finding any way forward for the site must be done with victims at its heart. It must be done in a way that is entirely sensitive to the needs of victims and to the history, heritage and legacy of this place. That is my pledge today. <BR /> <BR />There have been huge success stories on the site, and I will refer to them.”
“We also need to listen to the people who had concerns about the initial proposals. The prison site is an example of the challenging and difficult legacy issues that we often have to deal with in Northern Ireland. We went out and spoke to people about the original proposal. We listened to groups and to the people who would be most impacted by it, and we understood. We had to listen to the genuine concerns and issues of victims and survivors, the prison officers who worked on the site, the prison officers who were injured, the families of those who were killed on the site and around the prison and of those who may be connected to the prison perhaps because they served time there. There is a lot of history with the site. That will require us to move forward with consensus and sensitivity and by taking people with us.”
“It must also be a site for the community. I am glad that I have been working with many in the community, including local sports organisations, on the potential of using the dedicated community and sports aspects of the site.”
“<BR /> <BR />I see that my Assembly colleague the Member for Strangford is here. He was actively involved with many of the organisations at the time of the initial proposals. Some of the proposals were very ambitious, and we worked very hard on them. This site can be an economic driver not just for Lagan Valley but for Northern Ireland. There is space on the site, which is in the key geographic location of the Belfast to Dublin corridor, with links to airports and ports. The site has so much potential for us and would be ideal for an economic hub, particularly in some of the new areas that we talk about all the time, such as regtech, green tech and AI.”
“I can honestly say that I have spent many hundreds of hours of my life working on the Maze/Long Kesh proposals. Of course it is a source of deep frustration that the overall site has not been developed, and there are a number of reasons for that. Sometimes, it is incredibly simplistic to put this down to being a political disagreement. The reality is that the politics and decisions around a site such as this are not about what we do to people or what politics decides and imposes through leadership or whatever it may be. The development of the site had to happen together with those who were involved in, had a link to or had understandable issues, concerns and genuine fears and apprehensions about some aspects of the site, because there are historical aspects of the site that touch on all that.”
“It is great to have the opportunity to speak on this important issue for Lagan Valley. To clarify, I am speaking from the Back Benches and not in my capacity as deputy First Minister. The response to the debate will officially be from the First Minister. I do, however, want to contribute to the debate because of the site's importance for Lagan Valley in particular and, in my view, Northern Ireland. This is a site of regional importance, not just Lagan Valley importance. I also speak as somebody who has another role in which, hopefully, I have capacity and the position to seek to move this project forward. <BR /> <BR />I worked very closely with the site long before I came into the Lagan Valley constituency. For many years, I worked with colleagues around the Assembly, some of whom are still in the Assembly.”
“One of the key messages that we heard when we spoke to those who work and live around the lough was that the lough is still there, is open for business and still works. There are many fantastic aspects to Lough Neagh. While we have challenges that need to be addressed, we want to send a very positive message that high-quality work happens there and that high-quality produce comes out of the lough. There are no safety concerns whatsoever about that. <BR /> <BR />As we move towards the summer, we need to get better at sending that clear message to people. Perhaps what was discussed last summer had a negative impact when it did not need to have that impact. Overall, it will be about the Executive acting to address the big issues and making sure that the problems that arose last summer do not arise again.”
“We gave a strong indication that we want to work with, in particular, the AERA Minister and with stakeholders — those who use and enjoy the lough — to find the solutions that are needed, to secure a budget for implementation and to ensure delivery in order to get to the point of addressing the terrible issues that the lough faces.”
“I thank the Member for his question. The First Minister and I had the opportunity to visit Lough Neagh and hear from a wide range of stakeholders: those who use the lough; those who rely on the lough for their business, those who enjoy the lough for leisure; and those who live around the lough. We need to address that significant issue. We know that there will not be a quick fix, but we need to start now if we are ever going to get to the point of finding a resolution. <BR /> <BR />It is a complex issue. It was important for us to hear from people about what their issues are.”
“Absolutely. Such big projects are key levers in the growth of our economy, the movement of our city and what we need to do to achieve the prosperity agenda. We need to grow our economy here in Northern Ireland. That can only happen with that type of investment and the essential infrastructure. It will continue to be a key priority. As indicated, this project and some others must serve as examples to be looked at by our proposed delivery unit to see what can be done to ensure that such a delay does not happen again and that big capital and infrastructure projects can move forward in a timely way and, insofar as possible, within the budget that has been set.”
“Our hope is that the new delivery unit that is to be set up under the Executive Office will be able to examine this issue, in particular, and capital delivery and try to ensure that we get those projects delivered in a timely way.”
“I thank the Member for her question. Absolutely. There has been a challenge. When you look at our investment strategy and the proposals on big capital projects that were agreed by past Executives, you see that some have been delivered, such as the Titanic centre and others. There have been some successes. However, there have been a number of key examples where we have not been able to get delivery for a range of reasons, including planning, objections and other significant issues, despite the fact that budgets were, perhaps, secured for those projects at the time. <BR /> <BR />I know that it is frustrating that the project may take 11 years. It featured in the confidence-and-supply arrangement because of the frustrations around how long it was taking, so funding was secured. It is something that we need to look at.”
“The Justice Minister has taken the lead on the issue on behalf of the Executive by liaising with the families. We have also made the offer to say that we are more than happy to meet the families directly. The important thing for them is to have Northern Ireland included in the legislation in order to enable timely recognition and so that the injustice is reversed and their issues fundamentally addressed.”
“We took the opportunity to meet face to face to push the issue and urge him to include Northern Ireland. We see no legal impediment to Northern Ireland's inclusion in the UK-wide Bill. It would be the timely thing to do, and it is important to get justice for those who have suffered that injustice.”
“I thank the Member for his question. As we understand it, only a small number of people in Northern Ireland are impacted on, but those who are undoubtedly had their life profoundly changed by what happened as a result of that great injustice. We have therefore been working with the Justice Minister and other colleagues — many others in the House have been doing the same — to push for Northern Ireland to be included in the legislation. It is vital that it is. The time that it would take us to put through bespoke legislation here would be disproportionate and would mean that justice would, in all likelihood, be delayed for a number of years. <BR /> <BR />We have been working hard. We met the relevant Minister when we were over at the East-West Council meeting.”
“I am glad that, out of the inquiry, the redress board has been able to provide at least some acknowledgement and recognition of the terrible things that many people experienced.”
“Absolutely. It has been a very challenging journey for many of the campaigners who sought for the inquiry to happen, for the truth to be told and for redress to be made. I pay tribute to those campaigners. It has been a very difficult journey that has happened on some very difficult experiences. The campaigners were personally very much involved in, touched by and impacted on by what has happened. I therefore pay tribute to them. It has been a long journey for them. <BR /> <BR />I am glad that the work of the redress board is now drawing to a close. Only a small number of applications have still to be processed. We anticipate that some may come forward now, in the final year of the board's operation . Work is therefore not yet complete, but we are certainly getting to the end of it.”
“That is what this work is committed to achieving. We will update the House in due course as to the progress that is made.”
“It is an incredibly important issue, not just because the institutions ought to be making a financial contribution, as those institutions were at fault, but because it is incredibly important that they acknowledge their role. Victims and survivors of historical institutional abuse have raised that as an important element. <BR /> <BR />We appointed a person to do that liaison, and that person has been in place for the past number of years. We have extended the role by a further two years to enable him to continue his engagement with the institutions. We have made progress and hope to be in a position to announce very shortly some of the early financial contributions from some of the institutions. That work will continue. We are determined to see that the institutions play their part and make that financial contribution.”
“We have appointed the 10-person panel. We have our stakeholder engagement groups. We have the forum for the mothers and the adoptees who were impacted. The issue has therefore been raised by them as well. We want the records to be preserved, and they need to be, because they are so important for informing people and giving them that information. We have been working with the Public Record Office of Northern Ireland (PRONI) and other organisations to secure those records. That is not without its difficulty, but we have a determination to work through that difficulty and do what we can. The work is therefore continuing. I am happy to follow up my answer with a more specific briefing on the issues, if the Member so wishes.”
“There were a number of key recommendations in the report on mother-and-baby homes. Those have been actioned, and work is under way. The key next step will be the legislation. There is a draft of that legislation. A number of policy issues are outstanding. We have been urging for work be completed on that and for a consultation to commence as soon as possible. We are conscious that many of those most affected, particularly the mothers, are of a certain age. We want them to be able to get that redress and support as quickly as possible, rather than to wait in the longer term. <BR /> <BR />There are a number of other recommendations. I can assure you that work is progressing on all those recommendations, but there is a key focus at this time on getting that legislation out to consultation as quickly as possible.”
“It is possible to get that done by the summer but what the First Minister was indicating, I believe, was that by listening to the consultation feedback and to the Committees, we will be ensuring first and foremost that it is right, rather than just going towards a deadline, but, of course, the aim is to get it completed and in place by the summer.”
“I thank the Member for his question. We are keen to get a Programme for Government as soon as possible, but it must be the right Programme for Government. It must include the key priorities of the Executive, it must be realistic, and we are working with the Finance Minister on the Budget implications around that. <BR /> <BR />A Programme for Government works best when it is strategic and has a small number of key actions for the Executive. That is not to take away from the significant amount of work that will occur within every Department, and Ministers should bring forward all the elements of that work to the Executive in the normal way. What we are focusing on is a high-level, strategic Programme for Government.”
“What was disappointing about that, though — we have said this very clearly — is that aspects of that were repackaged. What the Member is referring to is a repackage of funding that had originally been allocated to a particular purpose. Of course, that has been difficult to deal with. The Budget is very tight. We are in a period of fiscal constraint, and hard decisions will have to be made. I cannot speak for the Education Minister, but I can only assume that it was communicated to him and that he, rightly and prudently, will have taken time to look into that issue, have those discussions with his officials and take advice on that matter. It is a matter for him to explain the timelines involved in that, but I can only imagine that that may well have been what has happened.”
“The Member will be aware that the financial situation of the Budget in Northern Ireland had been an issue of significant concern for some time, including when this place was not sitting. There was a high level of discussion, negotiation and communication with the UK Government to try to secure a better financial arrangement for Northern Ireland. Indeed, personally speaking, I can say clearly that it was my party that pushed hard for those discussions to commence immediately and prior to the restoration of these institutions, acknowledging that the Budget, as it was allocated at that point, would have been woefully insufficient. In fact, it would not have allowed us to do even public pay settlements etc. <BR /> <BR />Therefore, I welcome the fact that an additional £3·4 billion was secured from the UK Government.”
“As the Member will be aware, the international relations strategy was released by the then OFMDFM in 2014. Proposals were made to refresh it in 2016 and 2017, but there has been significant change in the world since 2014, not least in the geopolitical dynamics and emerging economies that might be a good fit for us in relation to enhancing engagement and looking for opportunities collaboratively. We are very conscious that we need to significantly review and refresh our international relations strategy. We are working on that with officials, and we hope to set out the timeline for that in the next number of weeks.”
“That was very much demonstrated by the engagements that the First Minister and I had over St Patrick's week in Washington DC, as well as those of junior Minister Reilly and junior Minister Cameron in Brussels. <BR /> <BR />Although that is welcome, it is the result of hard work over many years to build those relations and our reputation, and we cannot take it for granted. If we are to realise our ambitions, we need to continue to engage and build on the access and goodwill that we enjoy. As we look forward, we need to have a clear focus on our priorities for overseas offices and on new opportunities and regions.”
“The role of our offices in Washington DC, Brussels and Beijing is to represent and promote the Executive's interests and priorities overseas. That is key to our ambition as a small, outward-looking economy to build a more prosperous region in which our businesses and citizens can realise their potential. The bureaux work closely with key partners, including Invest NI, Tourism Ireland, local government and business communities, to promote Northern Ireland as a great place to work, live, invest in and visit. We have come to enjoy unprecedented access to key decision makers at the most senior levels right at the heart of the world's largest economies.”
“With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will ask junior Minister Cameron to answer the question.”
“If we do not table the applicability motion and indicate that we want the measure to be applied, and, if it is not applied, it will leave Northern Ireland as the only place in the United Kingdom where pet food will require 100% organic content before it can be labelled organic. It is a technical proposal, but it is one that ensures that we do not create regulatory barriers in the United Kingdom or North/South.”
“As indicated, applicability motions are a new mechanism to ensure that there is appropriate democratic scrutiny and the option and opportunity to take a look at the impact of the new measures. With the prior protocol arrangements, there was not that opportunity. That created a significant democratic deficit for the House and for Northern Ireland. There is now an opportunity to do that scrutiny. We are informed, through the notification from you, Mr Speaker, of whether proposals would have the risk of creating a regulatory barrier. In this case, the rest of the United Kingdom has already lowered the requirement to 95% organic ingredients for pet food to be labelled organic. The regulation proposes that the rest of the European Union does likewise.”
“It has a very important role. This is only the second proposal that we have had that will be subject to the applicability motion mechanism. I know that the Committee, with new members, is only getting a sense of how it will want to work and when it will want to inform. We have raised some concerns that this regulation came in over the Easter weekend during recess. It is important that we maximise the time that we have to look at whether the First Minister and I should table an applicability motion, or, if we do not, to inform other Members who may want to do so. We need to be careful with the timescales and to be fully informed, but the work will be essential, because many of the issues will be technical and we will need to know quickly whether the proposals will create new regulatory barriers.”
“In this case, we believe that applying the regulation would avoid any new regulatory barriers in the United Kingdom and North/South, which is why we have made the decision to jointly table that motion.”